Delete

Looking at some of the reactions on Facebook (Stans notwithstanding) to the 2018 sweep of "The Band's Visit," I noticed an overwhelming number of people make statements like, "they always choose the artsy show over the commercial stuff." I did a scant amount of research to determine the veracity of this statement. Here is what I discovered in terms of "Commercial" shows beating "Artsy" shows:

1972: "Two Gentlemen of Verona" beat "Follies."
1984: "La Cage aux Folles" beat "Sunday in the Park with George." (Not to decry any "La Cage" fans; the show certainly filled an inclusivity need. I also find it artistically inferior to "Sunday."
1986: "The Mystery of Edwin Drood" beat "Song and Dance."
1991: "The Will Rogers Follies" beat "Once on this Island," "Miss Saigon," AND "The Secret Garden."
1992: "Crazy for You" beat "Falsettos" AND "Jelly's Last Jam."
1998: "The Lion King" beat "Ragtime" AND "Side Show."
1999: "Fosse" beat "Parade."
2001: "The Producers" beat "The Full Monty" (and ushered in the era of "premium seating". 2004: "Avenue Q" beat "Caroline or Change" (and "Wicked".
2005: "Spamalot" beat "The Light in the Piazza."
2006: "Jersey Boys" beat "The Color Purple" AND "The Drowsy Chaperone."
2009: "Billy Eliot" beat "next to normal."
2010: "Memphis" beat "Fela!" AND "American Idiot" (both the latter were based on previously-released pop albums and might technically be considered 'jukebox musicals,' but I found them to be superior shows to "Memphis," which felt to me like "Dreamgirls" meets "Hairspray" lite.)
2011: "The Book of Mormon" beat "The Scottsboro Boys." (This one still breaks my heart, and they didn't throw "Scottsboro" any Tony bones for tech awards or anything. 12 noms, 0 wins.)

The seasons I excluded either had a greater number of artistic shows in contention against each other (e.g. 1976, in which "A Chorus Line" beat "Chicago" and "Pacific Overtures", or when an overwhelmingly well-received show won in an otherwise relatively weak season (e.g. 1965, in which "Fiddler on the Roof" beat "Golden Boy," "Half a Sixpence," and "Oh, What a Lovely War!".


In 2015, "Fun Home" took home the statuette, reversing the trend of "commercial usually beats artistic." To my mind, FH was easily the most artistically worthy piece nominated (up against "An American in Paris, which was danced beautifully but to me, was otherwise plodding, "Something Rotten!" which was fun and also the most "commercial" piece nominated, and "The Visit," which I found interesting and unique but not nearly at the caliber of "Fun Home.". (Arguably, the trend began reversing in 2014 when "Gentleman's Guide" beat "Beautiful."

In 2016, "Hamilton" deftly fulfilled BOTH identities of "experimental artistic piece with no celebrity casting and an innovative original score" AND "huge commercial blockbuster smash." So voters didn't have to choose "commercial" or "artsy" in 2016.

Last year, we had "Dear Even Hansen" repeat "Hamilton's" feat in terms of being a "smaller, edgy" show with no movie stars that was also a commercial success (like "next to normal" before it, but n2n, as we know, did not take the Tony). 2017 was relatively unique because whether DEH, "Comet," or "Come from Away" won, an "artsy, risky" piece would have taken the Tony. (This is not to deride "Goundhog Day," I just mean that there were three contenders that were NOT based on a previously-released internationally successful and widely-recognized property.)

And this year, of course, "The Band's Visit" declared victory over "Mean Girls," "Frozen," and "Spongebob." I leave it to readers to determine whether, given the overwhelming history of the Tony awards outside of the last few years to reward commercially viable pieces over smaller, more "artistic" works, whether "Mean Girls," "Spongebob," and "Frozen" fell victim to the voters wishing to give the statuette to a small, artistic piece, or whether the voters simply found "The Band's Visit" to be the best show of the season.

I'm sure we will all continue to track this over the next few years to see if we are about to witness a new era of the Tony committee favoring artistic endeavors over more commercial ones.

Updated On: 6/29/18 at 02:55 AM

delete

Updated On: 6/15/18 at 03:41 AM

It's interesting that you start your list at 1972. Follies still won best score, and Verona beat out out two shows which are certainly more "commercial": Grease - which would go on to become the longest running broadway show - and Jesus Christ Superstar - which despite being quite a phenomenon was not even nominated for the top prize.

