Centuries Of Change

Are women necessarily inferior to men or should they be treated as objects? Are they maybe even considered objects that can be molded by man, the creator's, ideal? Is this an obstacle that women still have to face in today's society? If we are going by what is being portrayed in cinema today, then this theme is still a story line in recent flicks. Earlier works portrayed men as god-like creatures and women as mindless statues, conveying women to be inferior. As time goes on in cinema, women became a little more independent. This can be traced or linked to feminism, but unfortunately women have battled and are still not being treated as equals today. Stories such as Shaw's play "Pygmalion" and "The Statue" Ovid's ancient myth showcased this when studied through the lens of centuries of buffering with translations, editions and change of language, but what happens when the story line no longer seems feasible? The altercation that Shaw made in contrast to Ovid was he was able to showcase mans flaws and introduced the powerful woman character as almost a hero.

Ovid's myth viewed women as merely statues with no mind to think for them selves. Gaeleta loved her creator, Pygmalion. In this instance or time period women put men on a pedestal and thus able to idolize them. It was accepted and not argued. They were to be molded into perfect specimens to sit there and look pretty, in essence "In sculpture exercis'd his happy skill; And carv'd in iv'ry such a maid, as nature could not with his art compare..."(Ovid 1). They believed that a good wife was a creation from

Presley 2

their own hands and was not articulated to anything to do with the woman. There was love, but no romance because a statue true unable to have passion for someone or have that reciprocated back. The idea of sharing a mutual respect in a relationship was not yet established, but steps through generations would get society closer to being equals.

At the time that Shaw's play was written, the idea of female professionals was somewhat new. Women were generally housewives before this period, and there was some residual resistance to the idea of normally male professions being entered by females in the play. Eliza was a strong woman and had no intention of fitting into the mold of a typical woman. She declared that she was less degraded as a flower-seller than as a "genteel" lady trying to make an appropriate marriage; because as a flower-seller at least she was not selling her dignity. Shaw displays the idea that during the time the play was written women married men who could support them and worship them. Because Eliza is a strong, resourceful, woman she makes the compromise and marries Freddy, who cannot support her but will adore her. In that sense, a powerful woman did not need to marry a powerful man with money. Eliza realized she could support herself and should marry a man who loved, respected and adored her. Higgins is astounded by this whole idea and even says "marry some sentimental hog or other with lots of money, and a thick pair of lips to kiss you with and a thick pair of boots to kick you with,"(Act 5 pg. 130). What Higgins does not realize is that good relationships are based on mutual respect which he shows none for to any human being.

Eliza liked Higgins just in the fact that she could spar with him and they showcased some tension that maybe it could lead to more. There was passion, but it was

Presley 3

never really romantic. He had no respect for her and Eliza realized this. She did not want to be treated as an object yet Higgins and suggests in the play to Pickering "What's a five pound note to you and what's Eliza to me?"(Act 2 pg. 57). These are the similarities between the two literature pieces and that is that women are mere objects to be molded. When taking on the project of Eliza, you can see how Higgins feels about the situation when he says, "You have no idea how frightfully interesting it is to take a human