Why do conservative people see Broadway

[IloveBroadwAY3]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 6:59pm

Good theatre is about pushing boundaries

[Pootie2]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 7:01pm

If that were true, there wouldn't be so many revivals.

[JMPlayer6]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 7:04pm

Why not?

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 7:37pm

Um being conservative and loving theater are not mutually exclusive??

And theater can be "good" without pushing and boundaries.

[BroadwayNYC2]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 8:08pm

you push those boundaries

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/high-school-theater-show/2830157

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 8:46pm

I don't think "pushing boundaries = good theatre." A lot of good theatre does indeed push boundaries, but I've seen some theatre that seems to exist solely for the purpose of shocking audiences and making them uncomfortable. Ever seen Blasted by Sarah Kane? Onstage action includes a dead baby getting eaten, a man getting his eyeballs bitten out, and other things I've tried to forget. Awful, awful play, and this is from someone who counts Sweeney Todd as his favorite musical and The Pillowman as one of his favorite straight plays.

That said, we do need new and edgy stuff for theatre to continue to be true to life. The old chestnuts that still get performed usually do reveal truths about the human experience, which is why they've stood the test of time even if they're tame (or worse, cheesy) by modern standards. We certainly don't need so many goddamn productions of Oklahoma! though, that's for sure. You've got to have a solid mixture of the new and edgy and the old and conservative for a healthy theatre scene. Broadway actually does this a lot more than people give it credit for.

[Fantod]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 8:49pm

Oh yes what horrid shows Hello, Dolly!, Annie Get Your Gun, and The Sound of Music were.

[darquegk]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 9:57pm

Not all theatre, even boundary pushing theatre, shares the same perspective. While it tends to be pro-human rights almost universally, it varies on issues of fiscal and political import. Look at Urinetown for an example of a rather libertarian perspective- although it's played for laughs, it's made clear that the idealistic socialist movement is naive and unfit to lead, while the cutthroat industrialists, though vicious, were right.

[IloveBroadwAY3]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 10:06pm

I get that not all theatre has to push boundaries but some of these conservative people think anything that is a little pushy is wrong. I remember a school saying legally blonde is wrong

[Visceral_Fella]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 10:14pm

There are things that all of us would reject in any platform. There are things, that aren't of the conservative human experience that are being explored in theatre. On the one hand, one could argue, how can one be changed with that mindset, on the other, who are any of us to question someone's integrity.

Updated On: 1/13/15 at 10:14 PM

[loliveve]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 10:32pm

Why do conservative people see Broadway? The same reason liberal people do, and moderates: they enjoy it.

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 10:41pm

If we want to push the boundaries, why don't we bring back LOLITA MY LOVE!

(That whole score is my jam at the moment)

[Michael Kras]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 10:47pm

Let's lay it down... 90% of Broadway does NOT push boundaries. It is NOT progressive. It does NOT do what I think theatre must do.

People make theatre to go to places no one else will go and say things no one else will say. Much of Broadway doesn't do that. I mean, so many of the shows are just crowd-pleasing tourist attractions. And they're 'nice'. Old people see them, then they go out and have their cake and coffee and sleep peacefully and forget all about it all the next day.

[haterobics]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 10:59pm

Is this a continuation of another discussion on here? Seems to have started in the middle...

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 11:13pm

"People make theatre to go to places no one else will go and say things no one else will say."

Well, sometimes. Not all theatre makers do that, nor should they. "Nice" is okay. I love "edgy," but not every play has to be about blowing the lid off the way we view the world.

That said, we need to do truthful works about real, modern day issues. And no, this is not Broadway's specialty. Broadway has become a showcase for plays and musicals that are designed to appeal to a broad audience. It's been that way for like thirty years now. It's fine - if you want something that isn't "commercial," go see an Off-Broadway or regional theatre production.

There are many Broadway shows however that were not "commercial," but were financially successful (or didn't lose TOO much money) nonetheless. Modern examples that come to mind are Spring Awakening, Urinetown, and even The Book of Mormon (if you think about it). Fun Home will likely do very well and that doesn't appeal to the rich middle aged white lady crowd at all.

[Broadwaydreaming]

Posted: 1/13/15 at 11:18pm

I think this question was posted on my aladdin vs. Matilda board. I mentioned about a teacher friend of mine taking students and parents to see a show, but had to be careful because some parents are more conservative. I meant that the way some parents reveal things to their children are different than others. Some parents put it all out there for their kids at a young age. Words aren't held back or covered up and children aren't "too young" to know certain things about the way life works. Others are more choosey. I knew someone who took a 12 year old camp group to Mamma Mia with parents. Some thought it was a fun time, others weren't thrilled that the premise didn't follow the teachings they have so far imparted on their kids.

I was raised in a somewhat conservative environment with very openminded parents. I, myself, love theater whether it's pushing boundaries or not. For me, it's about how the story relates to my life and how I'm moved by the story. Like others have said, most Broadway shows don't do a whole lot of boundary pushing as far as I'm concerned.

Updated On: 1/13/15 at 11:18 PM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 5:12am

Theater is about telling stories and feeling. Remember catharsis?? That could be achieved in many different ways.

