Am I the only one that didn't enjoy Spring Awakening? — Page 4

i'm in the UK, and so obviously haven't been able to see it, but I'm falling in love with the cast recording. as everyone's said, its got its flaws - i find the lyrics for 'touch me' a bit cringy, and yep the spoken dialogue - it sounds like its very stylised, which probably works on stage but isn't doing so well in recording.
I'm just loving the interesting conversations coming out of this, rather than - its crap, everyone who doesn't love it is stupid, hating kind of responses that come out. And I think this is a good indication of the fact that the audience isn't teenyboppery - there hasn't been any oMigoood bUt its LYke the Gr8test muziKal evA rittn!
and actually, these discussions have been fairly balanced and reasonable. congrats!

Wendla WAS scared of the consequences of having sex despite not realizing it could result in pregnancy- she knew that in her society, "good girls" didn't do that, or want that. But she did have thoughts about sex, which is why she sings earlier "who made me so bad" and wanted to be beaten in order to feel something, anything- given the repression of emotion in that culture. Time in the play is condensed, so it is actually not clear how much time has passed between scenes- such as the missing gap between midterms and finals. I assumed that months pass between the various vignettes- so you can't say that their relationship did not have time to develop- and it's made clear that they were childhood friends, and that most of the girls had a crush on Melchior...

Updated On: 1/8/07 at 06:21 PM

wow this is a great post. i do agree with some of the people who say some of the plots werent fully developed. i wished they did more on Ilse and Martha especially. The whole MIC thing, i dont think everyone realizes that the songs arent suppose to move the story along, they are internal monologoues in which the character is thinking to themselves. and the reason why some of the characters froze onstage is because, while the cast is singing their monolouges nothing else is happening around them. when you think doesnt the world just stop for those few moments so you can understand and process your thoughts. thats basically what it is. i really do feel bad for the people that dont appreciate this show. i think it defiantly deserves its spot on Broadway. I think if people really understood its message than they would enjoy it better, maybe even consider going to see it again to process it.

"I don't think a lot of people understand that these are inner monologues for the characters. I was walking Theater Talk and Michael Mayer or Steven Sater said they didn't really want the traditional musical idea of these characters turning and signing to each other. The songs are what's going on inside of the characters."

Exactly my point. :0)

i'm in the UK, and so obviously haven't been able to see it, but I'm falling in love with the cast recording. as everyone's said, its got its flaws - i find the lyrics for 'touch me' a bit cringy, and yep the spoken dialogue - it sounds like its very stylised, which probably works on stage but isn't doing so well in recording.
I'm just loving the interesting conversations coming out of this, rather than - its crap, everyone who doesn't love it is stupid, hating kind of responses that come out. And I think this is a good indication of the fact that the audience isn't teenyboppery - there hasn't been any oMigoood bUt its LYke the Gr8test muziKal evA rittn!
and actually, these discussions have been fairly balanced and reasonable. congrats!

I know! I'm actually really loving this thread, and I'm loving that we can converse about the show and share our differing opinions without it becoming a hate thread :) very cool.

and I dont know, shesamarshmallow I see what you mean, but again, I just always thought of rape as being abuse. And he's not abusing her- he knows she's feeling the same things he is (which she is, she just doesn't understand them as well as he does). And although it does happen a bit quickly within the range of the show, and they only really interact 2 times before that scene, they're supposed to have known each other all their lives- they've just never really gotten time alone together before. Its not like they're two complete strangers and all of a sudden he's forcing her to do it, you know? And as teka21 said (which I fully agree to that post on ALL points, by the way), she becomes fully comfortable and accepting of the fact that that happened to her. I just dont see how, if it was rape, that would be the case. The way I see it, if she was okay with it, its not rape. And yes, she's uninformed, but I do get the impression that she probably does have an inkling about what the results of what she does might be. I mean, if she didn't, when she finds out she's pregnant wouldn't she say "but how did that happen?" She DOES say "but I'm not married", but thats very different. If anything, that has to do with the fact that she DOES know what she did was wrong and that she shouldn't have done it till she was married. So yeah... I think she does have an idea of it. And again, the main point to my argument is that she did want it.

