Act I and II of Pygmalion

In the first two acts of Pygmalion, Eliza Doolittle, a poor flower vendor, has an encounter with Colonel Pickering, a student of Indian dialects, and Henry Higgins, the author of the Universal Alphabet, while selling flowers on the street corner of London. Hearing the broken English Eliza speaks disgusts Higgins so much that he develops an urge to teach her how to speak properly. Fearing Eliza’s poor speech could possibly prevent her from being successful in her life endeavors, Higgins brags about his ability to transform Eliza into the polished, refined young adult she is capable of becoming within the time frame of three months. “You see this creature with her kerbstone English: the English that will keep her in the gutter to the end of her days. Well, sir, in three months I could pass that girl off as a duchess at an ambassador’s garden party,” Higgins boasts to Pickering in Act I (18).

Higgins’ annoyance with Eliza’s broken speech reminds me of George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language” article our class read last week. Like Orwell, Higgins hates how Eliza unknowingly butchers the English language every time she talks. In fact in Act I, Higgins tells Eliza, “. . .you incarnate insult to the English language. . . .” (18). In this quote, Higgins is telling Eliza she dishonors English language.

Even though I have only read the first two acts of Pygmalion, I have to say, I am enjoying the play already! Particularly, I like how Act I opens with a family of three—a mother, daughter named Clara, and son named Freddy—looking for a taxi cab on a busy London street, whom I assumed to be the main characters of the play. However, it is not until Freddy accidentally bumps into Eliza that I realized the plot of Act I is centered around the character of Eliza, not the characters of the mother, Clara, or Freddy who were introduced first. 

The Desecration of the English Language

In the article, “Politics and the English Language,” by George Orwell, Orwell compiles several common errors people tend to display within their writing compositions. In many cases, people are unaware of the horrible mistakes they frequently incorporate within their writing. As Orwell states in his article, the reason why many English-speakers tend to butcher their native tongue is not because they are ignorant, but because the English language, itself, “is full of bad habits which spread by imitation” (paragraph 2). In other words, Orwell is implying that people like to copy what they see and read from the works of others.

I found Orwell’s article to be a plea for all English-speakers in the world. The tone of Orwell's voice throughout the article is one of desperation. In my mind, Orwell is asking English-speakers to stop being lazy within their compositions, be aware of the words they are using, and ensure these words are being used in their correct context. Moreover, Orwell suggests to “never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print” (paragraph 28, (i)). I have heard this statement from the majority of the English professors I have had throughout my matriculation. I think this pointer Orwell provides in “Politics and the English Language” is very important because the over use of metaphors, similes, figure of speech, and clichés has the ability to convert meaningful words and phrases into insignificant verbiage.

Below, I have included some of the clichés I have been reprimanded for using within my English compositions:

Practice makes perfect

I believe the children are the future

Diving into the deep end

Running around like a chicken with my head cut off

"Changing the Names: The Two Catherines," by Lyn Pykett

In the essay, "Changing the Names: The Two Catherines," by Lyn Pykett, Pykett discusses the roles of both Catherine Earnshaw and Cathy Linton in the novel, Wuthering Heights, by Emily Brontë, in extensive detail. Among many other points, Pykett expresses the difficulties Catherine Earnshaw experiences while learning "to be a woman as defined by the society in which she lives" (470). Furthermore, Pykett charts the difficulties Catherine Earnshaw encounters as living in a nineteenth century society while doing her best to obey the behavioral code of conduct, as a nineteenth century woman was expected.

Like Catherine Earnshaw, I have experienced difficulty with behaving as a "proper lady" at certain times throughout my life. As a child, I was free to do every physical activity I wished to participate in without worrying about tarnishing my physical appearance. If I happened to sweat out my curls while playing tag, my mother would re-curl my hair for me without any hesitation. If I acquired a hole in the "knee" of my jeans while playing too roughly at the park, my mother would patch them up for me. Similar to Catherine Earnshaw, as a child, I too, ran around "half savage, and hardy, and free" (123). As I became older, nevertheless, my mother stopped fixing the problems I created for myself and began to teach me the art of taking responsibility for my own actions. Since then, I have learned to suppress the urge of engaging in an aimless game of tag in fear that my curls may unravel. Because I know my mother cannot be there to assist me with every problem that arises in my my life, I have learned to make a conscious effort to walk, instead of run in oder to avoid the stress of re-styling my hair.

The transition from a bestial child to a refined young adult was not an easy one to make by any means. In fact, it took a great amount of practice and reprimanding from my mother before I was able to comprehend the behavioral code of conduct my mother instilled in me. For this reason, I can understand why Catherine Earnshaw had a hard time making a transition similar to the one I made during my adolescence. But unlike Catherine Earnshaw, I was able to succeed to the elevated plateau of becoming a "proper lady," while she continued to revert back to her adolescent state.