论文总字数：42789字

摘 要

萧伯纳是唯一一个同时获得诺贝尔文学奖和奥斯卡影视奖的作家。多年来，学者们对《芭芭拉少校》和《皮革马利翁》这两部戏剧中的主题和人物形象均做了大量研究，但很少有人研究这两部作品中的父亲形象，而本文则另辟蹊径，从社会地位、人物关系和人物性格这三个方面对两位父亲进行了全面对比研究。

两位父亲截然不同的社会地位集中表现在着装神情以及话语权两个方面。就前者而言，作为资本家的安德谢夫打扮绅士，面带威容，而处于社会底层的杜特利尔则是穿着破烂，带着无畏无惧的表情。就后者而言，安德谢夫掌握着国家的经济命脉，决定着国家政策，而杜特利尔则对政府的决策毫无影响力。

本论文还从夫妻关系、父女关系以及同事关系三个层面剖析了两位父亲的社会关系。安德谢夫和杜特利尔两人均与妻子不和，与子女亦存在着诸多矛盾。而在同事关系方面，安德谢夫与其军工厂的工人们，杜特利尔及他的工友们的关系均比较和谐，并无大的冲突。

就性格特征而言，安德谢夫极度贪婪，而杜特利尔则是安于现状；安德谢夫极其勤劳，而杜特利尔则是好逸恶劳。但就本质而言，安德谢夫残酷冷漠，而杜特利尔则是心地善良。

最后，作者希望该论文能够启发学者们从新的角度研究《皮革马利翁》和《芭芭拉少校》。此外，该论文所揭示的不同社会阶层的生活状态亦能帮助读者们更好理解萧伯纳作为一名改革家对社会问题的关注。

关键词：《芭芭拉少校》 《皮革马利翁》 父亲形象 对比研究 社会地位 人际关系 人物性格

1. Introduction

• 1. Research background

George Bernard Shaw was born on July 26 in 1856 in Dublin, Ireland. There were three children in his home and he was the only boy. Once upon a time, Shaw’s family belonged to the landowning upper-middle class, but the family went from bad to worse till his father’s generation. Originally, his father featherbedded in the government, later on changed into doing food business because of heavy drinking, but he was unable to support the whole family. When looking from this aspect, Shaw’s father image can be regarded to some extent as the prototype of the drunkard—Doolittle, Eliza’s father in Pygmalion, and such life background also endows Shaw with rich creative inspiration for his later writings.

Bernard Shaw once respectively studied in the local Catholic and Protestant churches, but he had to drop out of school and worked as an apprentice in a real estate agency to help his father provide for the family when he was less than fifteen years old. A few years’ rent account management, particularly renting out experience, made Shaw see for the first time a series of social problems resulted from the disparity between the rich and the poor, which also provided him with numerous perceptual materials for drama creation in the future.

Shaw is now known as the only person to be awarded both a Nobel Prize in Literature in 1925 and an Oscar in 1938, for his respective contributions to literature and work on the film Pygmalion adapted from his play of the same name. He is also a very productive writer and created more than 60 plays during the whole life. Nearly all his writings address prevailing social problems, but have a vein of comedy which makes their stark themes more palatable; Pygmalion and Major Barbara are no exception. Issues which engage Shaw’s attention usually include education, marriage, religion, government, health care, and class privilege.

In the late 19th century and the early 20th century, the rapid development of natural science and industry not only brought the enormous growth of the wealth, but also promoted the production of various new theories. In this context, people began to abandon the Christian doctrine and pursue the maximization of material wealth because they realized that God could

not save them or make them satisfied but money could. Major Barbara and Pygmalion, Shaw’s two most outstanding comedies were produced at that time, mainly revealing the essence of the capitalist society and exposing the ugly face of the exploiting classes to the public.

1.2 Need of the study

It is estimated that there are only about 24 academic articles published on cnki.net about Major Barbara between 1996 and 2013, in particular, over ten are published during the past six years; there are approximately 52 academic articles published on cnki.net about Pygmalion between 2001 and 2013. However, most readers and scholars focus on the analysis of Eliza and Professor Higgins in Pygmalion, as well as the heroine in Major Barbara, but few of them attach importance to the two father images, Doolittle and Undershaft in the plays. Over the years, only a handful of scholars have done so, but their studies is too vague for us to have a profound and fuller understanding of Shaw’s two works—Major Barbara and Pygmalion. Besides, so far, there is no scholar who has made a comparative study of the two father images.

