Eric,
It's a great question (that I won't even attempt to full answer at this hour). In certain cases and with certain shows, I think that the original staging and/or choreography is at least as integral and vital to the overall show as the score and book (which, because of the Dramatist's Guild, cannot be altered one iota without permission). No one would ever suggest throwing out the score of a great classic musical and starting over, so why do people think nothing of tossing out the landmark choreography of works like Sweet Charity or Chicago?
The choreography in West Side Story illuminates character and advances the plot of the show as well as the book and the score and SHOULD BE protected -- Robbins work defines that show as much as the contributions of Bernstein, Laurents and Sondheim. The same is true of Bennett's work in A Chorus Line and Dreamgirls -- it's unfathomable that either work would be professionally staged without his contributions.
I don't think this is true for EVERY SHOW ever written, but in certain cases the director/choreographer's work is so integral and definitive that it should be preserved and recreated in much the same way you preserve the book and score of that work.
For those who argue that future directors and choreographers should always be able to reinterpret any older work, I strongly disagree. A generation ago, the elite directors -- the Robbins, Bennetts, Fosses, Princes, DeMilles, Kidds and Champions -- NEVER ever under any circumstances did revivals. EVER. That was for hacks and the second-tier directors who staged revivals (the few that happened prior to say 1970) at City Center and elsewhere. The real artists worked exclusively at creating and developing NEW works for the theatre, not just putting a "new spin" on old tried and true classics (which, frankly isn't all that hard to do).
Let Sam Mendes and David Leveaux and Robert Longbottom and Jerry Mitchell take a new piece of material -- a new book, a new score -- and craft a masterpiece out of it like the masters of the past did all of the time. Let them go out of town and have to figure out how to guide the book writer and composer through rewrites and changes, how to work out an overall look and feel for the show with the design team, how to create fully fleshed out characters and memorable showstopping stage moments with their principals and ensemble. Can they do it?
How many damn revivals can they trot out anyway? We don't need anymore "reinterpretations" of classics from the past. We've pretty much run the through the catalogue of recognizable hits from the past, so somebody better start creating entertaining, groundbreaking shows for now that maybe can be revived two decades from now or else Broadway is doomed. Let's have these overpaid, not very talented directors of today go out and do the hard work of creating something innovative for a change, instead of reviving something that already works, say Sweet Charity, tossing out the original incredible choreography and throwing in their own inferior work that's "in the style of" Fosse and acting at the end like they just did something. I'm not impressed.
"What a story........ everything but the bloodhounds snappin' at her rear end." -- Birdie
[http://margochanning.broadwayworld.com/]
"The Devil Be Hittin' Me" -- Whitney
Updated On: 12/23/04 at 12:17 AM