Human Destiny – Pygmalion
Human Destiny – Pygmalion
As proven in Pygmalion, the novel by George Bernard Shaw and “Pygmalion”, the Greek myth, neither a creator, nor or anyone, should control the fate of another, be it a creation or simply another human.. It is neither moral, nor possible to control another’s fate, and arguable that one cannot even control their own fate. These stories are filled with examples of the negative results that come of people attempting to control other humans.
As Shaw would doubtlessly agree, a person attempting to control another is a negative action, with negative results. Proof of Shaw’s agreement comes in the form of his feminist attitude. Feminism would be the belief that women are in control of their own destiny, men should not control them. In Pygmalion, Shaw’s opinion is shown through Higgins, who is delighted that Elizabeth has become “a tower of strength: a consort battleship” (Shaw 105). He tells Elizabeth that he won’t tolerate her letting him control her, as his creation: “if you dare set up your little dog’s tricks of fetching and carrying slippers against my creation of a Duchess Eliza, I’ll slam the door in your silly face” (101). George Bernard Shaw, through Henry Higgins, shows his personal beliefs of feminism, as well as the idea that the creator should not have control over the creation’s destiny.
“Pygmalion”, if we can take Shaw’s word on what the ending would be, is further proof of the poor results of creators attempting to control their creations. Due to the lack of continuation of the myth “Pygmalion”, it is impossible to know the results of the marriage between Pygmalion and Galatea. However, if we are to believe Shaw, that he is too “god-like” for Galatea, then it would further prove that creators should not control the fate of their creations.. When Galatea comes to life, Pygmalion assumes she is as in love with him as