In today's New York Times Arts and Leisure Section there is an extensive article with photos of the current production of WEST SIDE STORY. Arthur Laurents mentions some of the changes that he has made, saying there is no reason to revive a musical unless there are different ideas used. He defends his change of the ending, saying that the cops would never let gang members carry a body out of a crime scene! So, forget the poetry of the original ending and opt for realism. Hmmm. Sondheim is also quoted.
As usual, I am asking someone to provide a link to the 3 page article, as I am ignorant of that skill. The article is well worth reading.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/theater/15cohe.html?ref=arts
Mr. Laurents made other changes, some to heighten the verisimilitude and others to depart from it.
In other words, arbitrary, capricious and either stupidly or maliciously intended to diminish or neutralize Jerome Robbins's contributions to the original.
Sondheim has the final word:
“It’s relevant if it moves you,” Mr. Sondheim said.
I thought The Estate of Jerome Robbins pretty much controlled what could and could not be done about his direction and especially his choreography. I am surprised that Arthur Laurents has the latitude to make so many changes in direction concept and specific staging. Pal Joey, your comments in your first post on this thread seem right on. What a travesty!
The clout of the Estate of Jerome Robbins was considerably weakened with the death last year of Floria lasky, Robbins's longtime lawyer and fierce defender of the integrity of her client's work.
Arthur referred to her in public as the "last remaining obstacle" to his reenvisioning of WSS.
ok... that picture of Karen is NOT flattering at all!!!!!
Videos