Pygmalion raises a lot of questions. One that stands out is
the issue of the reader’s fascination of radical change and the ensuing events
or consequences of apposing things, people or environment. The play stimulates
the reader’s fascination with such phenomenon. Another issue that is raised is
whether or not a deep change in identity can genuinely occur and be sustained
or if we cannot really change the greater part of who we are. Eliza undergoes a
dramatic change but never completely becomes a different person. Is identity
something absolute or mutable? Can change be possible to that extent? If your
peripheral identity (friends, appearance, environment) changes than eventually
your central identity (dreams, desires, beliefs) will change as well. Is
changing your central identity worth it? Eliza was willing to change her
appearance, style; form of expression and language but deep inside she still
remained a flower girl. How far is someone willing to go and what are they willing
to give up? She was determined to let go of her old life and take on something
new.
This story has gone through several different formats such
as books, plays and films, and it makes me wonder, why does this play fascinate
us? Why does radical change capture our attention? I believe we have a
fascination with these kinds of situations. We as readers know it won’t end
well but we can’t help being enticed with what we read. We want to see the
complete failure of the enterprise and any disaster that may happen as a result
of the absurdity of their effort. We want to know if they can really pull it
off. Will they be able to come through? Either way if the character fails or
succeeds it is still an interest to us and provides an entertaining plot for
the reader. Ultimately we are encouraged
to think of another side to human nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment