My Fair Lady

07 January 2022

Steam is water's ghost. An infantile notion, is it not?

08 January 2022
Promised to write a review on My Fair Lady.

12 January 2022
Cultural references I had for this film were Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen and La La Land where Eliza Doolitle was schooled on being a proper lady. (Yeah no required school reading for Pygmalion.)

Watching the actual movie, it had the effect of an indie film. Somehow that's similar among the old films (of Hitchcock lore) and the indie films. They have hanging endings which are not really conclusive nor suggestive of a sequel but merely as if they simply ran out of film to record on much like the serving portions you get at home where you know there's more where that dish came from and could equally dread being demanded to finish the portion you were served or having no chance at second helpings after everybody's served. There is no road marker that welcomes you as you cross that state: "Welcome to satiety!" Compare that to the formulaic industry movies where you can see the bottom of the ice cream tin and you know you've ran out of the frozen delicacy.

Old movies by Audrey Hepburn (This is only my second. Breakfast at Tiffany's was my first), run in an unprecedented manner. Somehow it's hanging, like there's always a curve and light bends differently that you cannot  predict with certainty how it would go next or if you had, it's hazy and warped.

The actors seemed to be yelling. Most likely they could not murmur like Blake Lively and be heard clearly through stage microphones  and they had to dub themselves.

Professor Higgins was quite a remarkable character and somehow reminds me of Dorian Gray's author - a lively, materialistic, educated, dandy - or the dork version of that time. They have different proclivities but generally, they are immersed in their subjects and views everything else as tedious or inconsequential. He was the standout character for me because he seemed to be flippant and shallow, with his denial disguised as logic or practicality when he simply can't deny how different his life would be without Eliza.

Prof. Higgins thought himself a simple man. Far from it. Until the end he does not admit what Eliza means to him. He confounds by giving her a ring which he says meant nothing but was apalled when she gave it back. If anything, he's more like how he thinks women are: says one thing and does another that opposes it.

In the beginning, Eliza was the unformed, unstable one and he looked after her, acclimating to her. Eliza changed and he tries to be unaffected. Now he wants to keep a woman but tries to make it appear like he doesn't; A man in consistent conflict with himself. He now is a muddled person compared to Eliza who came to terms with her change in station and lifestyle.

Audrey Hepburn did it well for the pre-makeover persona. From the independent Holly Golightly (fact checked that; almost typed Golucky there) to the uncouth Eliza. She was all glamor and sophistication as Holly despite the petty thieving (but by golly, all that hair is consistent! She must have half a million hairstrands!) Her speech and accent, more so her screeching as raw Eliza, was totally obnoxious. Holywood's ghost singer Marni Nixon's (who looks like Julie Andrews, the actual actor for the play version and whose name I want to think Ghibli's When Marnie Was There pays homage to) superb singing was commendable. As a character, I enjoyed how she was the take-charge type: she overheard Prof. Higgins' gamble with the Colonel and made steps to persuade them to get on with coaching her, going as straightforward as saying she would pay for lessons; how she told her suitor (Show Me) what she wants; and creating a confrontation to make Prof. Higgins realize her value to him (he never admits it to her face until the end).

The colonel was a forgettable character and does not merit screentime as much as Mr. Dolittle who was all-around entertaining though as a man and father he was not paramount but everything was forgiven because he was witty and lovable for it and in the end tried to live by middle class morals. So that's how I view people - those who appear entertaining take precedence over those who are dutiful. Blimey!

Characters with will, spunk and class (like Prof. Higgins' mother) were made to shine in this one. That if you had personality by speaking your mind and was no stick-in-the-mud, you were favored. Was this a call to activism? They tried to make it dated by mentioning suffragetes which supports that too.

The relevant theme of social stratification and discrimination by upbringing run true. This  applies across cultures where there are distinctions according to the manner of speech borne of regionalization. If using the same language but having different delivery, vocabularies or accent alone was enough to instigate a social divide, how much more in an archipelago where there are different languages?

Even Mr. Dolittle's mantra of getting according to what he needs and not what he deserves was a position on capitalism and communism.

Add to that Prof. Higgins' soliloquy on how a wife makes for a troublesome life and how women were generally the more difficult sex - blatant and very relatable expression of misogynistic views - in fancy alignment with the glib declarations on how women and wives are esteemed in Mr. Dolittle's bachelor party performance.

And because his songs are now on my playlist, Prof. Higgins' misogynistic declarations endeared me because it reflects his exasperation and frustration. For well-intentioned individuals who really want to be with their people, not having the same faculties to deal with situations is a bugger. Of course we understand that not all people think the same way and would see things differently from us, but that gap is tiring. Well, I am so glad the people who keep me find ways around it to get to me because I am petrified on the other end.

As Prof. Higgins sing-talks——the orchestral accompaniment makes it grandiose——it was undeniable his sentiments are founded in a limited space - his space which he validates through like-minded people. The colonel has no desire at all to receive flowers from him because he does not see him in a romantic light! He sees the successful debut while Eliza sees it as meeting her purpose, and as humans usually do, things that served their purpose are thrown away which is the source of her disgruntlement. It was obvious too when Prof. Higgins ended his ranting chant that he only accepts validations for his thoughts, asking Mrs. Pearce all his inchoate thoughts, not waiting for an answer unlike taking pause for the colonel's. So women are sounding boards to him whom he would prefer to act like men and just go along with whatever he thinks? It went well too that they ended the scene there to clearly present how not only Prof. Higgins has this misogynistic light where he has to be heard but does not mind not hearing from a woman by cutting off any possible replies from Mrs. Pearce through the actor, and the script as well, in effect, the movie industry she serves. It is infuriating. They jammed it all there; the standards by which societies categorize people by attributes they are not entirely responsible for like sex (we did not choose what sex to be born in or how we look or our lineage etc.) and the call by droll humor to take matters into your own hands.

It was a deeply rooted social movie discussing the merits of upbringing (third base privileges) and reflections of affluence according to conduct.