---

Updated On: 1/8/07 at 06:45 PM

So if I have sex with a baby, it's not rape?
Think, please.

---

"So if I have sex with a baby, it's not rape?
Think, please."

That is completly irrelevant. We are talking about the play here. you think.

So if I have sex with a baby, it's not rape?
Think, please.

but she's not a baby- not even close

again, I personally feel like she does know the consequences. Maybe she's not necasserily thinking about the fact that she could get pregnant, but she knows its not good. And thats the reason she resists at all. But once melchior convinces her that what they're doing is okay (again, not saying he's not getting a little carried away), she CHOOSES to do it. Sure, maybe melchior should have stopped knowing that she probably either didnt realize or wasnt considering that she could get pregnant from it, but I wouldnt call the fact that he doesn't rape. He's making a mistake, yes, but he's not forcing her into anything.

A baby... well, I'm not even sure how to respond to that because its ENTIRELY different. A baby has absolutely no control over what a person does to it. Wendla could have left if she wanted to. Melchior wasnt exactly making it easy to do so, but she could have.


And, on another note, although I def WAS affected by Moritz's death, I initially was actually more affected by Wendla's... but I think a big part of that was that I knew moritz's death was coming. Somehow, I hadn't listened to the end of the recording enough beforehand to pick up on wendla's death, so it really hit me hard. But now, reflecting back on it, I think I get just as sad about Moritz's death because I start realizing how STUPID society can be about grades and school and everyting.

---

Updated On: 1/8/07 at 07:06 PM

Mama, I think you're getting book/play/musical all mixed up. There is no novel, it was originally a play. The current version is a musical.

What I'm saying is that just because Wendla doesn't know what rape is, doesn't mean it couldn't happen to her. I honestly am having a really hard time understanding your point.

---

"Mama, I think you're getting book/play/musical all mixed up. There is no novel, it was originally a play. The current version is a musical.

What I'm saying is that just because Wendla doesn't know what rape is, doesn't mean it couldn't happen to her. I honestly am having a really hard time understanding your point."

Im not an idiot i know exactly what i am talking about... why dont you go see the play for yourself before you make any kind of remark. She doesnt know what RAPE is obviously, no it doesnt mean it couldnt happen to her, but it didnt in the SHOW. Like i said for the third time i havent read the PLAY( which by the way is in book form, not pieces of paper tied with string) so for me to compare the two i cant. I am saying from WHAT I SAW AT THE SHOW. is that it isnt a RAPE scene... do you understand me now, or should i re-explain myself.

I'm actually curious now to read that part of the play. I'm curious to see the differences in how that scene is handled.

But yeah, I tend to agree with Mama, as far as I know, what I saw in the show, I don't personally consider rape. Mostly because I believe that if she'd really wanted him not to do it, and voiced that, he would have listened. And even more so than that (because I DO see what you mean about the fact that it could still be rape even if there isn't any struggle), by the fact that she still loves him afterward. THATS what really convinces me. If she really didn't want it, no matter if she'd struggled or not, why would she have ever still loved him after that? I consider that seduction. Maybe even forcefull seduction. But not rape. She doesn't feel harmed afterward, and she even says that straight out.

---

Updated On: 1/8/07 at 07:28 PM

Well, think of statutory rape. If a person is under 18 (different in other states, I know), any sexual relations they have is considered to be rape since they are not perceived to be mature enough to make the right decisions. This is obviously a faulty system as many 16 year olds are probably mature enough and I'm sure there are 20 year olds who aren't - but Wendla is most definitely not. Whether or not it appeared as if she wanted to do it, she didn't have all the information required to make a proper judgement. Her apparent love for Melchior is irrelevent.

---

Okay, let's cool the tempers down, and elevate this discussion back to citing of the evidence. The reason Act 2 opens with another love scene, is specifically to drive home the point that their sex is consensual. They sing that their bodies are "the guilty ones" given the restrictions in their society, but they are rejoicing and celebrating in the pleasures they are feeling. And they are each singing their own thoughts, not to each other.