Writing about what happens to Eliza at the end of the play, Shaw commented "people in all directions have assumed for no other reason than that became the heroine of a romantic, that she must have married the hero of it". Do you agree from your consideration of Higgins's and Eliza with his words the true sequel is patent to anyone with a sense of humour in general and of feminine instinct in particular?
George Bernard's Shaws comedy `Pygmalion` presents the unlikely journey of an impoverished flower girl into London's society in the early twentieth century.

The two main characters in the play are Henry Higgins, master of phonetician and Eliza Doolittle, a common flower girl.

Some say Shaw created a mouthpiece of his own ideas and the character of Eliza is the personification of these views.

Bernard Shaw played two main roles in society before the publication of Pygmalion. Two of these may be link to his creation of Eliza and Higgins. Firstly his active role as a supporter of women's right, secondly his campaign for the simplification of spelling and the reform of the English alphabet. The two characters both represent his love for social action.

Higgins characters is not only extravagant but also comic. His passionate fondness for sweets and chocolates stands out in contrast to his seriousness and austere mode of living. He is constantly forgetting appointments, stumbling and tripping over something (Act 3 p58) "He goes to the divan, stumbling into the fender and over the fire ions on his way, extricating himself with muttered impatiently on the divan that he almost breaks it". These lines and oddities of his character contribute to the laughs in the play and place Higgins in the tradition of the comic hero.

Eliza on the other hand comes across as quite naive, simple and sometimes quite ignorant. Her behavior is the result of a poor upbringing and lack of education. Eliza has a strong moral within her self and is also very ambitious. She proves this well to Higgins with her quick learning skills.

Towards the end of the play Eliza instinctually knows that higgins did not of the making of a married man (mainly due to his idealization of his mother), although Shaw stands by his opinion that Eliza would not marry him even if there were no mother-rivals, that she would still refuse the marriage.

The play ends with an uncertainty to the plot, whether or not Eliza will marry Higgins, however this is cleared by the epilogue in which he states reasons against such a commitment. Instead Eliza marries Freddy Eynsford Hill. Some may predict she was driven away from Higgins, with his abrupt sense of being, using sentences involving Eliza while in conversation with Colonel pickering, "Thank god its all over" says Higgins without realising the hurt he is causing her with the miserable silences.

At the end of the Shaw quotes "people in all directions have assumed for no other reason than that she became the heroine of romance, that she must have married the hero of it". One can only form the conclusion that the ending to the play is suitable if only from learning of Shaw's own opinions and attitudes to feminist ideologies. This is because if it were to end in the obvious way (whereby Eliza would marry Higgins) Shaw would be failing his own play as someone with knowledge of women's attitudes would know that a person like Eliza would never marry Higgins.

If Shaw were to take into consideration the audience expectation he would have ended with Eliza marrying Higgins. The play is essentially a comedy so therefore one could argue that as an experienced play write he should have ended it in a way that conforms to the comedy genre, so therefore the audience can be forgiven for expecting what is an obvious ending.

The ending of Pygmalion is serious and in some ways realistic, not at all in keeping with the light hearted and cheerful generic conventions of a comedy. Therefore the audience cannot help but feel somewhat let down that their need for the fairy tale ending (the typical consummation of the hero and heroine) goes unfulfilled. This was distinctive of Shaw (who was a lover of paradox) to have provided such an anti-romantic conclusion to the play. His own need to write a realistic and informed ending was more important.

It is not entirely true to someone with feminine instinct that Eliza would marry Higgins. She is in a situation whereby there is opportunity to choose a suitable spouse rather than being pressured into marrying somebody who clearly would not fulfill her and meet emotional needs as a husband should. A person with a feminine instinct would realise this is a far more acceptable conclusion to the play.