Why Did the Irony of 'Pygmalion' Vanish? — An Observation Record of a Sleep-Inducing Stage Play
*This article is Chapter 1 of the observation series
'Why Couldn't I Laugh at the Stage Play "Pygmalion"? — The "Sleep-Inducing" Structure and the True Nature of a Society Where Sincerity Feels Out of Place'
.
I went to see the stage play "Pygmalion - PYGMALION -".
I do not know the original work of Pygmalion.
I did not prepare for it either.
I went to see it with only the vague recognition that it is a famous classic.
Therefore, this is neither an explanation of the original work nor a theatrical critique.
It is an observation record of how one audience member who does not know the original work received the performed piece as it was.
.
*This article contains mentions of the stage play's content (spoilers).
▶Click here for the read-aloud version of this article (YouTube)
What happened during the performance
To be honest, I was dozing off halfway through.
There were scenes where laughter occurred in the audience, but I couldn't laugh even once.
There was no excitement, no anger, and no strong sense of discomfort.
It just didn't resonate with me.
This does not mean it was "boring."
It is closer to the feeling that there was nothing I needed to process.
From the very first scene, there was a slight sense of incongruity.
The story begins with people taking shelter from a torrential downpour.
The large clock on the stage points to past 12 o'clock. The moon is also out.
—In other words, it is the middle of the night.
However, the characters are numerous and lively.
There are also exchanges where they casually invite each other to "go do such-and-such now."
Wait, it's the middle of the night, right?
That sense of incongruity seems small and trivial.
It is not enough to ruin the story, nor is it worth pointing out.
But at that point, I feel I had unconsciously stopped the "processing required to believe" in this world.
I held that same feeling the entire time.
"Wait... where should I even start questioning this?"
It's beyond the point of anger.
It's not even in the phase of scolding or correcting.
"Huh?"
It's that feeling of quietly taking a step back.
While watching this play,
I stood at that distance the entire time.
A major sense of discomfort
Throughout the performance, I was constantly questioning.
Is Higgins really a figure who deserves such condemnation?
Admittedly, his personality isn't great.
His language is also rough.
However, within the scope depicted on stage,
there is no violence
he keeps his promises
he completes the education
he provides a foundation for living
At the very least,
I couldn't find any definitive actions that would treat him as a "clear perpetrator."
Even so, he was consistently placed
on the "side to be blamed" throughout the story.
The establishment of a victim structure
Looking at the stage as a whole,
the arrangement of the characters was very easy to understand.
Higgins: The side lacking consideration
Eliza: The side that was hurt
Others: The side judging them
Because this arrangement is solidified at an early stage,
the audience does not have to get lost.
Who should they empathize with?
Who should they criticize?
Where do they stand?
Everything is clearly stated.
It felt more like looking at a map of ethical positioning than a story.
The position where the woman was placed
Eliza is, from beginning to end,
it is okay to be lost
it is okay to be anxious
it is okay to be hurt
placed in a position that says so.
Options are presented, but
they are all within a safe zone.
Higgins as an educator
Freddy as a romantic interest
a flower shop as a place of living (with funding assumed from external sources)
No matter which choice is made,
it does not touch the structure of society itself.
The possibility of stepping outside the miniature garden does not exist from the start.
Regarding the word 'choice'
On stage and in promotional materials,
Eliza's ending was spoken of as a 'choice'.
However, what was actually depicted on stage was,
the environment was prepared
the flow was created
Evaluation is determined by those around you
Within that, the structure was one of choosing one thing at the very end.
There are almost no scenes where one actively designs the situation.
This also appeared to overlap with the structure of the
“heroine who seems to have agency,”
which is common in manga aimed at men and can be consumed with a sense of security.
A scene that exceptionally caught my attention
There was only one scene that caught my attention.
Only in that moment did my sleepiness fade.
After Eliza's father becomes rich, he laments as follows.
It was better to be poor and free
If I needed money, I should have just extorted it from the rich
Now, conversely, I am the one being extorted
There is no victim, no justice, and no salvation there.
There is no structure to blame anyone, nor is there an easy-to-understand conclusion.
Just,
Ah, that's one way to live, isn't it
This guy is actually kind of great
Freedom isn't simple, is it
Only such feelings welled up naturally.
Within this stage performance, it was the
only scene where the way we receive it on this side was not fixed.
The original structure of Pygmalion
It felt so lacking in substance that
I looked up Pygmalion immediately after watching the play.
In the original 'Pygmalion',
Is education truly good
After changing a person, who takes responsibility
Is success the same as happiness?
This question directed at the audience themselves serves as the main structure.
However, in this production,
the question was forced onto Higgins,
the woman was protected,
and the audience was protected as well,
so that before the question could even arise,
evaluations and conclusions were already in place.
As a result,
the destination for the 'blade of irony,' which is the lifeblood of Pygmalion, had vanished.
Why did the irony vanish?
The reason irony disappeared from this production is not because Higgins' words and actions were softened,
nor because of considerations for the times.
It has nothing to do with the content of Eliza's choices either.
It is a problem of a much simpler structure.
Irony is, by nature,
a device to make the audience
bear the 'state of not knowing which side is right.'
However, in this production,
Higgins was the bad side,
Eliza was the side to be protected,
and those around them were the right side,
or at least they appeared to be placed in such positions.
At this moment,
the audience moves from being the 'thinking side'
to the 'evaluating side.'
Once the audience stands on the side of the evaluator,
they are no longer unstable.
Unless it becomes unstable,
irony does not function.
That is why in this production,
it felt as though the position was fixed
before the irony could function.
And so, my physical reaction occurred.
When I saw this structure, I couldn't help but laugh.
This was not because
it didn't suit my tastes,
nor because I couldn't understand the content.
It means there was no need to prepare to receive the question.
Therefore,
I became sleepy
I couldn't laugh
I wasn't hooked
It was a perfectly natural physical reaction
to a work where irony is not established.
The reason the father's scene was effective was also because
no one scolded
no one judged
justice did not intervene
only facts and sensations were presented.
What happens in a work without an edge
After the performance, I looked at the promotional copy again.
"An intelligent and ironic comedy"
Between those words and
what was actually happening on stage,
I felt a great distance.
And looking back, I thought.
This work
did not fail in its attempt to depict irony.
It seemed that as a result of trying to depict irony,
a different form of irony had emerged.
In a sense,
it might have been a
more brilliantly ironic comedy than the original work.
Finally
To me,
it felt like a work that was an extension of baby food culture.
No need to chew.
No risk of choking.
No need to think.
The location of justice is clearly indicated.
You can watch it with peace of mind.
In exchange,
the nutrition necessary for adults—the questions—are missing.
This stage play
had a somewhat meticulously polished feel to it.
This is neither a denial nor a condemnation.
It is merely an observation.
To be continued in Chapter 2.
🔁 Overall structure here
'Why couldn't I laugh at the stage play 'Pygmalion'? — The 'sleep-inducing' structure and the true nature of a society where sincerity feels out of place'
—
This article also exists in English.
🪞 If you,
・Think properly but don't see results
・Are doing reasonably well in life but feel unfulfilled somewhere
・Keep repeating the same patterns in love
If even one of these applies to you—
It is not a lack of knowledge,
nor is it a problem of 'personality' or 'ability'.
In this note,
✔ Why do we keep returning to the same problems?
✔ Why do we 'know what to do but still don't change'?
✔ What happens when you shift the position of your judgment?
These are articulated as a structure.
When you finish reading, you should be able to see 'what criteria you are using to make judgments'.
Let's end the cycle of worrying about the same things in the same place here.