However, in fact, the description of the two father images can best reflect Shaw’s writing purposes, for he is against Oscar Wilde’s aesthetic view “Art for Art’s Sake”, and argues that art should reflect the pressing social problems. Therefore, a comparative study of the two father images in Shaw’s Pygmalion and Major Barbara is bound to assist people in figuring out Shaw’s writing intention and enhancing a deep understanding of his thematic concerns as a realistic playwright.

1.3 Layout of the thesis

The present thesis consists of four chapters. Chapter One gives an introduction of the study, including the research background, the need for the study and the layout of the thesis. Chapter Two reviews Shaw’s Major Barbara and Pygmalion. Chapter Three is the most vital part of this thesis because two father images will be comparatively analyzed and some specified conclusions will be drawn in this chapter. Chapter Four will arrive at conclusions and present implications of the study.

2. Literature Review

The previous studies on Shaw’s Major Barbara and Pygmalion will be respectively analyzed in this chapter.

2.1 Previous studies on Major Barbara

The characterization and plot arrangement of Major Barbara vividly show us the mien of George Bernard Shaw as a master of language and the greatest playwright after Shakespeare. However, only a few domestic and foreign scholars have ever done literary study of this masterpiece mainly because the character traits in the play are bright and themes are relatively clear. It is estimated that there are only about 24 academic articles published on cnki.net between 1996 and 2013, in particular, over ten are published during the nearly six years.

In recent years, with the development of the capitalism in many European and American countries, the problems of capitalism and hierarchy gradually appear. Problems reflected in Major Barbara can cause the resonance of readers day by day, so a lot of scholars, especially Chinese scholars reread and did some researches on the play, most focusing on the study of its subjects. For example: Chinese scholar Zhang Mingai (2008) sharply points out, judging from Major Barbara, we can figure out Bernard Shaw hates the bourgeoisie, and regards them as the unscrupulous who just care about the wealth. They don’t have the justice principle and merely want to grab the biggest wealth from those workers who create material. In Major Barbara, reflecting the problem of the secular life in the society is one of the striking features of the drama, as Wei Jinmei (2011) claims. She also explains that in order to better depict the themes, Shaw concentrates on the writing of the economy, the issue of religion, family and education, but the most important one is that of poverty. Zhou Hongyan (2011) further indicates that in the era of monopoly economy, the monopoly capitalists can control the government agencies by controlling the country’s economic lifeline, and thus the government becomes the institution to safeguard their interests.

There are also some scholars conducting the analysis of the character images and the language characteristics but eventually return to the discussion of themes. Frank Harris (1921) points out that in Shaw’s long life, there is nothing more important than his concern for women, and Barbara is a typical and successful image that reflects the idea. Grene Nicholas (1984) equally regards the character portraying of Barbara as Shaw’s care for women, for he highlights that women need to jump out of the cage in the patriarchal society, pursue their own liberation, participate in social activities, and female shall be no longer an accessory of male. Chinese scholar He Ning (2009) studies the language features of Major Barbara in three aspects: detailed instructions of the stage, large section of the dialog and spoken language and the dialect. Finally, he puts forward that Undershaft’s dialog accounts for a large space of the conversation, which not only implies he is the most influential figure in the drama, but also reveals the theme of the script: on one hand, poverty is the root of all evil and we can buy everything with great power; on the other hand, the so-called salvation army and the upper class are of no use but to teach the religious morals. Chen Maoqing (2011) makes a comparative analysis of Andrew Undershaft in Major Barbara and Mother Courage in Mother Courage and Her Children from the perspective of pursuing money and ignoring morals and concludes that though having the same pursuit, they share different destinies due to the disparity of the material wealth amount as well as revealing the disadvantage of the capitalist society in which money is king.

2.2 Previous studies on Pygmalion

Pygmalion derives its name from the famous story in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, but what happens when George Bernard Shaw tries to translate such an allegory into Victorian England? Since its publication in 1912, the haze has been plagued by scholars at home and abroad. Thus, Pygmalion has been naturally the concern of much criticism. Especially, after Yang Zongxian’s translation was well-known among the public in 2001, many Chinese scholars conduct numerous researches on the play. There are about 52 academic articles published on cnki.net between 2001 and 2013. Different from the situation of Major Barbara, scholars attach more importance to its characterization rather than thematic analysis.

