What is the role of Alfred Doolittle in Pygmalion? Is he simply a fool cast for comic relief? Or is he more? Explain. Consider him as a mirror image of Higgins.
Though he only takes part in two scenes in the course of Pygmalion, Alfred Doolittle plays quite a large role, especially in comparison to how insignificant a character he is in the play. Upon his first few lines of interaction between Higgins at Pickering when he barges into Higgins' home, he seems like a deplorable, if inconsequential character to the plot. In many ways, he is, too. But plot aside he is one of the most important driving forces of the story's theme. Shaw writes Pygmalion with the intent of forcing the audience to see how truly faulty the hierarchy of the social classes is.
His dialogue throughout the course of the play is almost exclusively Shaw's satirical criticisms on the social classes, and the biased standards, and moralities of all of them. His character gets the audience thinking about what is right and wrong in the world, and his mastery of debate is hard to compete against as he brings up extremely challenging arguments to how flawed the system really is.
Most of the strongest satire comes from Mr. Doolittle-- so much so that it is actually a little surprising that his character is not brought in as often as he otherwise might. Certainly it would not have been difficult to make Eliza's father a more prominent character in the play, but perhaps doing so would have made his character less pivotal in guiding the audience to Shaw's true theme.
Mr. Doolittle can also be taken in with the perspective of a mirror image to Higgins. It has already been discussed at how similar these two characters are. Plot wise they are very different... right? Let's put it this way: they are both brash, confident men that use others. They have no compassion for others, as seen by how Higgins treats everyone and how Doolittle treats his daughter-- as more of a tool to be used than anything else. Basically, their personality is the same, save for the fact that their life and upbringing has been different.
They both use people, they simply have different methods for doing so. Had their roles been switched from the beginning, it is easy to see how the stories would have played out in much the same manner, yet the audience looks up to and respects Higgins far more as a character. This, though, is mere speculation: why would the audience look up to somebody if it was clearly not for character? In this instance Shaw clearly points out that social class affects how people are treated from the beginning, regardless of who they really are as people.
Though he only takes part in two scenes in the course of Pygmalion, Alfred Doolittle plays quite a large role, especially in comparison to how insignificant a character he is in the play. Upon his first few lines of interaction between Higgins at Pickering when he barges into Higgins' home, he seems like a deplorable, if inconsequential character to the plot. In many ways, he is, too. But plot aside he is one of the most important driving forces of the story's theme. Shaw writes Pygmalion with the intent of forcing the audience to see how truly faulty the hierarchy of the social classes is.
His dialogue throughout the course of the play is almost exclusively Shaw's satirical criticisms on the social classes, and the biased standards, and moralities of all of them. His character gets the audience thinking about what is right and wrong in the world, and his mastery of debate is hard to compete against as he brings up extremely challenging arguments to how flawed the system really is.
Most of the strongest satire comes from Mr. Doolittle-- so much so that it is actually a little surprising that his character is not brought in as often as he otherwise might. Certainly it would not have been difficult to make Eliza's father a more prominent character in the play, but perhaps doing so would have made his character less pivotal in guiding the audience to Shaw's true theme.
Mr. Doolittle can also be taken in with the perspective of a mirror image to Higgins. It has already been discussed at how similar these two characters are. Plot wise they are very different... right? Let's put it this way: they are both brash, confident men that use others. They have no compassion for others, as seen by how Higgins treats everyone and how Doolittle treats his daughter-- as more of a tool to be used than anything else. Basically, their personality is the same, save for the fact that their life and upbringing has been different.
They both use people, they simply have different methods for doing so. Had their roles been switched from the beginning, it is easy to see how the stories would have played out in much the same manner, yet the audience looks up to and respects Higgins far more as a character. This, though, is mere speculation: why would the audience look up to somebody if it was clearly not for character? In this instance Shaw clearly points out that social class affects how people are treated from the beginning, regardless of who they really are as people.