CAROLINE, OR CHANGE Previews — Page 5

I think people need to realize, going in, that this is a show about ideas, themes, issues. It's not an edge of your seat plot, it's not a fun romp through the 60s, it's not a beautiful story about humanity - its an honest look at everything from systemic racism to class to grief to religion to generational differences and to CHANGE. And like most things in this world there are no easy answers. Things don't get tied up in a pretty bow. It's Tony Kushner (Angels in America is two plays with many abstract elements) and Jeanine Tesori (think Violet/Fun Home and less Millie/Shrek) - so I don't know what people are expecting. With those names above the title I should hope to have a meaningful conversation afterwards and not just "that song was so pretty" and "wow, I loved those costumes". No, with those names above the title you should be asking yourself "why did the boy and Caroline resort to racism at their first bit of genuine conflict" or "why is Caroline the only one we ever see working and she can't even afford to be her - 'take Caroline away cause I can't be her'"? For me, it's a show you fall in love with a few days after-the-fact and not necessarily on first viewing. It creeps in.

It's not a show for everyone. But to say these characters aren't well drawn out - my heart broke for each and everyone of them. Also, I haven't stopped thinking about it since I saw it. Clearly.

Jordan Catalano said: "teatime2 said: "Act One is all exposition for very little pay off in Act Two."

No.”

lol. People said the same thing about Grey Gardens. Some people just love to be wrong.

---

It seems like I'm in the minority here, but I loved the first act (and the second). I had never seen the show before, and I was swept away in the beauty of the music and voices, even though I wasn't necessarily playing close attention to the lyrics 100% of the time. For a show with a fairly simple plot, I thought it packed an emotional punch.

It presents uncomfortable issues as simple plots. There is nothing you would miss, at all, about this show.

---

Agree, I wonder if that is the reason people have mixed opinions and are leaving the show at intermission. Like, people wondering "Is this....it?"

---

unclevictor said: "Hope this show lasts…it’s looking dismal"

The original 2004 Broadway production played 22 previews and 136 regular performances. It arrived on Broadway with an enormous buzz due to its success Off-Broadway. It’s just not a musical that draws in an audience aside from fans of the work, which many discovered after the Broadway production flopped.

pair-o-dice said: "I think people need to realize, going in, that this is a show about ideas, themes, issues. It's not an edge of your seat plot, it's not a fun romp through the 60s, it's not a beautiful story about humanity - its an honest look at everything from systemic racism to class to grief to religion to generational differences and to CHANGE. And like most things in this world there are no easy answers. Things don't get tied up in a pretty bow. It's Tony Kushner (Angels in America is two plays with many abstract elements)and Jeanine Tesori (think Violet/Fun Home and less Millie/Shrek) - so I don't know what people are expecting. With those names above the title I should hope to have a meaningful conversation afterwards and not just "that song was so pretty" and "wow, I loved those costumes". No, with those names above the title you should be asking yourself "why did the boy and Caroline resort to racism at their first bit of genuine conflict" or "why is Caroline the only one we ever see working and she can't even afford to be her - 'take Caroline away cause I can't be her'"? For me, it's a show you fall in love with a few days after-the-fact and not necessarily on first viewing. It creeps in.

It's not a show for everyone. But to say these characters aren't well drawn out - my heart broke for each and everyone of them. Also, I haven't stopped thinking about it since I saw it. Clearly."

It does creep in, and its a piece that has stayed with me. I am a big Kushner fan and his other works ask lots of great questions and stay with us--without as many gray/undefined plots points (or hints of them) nagging at us. It didn't necessarily ruin the work for me, but sue me if my mind's expectations were disappointed over the course of the night. It is his right to do so! I can only react. I was underwhelmed but maybe I'll see it again.

I strongly disagree with the notion that this should be a one-act, or a play, or that the first act is not as strong as the second. If anything, the first act made me excited for the second thinking a bigger payoff was coming.

Zion24 said: If the statue played a more prominent role towards the end, then I just missed it because it was all wrapped up in that quick final number. I don't see how Emmie's actions re the statute represent change because didnt she do whatever she did at the statue before the play even starts?

It's hard to make clear comparisons between the original production and this one because I just have the cast album to go off of but, for me, this is one of the strengths of this production. I think it's down to the subtleties of the actors' performances and the direction. I can pick out a lot of little things but overall, I feel like the production plays Caroline and Emmie's relationship as less harsh than the dialogue/lyrics might suggest. The words coming out of Caroline's mouth can be harsh but she's clearly loving and charitably tolerant. More bark than bite. And I believed Emmie when she apologized for calling her mom a maid and that moment when they hugged after church. I feel like Sharon's Lot's Wife didn't have a finality (I have seen a bootleg clip of Tonya) but instead was a cathartic moment of her expressing her frustration. But it's very much softened by the conversation with Noah afterwards and the way this production stages the Epilogue. Because Emmie IS Caroline's heart, it takes away the harshness of her slamming the iron down on her feelings. Emmie is the change Caroline felt she couldn't pursue. The change is fast and slow. Emmie didn't need to change. It's the audience's understanding of her character that shifts in the Epilogue. That payoff comes in Emmie singing "I'm the daughter of a maid [...] nothing can ever make me afraid" and the song ending on "the children of Caroline Thibodeaux." There's a real strength to having that two-story set so we can see Caroline elevated in the warm glow of those lights, lifted up out of the basement where she felt like she was drowning.