Plentiful scholars have done analysis of characters, particularly the heroine Eliza. Zhang Xuan (2004) proclaims Eliza as an extremely brave flower girl who dares to seek inner independence and equal care. Wang Chongkai and Cao Yang (2008) pay equal attention to independent personalities and further points out that the new Eliza is ultimately created by Eliza herself instead of Higgins. Deng Niangang (2010) discusses the intense contrast between Eliza’s weak economy and her later cultured manners, drawing a conclusion that it is the power of knowledge and independent personalities that finally make her successfully survive the predicament of her ethical identity. Compared with the aforementioned scholars, Hu Hui (2001) gives a relatively comprehensive analysis of all the major characters in Pygmalion, including Eliza, Higgins and Colonel Pickering. However, she only leaves Eliza’s father—Doolittle out. In fact, the portrait of Doolittle can best reflect Shaw’s writing intension because not Eliza but he is the typical representative of the low-class labors. Fortunately, in the paper of Reread Pygmalion written by Yang Chunxia in 2009, he talks over Doolittle’s image, but doesn’t deeply dissect in details; as a matter of fact, her interpretation appears to be full of generalities.

Relatively fewer scholars show interest in the themes of Pygmalion when compared to those who are keen on its characterization. Charles A. Berst (1995) believes that Pygmalion just tells a story with Myth and Cinderella. While Chinese scholar Liu Shuqin (2010) claims that Pygmalion is a masterpiece aiming at attacking the upper class and the lower class at that time: on one hand, it exposes the empty, vulgar, shallow and hypocrisy of the aristocracy stratum; on the other hand, it reveals the rudeness, selfishness and ignorance of the poor. “In this essay, the author tries to analyze the themes of the play, including romantic significance, Cinderella story, allegorical interpretation, the importance of phonetics in society, hypocritical moral code of middle class and so on” (Zhang and Liu 207). The two scholars insist so, but they do not give us a thorough analysis of the themes from the above five angles; therefore, the argument seems to be not convincing enough for us to believe.

This paper will compare the images of two fathers in three aspects: the social positions, interpersonal relationships and personal characters. Afterwards, some common features and conclusions will be reached so as to help readers better understand the writing purpose of Shaw’s Major Barbara and Pygmalion, and provide some powerful inspirations for the real life.

3. A Comparative Study of the Two Father Images

The different social positions, interpersonal relationships and personal character of the two father images will be separately studied in this chapter. In the end, some specific conclusions will be arrived at.

3.1 From social positions

The fundamental reason for the differences of the two father images is their social positions. It is rather clear in the drama that Undershaft is a typical capitalist who owns the largest weapons factory in Britain, while Doolittle is a hundred-percent representative of the lower working class who has to struggle on the poverty lines. Therefore, their differences can manifest themselves in two aspects.

The first indication of their differences is their dress-ups and expressions. As the plays depict, when Undershaft first appears:

Andrew is, on the surface, a stoutish, easygoing elderly man, with kindly patient manners, and an engaging simplicity of character, but he has a watchful deliberate, waiting, listening face, and formidable reserves of power, both bodily and mental, in his capacious chest and long head. His gentleness is partly that of a strong man who has learnt by experience that his natural grip hurts ordinary people unless he handles them very carefully, and partly the mellowness of age and success. He is also a little shy in his present very delicate situation (1. 588-598).

From the above detailed and vivid description, we know that Undershaft is a very smart man with calculating mind because he is seemingly ready to listen to others, not in a hurry to refute others; his amiable appearance well-conceals his talent in that he looks like a kindly shy old man, which makes him a little foolish; he is polite and modest to everyone anywhere and anytime, not only to his family members but also to his workers.

In comparison, Doolittle is too much outshone, as Shaw writes “Alfred Doolittle is an elderly but vigorous dustman, clad in the costume of his profession, including a hat with a back brim covering his neck and shoulders” (2. 610-612). Although both of them are all elderly men of the similar age, the dress-ups are of great disparity. Undershaft always dresses in all seriousness like a gentleman, while Doolittle is almost in rags as a garbage collector. Besides, Doolittle has well-marked and rather interesting features, and seems equally free from fear and conscience, and he often presents the pose of wounded honor and stern resolution in order to get petty favors from others.