SOME theater pushes boundaries SOME theater says says things no one else will. SOME. Theater would be exhausting if this is the only thing it strove for. There would also be a lot less theater.

I love a show that makes me think, both during and after the show. I also love an artfully crafted light entertainment..

All theater has a message, it just doesn't need to be ground breaking.

[AHLiebross]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 6:50am

Les Miz has a message that is consistent with conservative values -- JVJ's experience with the Bishop of Digne is what redeemed him, because the Bishop "bought [his] soul for God." The Phantom of the Opera, Annie, My Fair Lady, The Sound of Music, Fiddler on the Roof ... I could go on and on listing shows, some with a "message" and some without, that can easily appeal to social and political conservatives.

As for shows such as The Book of Mormon -- I STRONGLY advise conservatives to stay away.

[South Florida]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 7:26am

Interesting, the only show my Conservative friends have any interest in is BOM.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 8:33am

Not all good theater pushes boundaries.

The LCT revival of South Pacific didn't push any boundaries, and that was a production that was universally loved.

[mamaleh]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 8:40am

Human beings are an interesting mix: people can be liberal about some issues and conservative about others. I recall THE BOY FROM OZ (a gay-themed show) staff remarking about how many ticket requests they got from the 2004 Republican convention contingent. So it's never wise to put people in stereotypical categories.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 8:49am

One person's comfort zones are another's boundary-breaking trigger. Have you ever attended a production of "Our Town" with someone who has recently experienced great loss? Particularly if the loss was of a younger person? I remember seeing the Wilder classic during the despair-filled early years of the AIDS crisis, and the young, vital Emily's death hit the audience like a sledgehammer in a gingham glove. When Emily spoke in act three, the audience was awash not only in tears, but a sense of a genuine grief beyond the story's. I am not presuming AIDS alone was a factor. But the production landed in the 80s as an illuminating mirror. It wasn't some old chestnut that sent everyone home with a smug acceptance of the wonderful hand they'd been dealt. If it did, the acceptance might've been tempered with a sober gratitude.

My case is this: boundaries are relative, and they are pushed when they make emotional or intellectual demands on an audience through a transcendent experience, one that, as Marsha Norman opines, can only take place as a communal event. It doesn't have to be simulated sex or violence or "Red Light Winter" revenge. It can be about daring to genuinely explore human experience. I think it's dangerous to define boundary-pushing in exclusively rarefied sociopolitical terms. But then, I also think it's ludicrous to think "experimental" theater is all about magic realism.

Theater is dangerous when it tells the truth. And the truth has never been easy to hear or see. It's that simple, ultimately.

Updated On: 1/14/15 at 08:49 AM

[After Eight]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 9:12am

"Let's lay it down..."

OK, let's.

"90% of Broadway does NOT push boundaries."

Let us give thanks.

" It is NOT progressive."

Let us give double thanks.

"It does NOT do what I think theatre must do."

Thank heavens you don't run Broadway.

"I mean, so many of the shows are just crowd-pleasing tourist attractions. And they're 'nice'. Old people see them,"

Look around. Young people are not absent at these "tourist attractions." Who's going to see Wicked, The Lion King, Aladdin, Matilda, etc., etc.?

"then they go out and have their cake and coffee and sleep peacefully and forget all about it all the next day."

This old person can remember the "nice" plays of over 50 years ago, and does so often, and quite pleasantly, I might add.

On the other hand, as far as the "progessive" stinkers you would like to impose on us, young and old alike, would that we COULD forget them! Alas, we could devour an entire Lindy's cheesecake and be unable to forget things like that repellent "progressive" "musical" about to swoop down on Broadway like a pterodactyl to scoop up Tony Awards. Hell, the entire river Lethe itself couldn't wash away the memory of that stomach-churning opus.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 9:45am

First, let's rephrase as why conservatives see and sometimes like boundary-pushing theatre.

Maybe for the same reason - leaving aside the remunerative - some conservatives have no problem performing in boundary-pushing theatre. E.g., Jon Voight, Gary Sinise, Kelsey Grammer.

Or, more broadly, the same reason the George Bushes have gay friends.

What is that reason?

Because there's a difference, for some people, between personal political ideology and a willingness to explore and relate on a social and artistic level with a variety of human experience which may not be - apparently, in many cases an operative qualifier - consistent with their ideological positions.




Updated On: 1/14/15 at 09:45 AM

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/14/15 at 9:47am

Remember when both ANGELS IN AMERICA and SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION (among favorite plays, full disclosure) both trash-talked CATS in the same general time-frame? Remember when just the word CATS defined middlebrow? I remember the great Kushner himself deriding CATS as some cultural cess pool. It always seemed like Sartre attacking the Ice Capades, pointless intellectual gamesmanship without anyone who cares watching. As if the audience lining up to CATS would buy a ticket to ANGELS IN AMERICA if CATS weren't running. (They might say, "Maybe 42nd STREET a second time would be fun.") When artists define the marketplace with that flavor of elitism, I personally bristle.

Updated On: 1/14/15 at 09:47 AM