Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: PYGMALION endings over the years....Part two, 1937-1941 | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 10:30 am EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: PYGMALION endings over the years....Part one, to 1937 - showtunetrivia 10:28 am EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| So GBS's own 1938 screenplay had more Freddy (not much of a character in the 1916), edited any comments that could be construed as romantic on the part of ED or HH, and overall, shifted the focus from HH to ED. And, as I said above, implied a marriage with ED and Freddy. GBS's screenplay wasn't a proper shooting script, so other hands came in, notably Cecil Lewis and W.P. Lipscomb. GBS was reportedly adamant that none of his words could be altered, but he didn't mind if things got moved around. And he wasn't present during shooting. Tsk tsk. Pascal, however, brought romance in from the opening titles, which explained the myth of Galatea to the viewers...and by casting Leslie Howard,,fresh from playing the Scarlet Pimpernel--and what's more romantic than that? And he added to all that with sentimental music, close-ups, and dramatic cuts. And while GBS's ending was filmed, as was a so-called "compromise" ending--Pascal and the movie folks hated those. So they chucked them. Here's GBS's ending: HH outside his mother's,,with a kind of dream sequence showing the past and the future (ED--Freddy), then returning to the present. The movie has HH,,after ED coolly leaves him at his mom's, storming through the streets of London, back to his flat. And the now familiar scene of playing the recordings, ED's return, his intense surprise, and the immediate covering those feeling with the slippers line. The movie was an international smash and the screenplay won the Oscar for GBS, Lewis, and Lipscomb. GBS said it was an insult for the Academy to give him and award,,as they undoubtedly had no idea who he was. There are stories he refused it--not true, Mary Pickford saw it in a prominent spot on his mantle.(After his death,,however, his estate's caretakers obviously has no notion what the hell it was, and may have used it as a doorstop. It needed refurbishing.) August 1939--GBS knew he couldn't do a damn thing about the movie,,but he was concerned that it would have an effect on future stagings of the play. ("Ere, now, that ain't the way it ended when Leslie 'Oward did it!") So this ending has HH casually tell ED to order the ham, cheese, and buy him the gloves and tie. She says, buy them yourself and sweeps out. Same as before. But then... Mrs.H: I'm afraid you've spolit that girl, Henry. I should be worried about you and her if she were less fond of Col. Pickering. HH: Pickering? Nonsense. She's going to marry Freddy! Ha ha! Freddy! Ha ha ha ha! (Roars with laughter) This edition was published but didn't get much use, partly because the earlier edition was ubiquitous, and partly due to the war. In 1941, GBS published his definitive edition, incorporating five scenes from the film, a new preface, a note to stage technicians on how to incorporate those new more cinematic scenes ( or options around them), etc. Remember ED looking for that ring in the fireplace, how Stella Campbell had started clutching to her bosom, swooning? Now GBS has her retriving it, thinking,,then dashing it down on a table and storming upstairs to pack. No sentimental souvenirs here! And we have a further revised ending. After HH issues his casual order, instead of "Buy them yourself," we get: ED: Number eights are too small for you if you want them lined with lamb's wool. You have three new ties you have forgotten in the drawer of your washstand. Col. Pickering prefers double Gloucester to Stilton, and you don't notice the difference. I telephoned Mrs. Pearce this morning not to forget the ham. What you are to do without me, I cannot imagine. (Sweeps out) And we close as in the 1939 version. "Freddy! Ha ha ha ha!" This is what you see if you see PYGMALION, the version licensed by the estate. I haven't read the 1939 version, but I have read the 1916 and 1941...and I like the former better. It's more focused, it's more Shavian in tone. You get more philosophy from HH. (indeed, Lerner put back many lines from that edition that GBS had cut,,either for the screenplay or the 1939/41 versions. And they're good lines.) Also, unlike his other plays, this version was not performed before publication...and it shows. The 1916 may seem more static (there were huge technological developments between 1914 and 1941), but the later version seems clunky. At least to me. Laura |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: PYGMALION endings over the years....Part three, MFL | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 10:42 am EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: PYGMALION endings over the years....Part two, 1937-1941 - showtunetrivia 10:30 am EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| AJL explained, in the published edition of MFL that he was ignoring Shaw’s sequel about ED and Freddy, opting for the movie ending, because “Shaw and heaven forgive me!—I am not certain he is right.” Add to this: it was 1956, when musicals tended to have romantic, happy endings; the way songs and underscoring (note the sweeping surge of “I Could Have Danced All Night” as the final curtain falls) heighten the emotions. AJL’s stage directions for that final scene describe what he, the librettist, thinks is going on with the pair. I’m paraphrasing, since my copy’s not handy, but he has HH startled, disbelieving, when ED interrupts the phonograph. “He would run to her, if he could, but he can’t. He slouches in his chair.” He says “Eliza, where the devil are my slippers?” Eliza smiles, and moves slowly towards him. She understands.” Many audiences enthusiastically accepted that, or it wouldn’t have become the smash it was. Other people, however, reacted as Adam did, and never fully bought the ED-HH pairing. Which brings us to the recent Bartlett Sher revival, with the controversial ending. I haven’t seen it, but I’ve read Sher’s comments on his choices, and many reviews. HH is an acerbic, cranky, short-tempered character; it seems his portrayal here emphasized all those qualities, rather than softening the edges. The story here is ED’s journey to independence, and (again, I’m working at second hand here), there were directorial nuances throughout to build towards that revised ending, to make it convincing and logical. As a theatre historian, I know there’s nothing worse than mounting