Cabaret: Did the revival stack the deck too much?

[Jennifer Lynn]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:47pm

Mentioning Cabaret in another thread made me want to bring up this topic. Someone else touched on it on the RATM newsgroup, but I thought it merited discussion here.

Did the 1998 revival of Cabaret stack the deck a little too much in showing such out-and-out sleaziness and unpleasantness? Rather, did it undermine a major theme by making the grit and dirtiness so in-your-face?

In the book The Twilight Zone Companion, the episode "The Obsolete Man" was discussed. That was the one with Burgess Meredith as a librarian in a future society that banned all books, all expression of faith, and all free thought. The book's author acknowledged that the episode was well-written and acted; however, he thought that the deck was stacked too much in making the society so over-the-top. By doing that, he claimed, it allows us to smugly sit back and claim that we'd NEVER go along with such a society. Whereas the classic "Eye of the Beholder" episode doesn't reveal the nature of its society until the episode is well underway, and makes us uncomfortable by thinking that it isn't really so far off our own, after all.

So it is with the 1998 revival model of Cabaret. Although I enjoy it (I saw a small production that modeled itself on it) I can't help but agree to some extent with the comments of the poster on RATM. The original 1967 version showed life in the Kit Kat Klub to be sleazy, but also to have a tacky, perverse sort of glamour. It isn't until the story's well underway that we start to realize something's terribly wrong here, and the Kit Kat Klub soon starts to lose whatever glamour it had...and thus we realize that we were taken in just as so many ordinary Germans were by Nazism, either by closing their eyes, by telling themselves they were powerless anyway, by convincing themselves it was all for the best, or all three.

But by making the Kit Kat Klub so in-your-face unpleasant, with the bruises and needle tracks on the dancers' arms, does the revival model undermine that idea? By making the unpleasantness all on the surface, by making it clear the Kit Kat Klub was such a tough place to be for both the performers and the audience, does it give us room to sit back and tell ourselves, "I never would have been taken in"?

Your thoughts?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 7:52pm

Interesting post!

I agree that it's in-your-face, gritty and dirty. But there's something enticing about that, just as there's someting enticing about seemingly-perfect glamour, to me. Watching it, I found it intriguing, and sort of deliciously, yet deviantly decadent, not something I found to be disgusting or frightening. I don't think it's really a detriment. The gritty version of the club still brings across the same point -- everything in there, despite how dirty it is, still holds that notion that everything is well and good and happy. Just look at that atmosphere; it isn't, at the beginning, one of pain or fear. I found it effective, and the idea of finding out something is gravely wrong in the middle of the story was still carried out -- it was just all turned out a few notches.

[Emcee4ever]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:16pm

I agree with LuvtheEmcee. :)

I think the grittiness helped cause without the makeup, bruises, and track marks the girls really were beautiful.

[Demitri2]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 8:40pm

Understand the original was considered very risque for 1967. If the times allowed it, I feel it would have even been more extreme in the sleaze department. First off the emcee was one of the first borderline drag queens to have appeared in a current Broadway musical. Also at the time Joel Grey's love affair with two gorillas not only leaned on bestiality but also suggested the growing decadence of Berlin. To me the kit kat club was never glamorous but more of a dive for partyers, outcasts and curiosity seekers. The only character whose innocense is at stake is Cliff. In the revival, the major difference for me was the emcee's demise at the end of the show which I found very moving. Nothing like this happened in the original.


Updated On: 12/1/05 at 08:40 PM

[Chris32NY1]

Posted: 12/1/05 at 10:47pm

I saw the revival of Cabaret eight or nine times -- I tried to see it whenever there was a change in the master of ceremonies or sally. Yeah, it was sleazier than the original production and movie, but the show adapted over time. I think the change gave the characters more opportunity to throw themselves into the part. For example, I was not sure that Molly Ringwald would be able to handle the part of Sally, but I was pleasantly surprised that she showed real talent in the part. If anyone saw her in it, can you remember when she sang "Maybe this Time" toward the end of the show? The grittiness of the show allowed her to be believable in her presentation.

[SirLiir]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 12:05am

The Emcee dies in the revival of Cabaret?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 12:06am

Yes. In a concentration camp.

[SirLiir]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 12:12am

I know he ends up there but does it show him dying or is it just implied?

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 12:16am

I suppose I could have interpreted it all wrong, but I believe the final sequence is him being shot. There's that terrible, loud noise, and the cymbal crash leading up to him bowing as the lights go down.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 12:32am

I never really knew what Cabaret was about, but now I really, really wish I'd seen this.

[SirLiir]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 12:56am

Ditto ><

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 1:13am

I see where you're coming from, but I actually believe that the intensified grittiness of the revival was necessary since so much has changed since the original production. Most notably, we're so desensitized to sex and violence that they had to make those elements more graphic in the revival so that they would have the same effect on a modern audience they did almost four decades ago when the play first opened. And as far as the issue of the Nazis were concerned, that element stayed pretty much the same I believe, the notable exception being the Emcee playing the ticket collector in the final scene (and of course, dropping his drawers at the end of the first act to show the swastika tattoo on his ass).

I'd also like to say that having performed "Cabaret" (as Ernst)in its original version prior to seeing the revival, I felt that the changes to the script greatly improved the play as a whole. The dialogue is sharper, the characters (most notably Cliff) more defined, and the shock value (a major facet of this play) more effective. I really hope they release the new version for licensing.

[FOAnatic]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 1:14am

I second EVERYTHING said by Emcee.

[popcultureboy]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 5:05am

Who says it was tough? And who says the bruises and the needle tracks make it "unpleasant"? It just took the concept of heroin chic and ran with it. Watching any production of this show, you know there are drugs involved in the glamorous hedonism on show, whether it's as foregrounded as it was in the most recent revival or not.

Seeing the obvious signs of drug use on the performers didn't make me think their life was unpleasant at all and I think act one of the revival captured the sleazy glamour perfectly. The only thing "terribly wrong" with the lifestyle is that it was wiped out by the Nazi regime. And I love how the most recent revival challenged the viewer that little bit more with it. It showed both sides of it at the same time. And yet still, the reveal of the empty orchestra balcony at the end packs the powerful punch it needs to.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 9:48am

And somewhat related, the revival restored the material's roots, the Isherwood "I Am A Camera" underpinnings for the tale that was altered for the film.

Yes, the film gave us the "camera's" bisexuality, missing always before. But I've always been in the minority -- I thought Liza wasn't inherently right for Sally; Sally being Americanized and turned into a brilliant singer felt a built-in dilution. She is compelling in the film, but the Sally of the revival is closer to the woman Isherwood intended, and somehow it gave the show a new jolt of authenticity. Natasha -- tacky, narcissistic, critically, only a mediocre singer -- was perhaps definitive in this regard.

[robbiej]

Posted: 12/2/05 at 10:17am

The question of Liza is really fascinating. I understand the criticism of her being too...well...good...at least as a singer. But the fact that she was a terrific, dangerous vocalist who decided to live her life away at the Kit Kat Klub made the character seem more reckless. I find it to be a pretty valid interpretation. And the performance was simply spectacular.

HOWEVER, Richardson's Sally was a revelation. And truly embodied the entire feel of the revival. No matter how bruised and drugged they appeared, there certainly was a dark beauty about the whole production. In 1998, we were still in the thores, as pop has said, of the heroin chic trend. This production simply reflected the time in which it was produced.