And no, I wasn't suggesting corporal punishment! Noah and Caroline both say and do horrible things. Caroline is tortured over it and it leads to the penultimate number in the show. Noah is punished by Caroline's absence but hides the story from his parents and never seems to confront what he said/did. Thats Kushner's prerogative, but it felt unfinished. As for Rose's father, yes Emmie disagreed with his more radical worldview, but Caroline? We dont know (we can guess) because she never says. Again, I'm not criticizing the book as much as I am admitting I was looking forward to more, and the story just never got there for me."

I think Noah is punished by having his illusions shattered. He's a child so there's a great deal of devastation in that newfound understanding and the gulf he created between himself and his last tether to his mother over $20.

I think it's fair to want a more direct confrontation. For me, this is a show about big ideas and "small domestic tragedies." So it makes sense to confine the big confrontations to Caroline/Rose (when Caroline talks back) and Caroline/Noah. Domestic tragedies concerning women and children. I actually liked the way Noah's grandfather intercedes. No, it isn't a direct confrontation with Caroline. But for all his anti-capitalist, revolutionary rhetoric and scoffing about non-violence, he steps in and pretends that he lost the $20 bill. For all his grandstanding, he re-establishes the status quo and takes money out of the equation when he was previously so intent on teaching the lesson that money is "never pure" and "you rip your gold from a starving man's mouth."

Thinking on it more, I really love Caissie's interpretation of the character. There's a lot more liberal guilt and nervousness and discomfort than just brittle neurosis. And from the phone call early on to the scene later with the $20 bill, there was something to dig into with her relationship with her father that added some depth to her struggle to parent Noah.

VintageSnarker - I agree with everything you said! I saw last night's show and was really moved by it. I was sitting toward the back of the mezzanine and I could still vividly see Sharon portraying the weight on Caroline's shoulders.

Also, as a former clarinetist...I really appreciated John Cariani playing it live. It was impressive! Klezmer music is not easy to play.

I appreciate the "wait, what?" moment of the epilogue. To this point it seems like the change is happening around Caroline while she remains planted - by both her circumstance and, on occasion, her will. Nonetheless, here we are learning she's been raising the change in her own house - that while it seemed like it was all for nothing, Emmie's life and perspective are leaps and bounds beyond her mother's.

I absolutely adore this show and can't wait to see this production.

I think Kushner makes some very astute arguments in this show about what change is, and how it can come about. Caroline is defined by her survivor’s instincts- which ultimately provide Emmie with the opportunity to join the civil rights movement. She may feel trapped in her role as a maid, but she is ultimately able to help improve the world, albeit indirectly.
Meanwhile, Grandpa Stopnik, for all his communist bluster, hasn’t really done anything- and apparently money is no concern for him (Kushner critiques the empty rhetoric of some communists in his other works, too, like the revolutionaries that don’t do anything in Bright Room Called Day). His introduction of a large sum of money is the catalyst for both Noah and Caroline to tap into bigotry- the only overt bigotry in the show, despite being set in Jim Crow-era Louisiana.
I think Kushner and Tesori create such a compelling, different view on race during this time period. It’s not a feel-good, easy depiction of overcoming, like Hairspray. Nobody is a noble activist, nobody is a racist villain. Kushner largely focused on the differences informed by class / money, even between Dottie and Caroline. Dottie has the privilege to be able to improve herself; Emmie has the privilege of risking danger to fight for civil rights because Caroline has provided security for her.

---

Alexander Lamar said: "I think a lot of the way Caroline reacts to Emmie is based on fear - this is why there is no confrontation between Caroline and Mr. Stopnick. She knows what she stands to lose if something goes wrong.

Still, deep down she admires Emmie’s spirit, I think."

I agree. I love the way this show plays with the idea of change. Dotty is so important for understanding Caroline. It's through Dotty that we understand that Caroline wasn't always like this but she's losing her courage and becoming bitter and fearful. She's too weighed down by the disappointments of life and the need to provide money for her four kids to think about night school or anything else. But Caroline keeps coming back to her frustration about not being able to understand a map or read so it clearly bothers her. The other part of Caroline's law that strikes me is the first part about wanting the night to last longer. In this show, the moon is an agent of change. It underlines how Caroline doesn't have the luxury of time in which to change, time to let the moon's magic have some effect.

I think it's also significant that the scene of Caroline snapping at Rose and coming close to threatening her precedes Emmie's verbal sparring with Mr. Stopnick. Emmie mocks Caroline saying "mama, teach me what you know, how to keep my head tucked low" but we have just seen that Caroline isn't docile and we are well aware of Caroline's frustrations. "Ooh Child" is very similar to the way Caroline reprimands Emmie about having a boss and not being a queen. Mirroring those scenes affects how the second one plays. Emmie's spirit comes (at least partially) from Caroline.

Do we know for sure if Cariani is actually playing clarinet? I actually played clarinet for Caroline off-off Broadway at Gallery Players and the character part is written into my score book and I can tell you is one of the hardest shows I've ever played, those klezmer solos are insane. When I saw this revival, I highly doubted he was playing just based on my experience having it in the orchestra book, and how difficult it is, but if he is, great for him, he must be really good at it.

And yes his father is a clarinet (hence all the clarinet solos) and his mother was a sad bassoon (so there's a big bassoon part that sometimes comes in). The orchestrations are appropriate and truly lovely.

Being a part of the production truly gave me an appreciation of the show that I doubt I would have had if I only saw it. There's been great discussion and I'll add just one of my favorite moments from the show. At the end when Caroline's last lines are admitting she misses sharing the cigarette. I believe this is the only time in the show she directly acknowledges caring and having any kind of affection for Noah "directly" to him.