Posted: 3/5/18 at 2:19am
I have to admit all I know about Carousel is what I have learned from this thread. I was initially excited about this production (I’m always happy to discover classic musicals - I’ve now seen Hello, Dolly! twice - once with Bette and once with Bernadette) and had hopes to see Carousel if I made it to NYC while it was still playing. Now, unless it significantly improves during the preview period, I doubt I will see it even if I make it to NYC before closing.
I will say I have mostly enjoyed observing the conversation about whether it’s ever appropriate to revive a beloved show with some views that now seem outdated and beyond that can be perceived as sympathetic to the abuser rather than the abused. But furthermore, there has been a passionate discussion from both sides regarding whether these works, if they are revived, should be revised precisely as they were or be modified to reflect modern sensibilities. I have to admit I have sympathies for both arguments. On one hand, by being as faithful to the original as possible, you allow new audiences to experience the show much as it was intended originally. The other argument, of course, is why recreate a work of art brushstroke by brushstroke as it takes all the creativity out of it. Plus, no work of art is perfect, and if it can be improved upon, why not do that?
Perhaps because I just finished watching the Oscar broadcast tonight, I have been thinking about movies from the past that were lauded at the time, but have problematic content. Of course, I am aware that film is a different art medium that live theater. But three films come to mind. One is the original The Birth of a Nation (1915), which, while lauded at the time and still of historical significance, most would not support recreating today or if it was, not without significant changes in relation to its views of people of color. I admit I hade never seen this movie so am going by the critical consensus as I perceive it. The second movie that comes to mind is Gone with the Wind. It too has significantly outdated views, in particular regarding people of color. However, I would argue it should not ever be recreated on film (like we need another remake), not because of the offensive stereotypes, but because no remake is likely to ever top the original, even with its significant flaws. However, I think with some tweaks, the new film could be a commentary on what like was life was like for white and brown people (including how white people viewed people of color) back then while not condoning it. Lastly, I am thinking of Gus Van Sant’s 1998 almost scene-for-scene remake of Hitchcock’s Psycho, a film that is largejy not offensive (except perhaps for its portrayal of mental illness). However, the remake was largely shunned by audiences and critics alike. Why pay to see a pale imitation when you can see the original? Of course, that same opportunity does not exist in regard to live theater. Even if we see a film of a live production, It is not going to capture entirely what it felt like to be in that audience. And, of course, most productions now or then do not produce a live recording suitable for filmgoers’ consumption.
I am aware I am rambling now. I am just trying to sort this out. I’ll admit I’m not much of a purist so revisions of classic works do not bother me as long as the revision enhances the original or at least makes it different in any interesting way. Certainly, it would appear most people on here would agree that Carousel is not so problematic that it should never be revised. The question then is to revive it with zero changes to score or script or make approved tweaks to problematic areas in the original. i’m honestly finding I am more sympathetic to the latter although others have spoken much more eloquently and knowledgeably about how that could be achieved than I ever could. It does seem that regardless of where you fall on these issues, the vast majority agree that this production mangled the original material into a hot mess. A strong creative team might’ve been able to get approval to modify a line or two while changing how other lines are simply delivered.
I am also thinking about three revivals. The recent revivals of Hello, Dolly!, The King and I, and Spring Awakening. The first seems to have taken the least amount of liberties with the original material while The King and I made some small efforts to mitigate some of the racial stereotypes and was fairly (if not wholly, depending on who you ask) successful. Lastly, Spring Awakening reimagined the original (although not due to problematic content) while also staying true to the source materiel. I would say all three were very successful in my eyes. I am very grateful to have seen all three revivals. At the end of the day, one size would not seem to fit all when it comes to revivals. All I know is I trust all of you enough to believe that this production seems to have gone wrong in so, so many ways.
For those that did, thanks for reading my rambles. Lol. Please know that I am aware that’s even at the relatively advanced age of 53, I’m a relative novice in relation to many of you when it comes my knowledge of theater. It would seem I’ve loved it my whole life since I was in drama club in high school through being in a couple plays in college then seeing touring productions; things really ramped up when I came to NYC the first time in 2010. There has been no turning back since. Just know that my sometimes ill-informed posts are just my attempt to sit at the cool theater kids’ table and strike up a conversation. I think ya’ll are the bees’ knees (except for the one poster I recently blocked). Lol. Well, goodnight.
Updated On: 3/5/18 at 02:19 AM