The discourse power is the second indication of Undershaft’s and Doolittle’s entirely different social positions. Undershaft’s wife, Lady Britomart often points out that Andrew and Lazarus positively have Europe under their thumbs, which suggests that Undershaft is the country’s dominator. Besides, we can draw the conclusion from the conversation between Undershaft and Stephen, his son. Stephen strongly confirms “I am an Englishman; and I will not hear the Government of my country insulted” (3. 381-383). But Undershaft immediately rebutted as this “I am the government of your country: I, and Lazarus…you will do what pays us” (3. 386-388).

The short sentence tells us that Undershaft and those rich capitalists are the real rulers of the country, and the whole country and its political systems are used to serve for them. The country and its troops are also used to protect the capitalists’ interests, rather than the ordinary people’s. As the theorem goes, economic base determines the superstructure, so money shall govern the state, and the money is concentrated in the hands of a few capitalists headed by Undershaft. Namely, these minority capitalists are masters of the nation and have a vital impact on national affairs.

In contrast, Doolittle has no discourse power on the decision of the state’s policy-making, for he is rather insignificant as a dustman among thousands of the lower working class. When Pickering asks Doolittle whether he has moral, Doolittle quickly answers “Neither could you if you are as poor as me” (2. 765-766). We often call the class who refuse to practice thrift and squandered their money on drinking sprees and other mindless forms of entertainment as the “undeserving poor”. These words can be viewed in some degree as Doolittle’s self-mockery. Unlike Undershaft, Doolittle possesses no wealth or a high social position; therefore, his life and his words to the society are as light as dust.

3.2 From interpersonal relationships

This section will study the two fathers from their totally different social relationships, mainly focusing on the spousal relationship, the parent-child relationship and the colleagueship.

In terms of the spousal relationship, Lady Britomart is Undershaft’s wife, but from the play we can clearly know that although they do not divorce, they actually have been separated for many years, and Undershaft has not set foot in the family door for long. When Undershaft returns home at the beginning of the drama, Lady Britomart introduces to him “This is your family”. Surprisingly enough to us, Undershaft feels rather astounded and asks “Is it so large”? The reason why they separate, Shaw does not explicitly point out in his works, but we can find some clues from Lady Britomart’s words. For example:

He is always breaking the law. (1. 213-214).

You know the Undershaft motto: Unashamed. Everybody knew (1. 222-223).

Children did not dislike him; and he took advantage of it to put the wickedest ideas into their heads, and make them quite unmanageable. I did not dislike him myself: very far from it; but nothing can bridge over moral disagreement (1. 328-332).

From her words, we can see that she is a very straightforward woman, so she dislikes Undershaft’s hypocritical moral and behavior, accusing him of “Unashamed”. At the same time, she shows no interest in Undershaft’s cannon career, while Undershaft devotes all his concern and energy to the cannon factory management; as a result, he gives little care to his wife to the extent that he is an extremely irresponsible husband. On the other hand, Lady Britomart and the whole family have to rely on Undershaft’s supply to survive and maintain a decent and comfortable life way of bourgeois all the time. In addition, Lady Britomart tries to curry favor with her husband so as to help Stephen get the family business succession, but Undershaft puts forward that he only wants a man with no relations and no schooling, so their relationship gradually deteriorates. In a word, there exists both interest and personality differences between Undershaft and Lady Britomart, which cannot be harmonized.

Through Mrs. Pearce, Professor Higgins’ maidservant and Eliza’s dialogue, “Where’s your mother? (2. 302)”, “I aint got no mother, her that turned me out was my sixth stepmother. But I done without them” (2. 303-304), we know that Doolittle has not been married, and the woman now living with him is Eliza’s sixth stepmother. Her name is not told by Shaw in the play, and thus she is an image to foil Eliza and Doolittle. Doolittle is a drunkard who often asks for money from the daughter Eliza to buy alcohol. When he fails to get the money, he will pretend to be poor and says to Eliza like this:

You won’t be so cruel to me awake to face your stepmother. I am in agony that I want to marry her, and from then on, I become her slave. Eliza, all of these come from I’m not a lawful husband (2. 632-634).

Judging from Doolittle’s words, the relationship between the two people is not very good. Besides, Eliza’s stepmother would not like to marry Doolittle because of his uptight life. Later on, when Doolittle accidentally receives a large amount of fortune, Eliza stepmother turns to offer to marry him. Meanwhile, Doolittle does not discard her because of his unexpected fortune. At last, they get married. Compared with Undershaft and his wife, the Doolittle couples share the same life habits and characters with each other.

请支付后下载全文，论文总字数：42789字