Assassins revival. — Page 2

GeorgeandDot said: "The Menier Chocolate Factory production was glorious. It was a pretty immersive, terrifying experience. It was scary, loud, and violent. The British described our nation to a T. I would love for it to transfer with an American cast. I still have chills from the "birth of the nation" when the clown proprietor is birthed from a giant, glowing, decapitated clown doll head at the start of the show."

For some reason I have seen "Assassins" more times (at different theatres) than any musical (this includes all three New York City productions) If it's under 20 different productions it is JUST under. And the Menier Chocolate Factory was the greatest production of "Assassins" I have ever seen.

Too controversial! Rewrite it to be about men's rights activist shooters. Just tweak the lyrics a little, you know, "Everybody's got the right to a girlfriend".

For those interested, I came across a review of a 2018 Austrian production of the show which sounds pretty provocative. Although, as the reviewer notes, such a production reads as a bit less controversial outside of the US than it would have within. (Quite possibly the article references this very thread as well, so, full circle.) The review is in German, which I for one don't speak, but Google Translate appears to do a decent job converting it to English.

https://theaterdistrikt.net/2018/04/20/attentaeter-in-linz/

As I interpret it, the posters here don't personally think that the show is pro-assassination, but rather that the show is likely a hard sell for those not already in the know about that.

There's going to be an actor-musician production in the UK later this year, directed by Bill Buckhurst.

https://www.watermill.org.uk/assassins

Fan123 said: "As I interpret it, the posters here don't personally think that the show is pro-assassination, but rather that the show is likely a hard sell for those not already in the know about that....

"

I'd like to think you are right, Fan, but if you read the posts on the previous page ("I hope no liberator is inspired by (ASSASSINS) (emphasis added)), I think you'll find the posts to which I was responding.

It's true the musical play invites us to identify with the killers, but only briefly and only in the context of understanding how the idea that "Everybody's got the right to be happy" can betray us as well as inspire us.

That doesn't mean the piece is saying it's okay to assassinate the President (not even the current one), and in fact the play isn't structured as a polemic that will send us home to grab our guns. (See, for contrast, Odets' WAITING FOR LEFTY, which quite consciously challenges the audience to stand and declare their support for some hypothetical strike.)

I will grant the point that audiences may find ASSASSINS very unsettling during times of national trial (such as the first couple of seasons post-9/11). But I don't think we should pretend the piece is even structured to provoke rebellion. It isn't. Thought-provoking, certainly, but the musical is hardly a call to violence.

Charley Kringas Inc said: "It's not pro-assassinations, but it's also kind of not really pro-anything (pro-vocative, maybe).The thesis has always felt so muddled to me. There's something ironically flaccid about their ultimate call to arms being about being remembered, particularly in the face of the current spree of shooters - there's so many of them now that theykind of blur together."

I think the show's thesis is pretty clearly about the fallout of the American Dream, and looking at those who can't receive what they were promised. It's a pretty clear analysis of it, starting with the era of Manifest Destiny with Booth and taking it all the way to the peak revival/fallout of the American Dream with Kennedy's assassination, silencing any spark of the naive hope that people were holding onto. The show is way too complicated to be pro-anything. I guess it's pro-empathy and understanding, but it's certainly not pro-assassination. It's simply an analytical piece, an essay depicting the rise and fall of the American Dream and the delusion that existed in the vision.

GavestonPS said: "I'd like to think you are right, Fan, but if you read the posts on the previous page ("I hope no liberator is inspired by (ASSASSINS) (emphasis added)), I think you'll find the posts to which I was responding."

Well, now I have to explain an intentionally cryptic comment from more than a year ago.

What I actually wrote was: But I wouldn't want any potential liberator to see it. What I left out, because it was suggested in the context of the thread up to that point, was "...because it's actually pretty tough on the assassins."

A year later - to anyone who may be reading this - I do not stand by the full implications of this remark, and I guess I should be grateful that it was misinterpreted.

kdogg36 said: "GavestonPS said: "I'd like to think you are right, Fan, but if you read the posts on the previous page ("I hope no liberator is inspired by (ASSASSINS) (emphasis added)), I think you'll find the posts to which I was responding."

Well, now I have to explain an intentionally cryptic comment from more than a year ago.

What I actually wrote was: But I wouldn't want any potentialliberator to see it.What I left out, because it was suggested in the context of the thread up to that point,was "...because it's actually pretty tough on the assassins."

A year later - to anyone who may be reading this - I do not stand by the full implications of this remark, and I guess I should be grateful that it was misinterpreted.

"

Sorry, kdogg, I didn't notice the date on your original post. I wasn't accusing you of grossly misrepresenting the play; I only invoked your post because of your creative-but-apt use of the word "liberator", which stuck in my mind and freed me from having to go back and quote any of the several posts to which I was referring.

I'm sorry I put you in a position where you felt you had to explain yourself.

GavestonPS said: "I'm sorry I put you in a position where you felt you had to explain yourself."

No worries at all!

Theatrefanboy1 said: "I would love to see Jonathan groff in this"

I would love to see Jonathan Groff in anything--even better, in nothing at all!

Hot Pants said: "Theatrefanboy1 said: "I would love to see Jonathan groff in this"

I’m assuming as the balladeer? I’mcertain he would do a great job. I know I might be alone, butI’d actually be interested to see him as Booth. I think it could be a very exciting example of playing against type. Also I’d like to see a younger Booth, given the fact that he was only in his 20s when he died."

I don't know that Groff as Booth would be "playing against type". The role was originated by Victor Garber, who has played his share of good-looking, leading man roles.

The trick of "The Country Is Not What It Was" is that Booth is entirely sympathetic, singing his song of patriotic despair until he uses the "N-word" and instantly reverses how we see him. That would work for Groff as well as it worked for Garber. (It's entirely a Brechtian device, brilliantly done, which Sondheim will never admit because he's too busy telling us he hates Brecht.)