museum pieces. Theatre evolves with the times. But part of me has a Big Problem with wholesale futzing with a playwright’s explicit stage directions. I’m troubled by the recent, dark OKLAHOMA! which also radically altered stage directions. The AJL and R&H estates have signed off on these productions, but I can’t help wondering what those writers would say, were they living. Sondheim has okayed the recent London revival of COMPANY, changing Bobby to Bobbi, but would librettist George Furth approve? To what extent do we adhere to what dead playwrights intended and how much can we alter that for modern audiences? On the other hand, as an audience member, I know that directors and actors can do much to implement their own imprint on classic material. I cite my own experience with an altered MY FAIR LADY. 1991, Houston Grand Opera. Frank Langella in his musical debut, soprano Lee Merrill as Eliza. The most physical, sexy, charged MFL ever. Through the entire production, you knew this Higgins, for all his dismissal of women as “infuriating hags,” definitely noticed that this “squashed cabbage leaf” was an attractive woman. The key moment in the lessons, when all are exhausted and ED is despairing, when HH recognizes her efforts and spurs her to go on...hoo boy! If Frank Langella looked at me like that and told me he thought I could do the impossible, I’d try it. The underlying sexual tension built and built, solely from the way they played it, with looks, subtle touches, reactions. Final scene: as broken and defeated a Higgins as I’ve ever seen. (Trust me, I’ve seen a few, including Rex in his last revival.) He jerks upright when he hears her lines. Pause, as he kind of melts, gathers himself, says the slipper line. She moves towards him, slowly, as in the stage directions. And....he can’t control himself any longer. He leaps up, runs to her, grabs her in a clinch, whirls her around, and kisses her. And the historian in me is screaming, “That’s NOT in the stage directions!” But the rest of me, every red-blooded corpuscle of me, said, “Shut the hell up! Bravo!” Theatre. Why I love it. As for Michael’s original post about why the Sher production might have cut the “black eye” lines, my take (for what it’s worth—and again, I did NOT see this version) is that domestic violence was so common in 1912, GBS’s original audiences likely thought little of it. Over a century later, we cringe at the notion of such commonplace violence...and maybe Sher also wanted us to cringe that even someone who has grown and developed a sense of worth and independence would continue to regard it as commonplace. Laura, with apologies for retelling the Langella anecdote twice in the same month, but it sort of fit here |
|
| reply to this message |
| Thank you, Laura! | |
| Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 12:22 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: PYGMALION endings over the years....Part three, MFL - showtunetrivia 10:42 am EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| For that brilliant essay. Really stellar work. And thanks specifically for detailing exactly where the line " What you are to do without me, I cannot imagine" came from. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Thank you, Laura! | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 01:29 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: Thank you, Laura! - Michael_Portantiere 12:22 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| My pleasure, Michael. These posts were cobbled together from a discussion I had on my FB page last year, and I thought, “I should keep this where I can get at it.” Laura |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Thank you, Laura! | |
| Last Edit: WaymanWong 08:33 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 08:32 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Thank you, Laura! - showtunetrivia 01:29 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for your analysis, Laura. You're abso-bloomin'-lutely wonderful to share those ''Loverly'' posts about ''Pygmalion.'' You might be interested to know that Turner Classic Movies will be re-examining ''My Fair Lady'' on its ''Reframed'' series. According to the Associated Press: ''During the “My Fair Lady” conversation on March 25, [the TCM hosts] talk about why the film adaptation has a less feminist ending than the stage play, and Henry Higgins’ physical and psychological abuse of Eliza Dolittle. Not feeding her and stuffing marbles in her mouth are played for cute laughs in the film. Is it a commentary on misogyny or just plain misogyny?'' |
|
| Link | AP News: In a New Film Series, TCM Takes a Look at 'Problematic' Classics |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Thank you, Laura! | |
| Posted by: BillEadie 01:29 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: Thank you, Laura! - Michael_Portantiere 12:22 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| Always knew that you were amazing, Laura, but these posts support my presumptions (based on the one time we actually met). I hope that you will save copies of them. Bill, in San Diego (virtually - actually physically in Denver for a couple of days) |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| A graduate seminar on Pygmaiion! | |
| Posted by: Billhaven 10:54 am EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: PYGMALION endings over the years....Part three, MFL - showtunetrivia 10:42 am EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks for the intricate history. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: A graduate seminar on Pygmaiion! | |
| Posted by: showtunetrivia 11:09 am EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: A graduate seminar on Pygmaiion! - Billhaven 10:54 am EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| My pleasure, Bill. Laura |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| Thanks | |
| Posted by: Whistler 04:25 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: re: A graduate seminar on Pygmaiion! - showtunetrivia 11:09 am EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| Thanks. A really nice piece of writing. It shows what this site can do at its best. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Thanks | |
| Posted by: singleticket 05:23 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
| In reply to: Thanks - Whistler 04:25 pm EST 03/09/21 | |
|
|
|
| Agreed, what a delight to read. And I doubt I’ll forget “My ending makes money”... it’s such a great showbiz motto. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.027258 seconds.