Also, I don't think the same people vote every year (or do they?) At the end of the day, it also depends on the composition of Tony voters (one year might have more people who prefer commercial shows and another year might have more people who prefer artsy ones, etc.)

I don't like this dichotomy so much because I doubt a lot of the creators of these so-called "commercial" shows would say they only made the show to cater to the crowd and that they didn't pour all their hard work and soul into making the show just so it could be called "commercial" even if the way they structure the show has been informed by experience as to what would work for an audience and what wouldn't. A big part of theatre is having the words and songs heard and acting through and every person talks about how certain changes and choices are made based on audience response. It's the nature of the beast. I mean I do know what you're getting at and I've even accused certain shows of only being made for the sole purpose to cash in on a franchise they thought would make tons of money based on marketing research, but even then the people outside the money-inclined producers who are in charge of actually creating something on the stage would probably argue they put a lot of their craft into it. And even the ones who made what some thing are "high art" would love it if their show became a hit or at least did well enough not to close "prematurely" and have people actually watch their show.

I also don't agree with a lot of the OP's categorizations as to which show was "commercial" and which show was "art". I think it's pretty simplistic actually.

Updated On: 6/15/18 at 09:57 AM

For a while, it was believed that a majority of Tony voters were out-of-town producers who present national touring productions at their venues. Thus, there were years where the commercial hit would win over the more accomplished piece like The Phantom of the Opera winning over Into the Woods, Crazy for You winning over Falsettos, Thoroughly Modern Millie winning over Urinetown, Spamalot winning over The Light in the Piazza, and Memphis winning over Fela!.

Though a few years ago, it was revealed that the road vote only makes up about 10% of the voting bloc. So in recent years, we've been seeing the more accomplished piece winning over the commercial hit like Once winning over Newsies, A Gentleman's Guide to Love & Murder winning over Aladdin & Beautiful, and Fun Home winning over An American in Paris.

Updated On: 6/15/18 at 10:00 AM

SONG & DANCE is the ART in this equation? I need to start drinking at work.

The thing about both PHANTOM over WOODS and CRAZY FOR YOU over FALSETTOS is that the two Tony-winners were astounding productions. PHANTOM was and still is a worldwide phenomenon (I'd argue entirely due to Hal Price's unbelievable direction and storytelling abilities) and I wanted to absolutely hate CRAZY FOR YOU when I saw it because I loved FALSETTOS so, so very much. But CRAZY FOR YOU was joyous and sensational and had some of the best dancing I've ever seen on a Broadway stage.

And though LION KING has two huge brands (the title itself and Disney), it was also a wildly creative triumph. RAGTIME has the best first act of a musical I've ever seen, but the second act makes me want to re-bury Baby Coalhouse back in the ground.

Gurl...show your work.

BOOK OF MORMON is really tightly constructed and has something really interesting to say about religion v. faith. Sure...it's potty-mouthed...but it's smart and a well-made musical (I'd give most of that credit to Bobby Lopez).

LIGHT IN THE PIAZZA sure sounds pretty. But, Jesus, that show is like watching beige paint dry on a piece of sheet rock while listening to modern classical music. I mean...she gets kicked in the head by a horse. That is hilarious.

I exaggerate my dislike of the show. I didn't much care for it, but could recognize it's artistic worth. But two nights after seeing it, I was at the Townhouse (stop judging) and ran into a co-worker and his friend that I was just meeting that night. They said they had just seen PIAZZA and I said, almost apologetically, 'I didn't really care for it.' The friend, to whom I was JUST introduced, slapped me across the face. So...Adam Guettel now has to deal with my wrath.

SONG AND DANCE was proffered as the Art against DROOD's commercialism. Was it really ever on the rails?

The problem is, the theory doesn't hold up all that well. Some years, it seems that commercialism was highly valued over art (see: SPAMALOT). The last few years, it seems the opposite...with riskier fare being rewarded. It also doesn't really take into account that the award is for Best Production of a Musical. It also views some productions with hindsight. For example, PHANTOM doesn't get the credit it deserves for the artistry of its production. LA CAGE was anything but a sure thing. It's a deeply personal work by out, gay writers at a time when that wasn't particularly commercial...especially with gay men dying by the thousands at that point. Viewing LA CAGE as commercial is fine today, I guess. The original post seems to posit that LA CAGE was created with an eye on great commercial success. That couldn't be farther from the truth given the times and the fact that Jerry Herman hadn't had a hit in well over a decade.