Dessa Rose Reviews

Talkin Broadway is mixed to negative:

http://www.talkinbroadway.com/ob/03_21_05.html

---

Updated On: 3/21/05 at 06:51 PM

Broadway.com is pretty negative, except for the performances by the leads.

http://www.broadway.com/gen/Buzz_Story.aspx?ci=508732

lc

Even though I wasn't wild about the show, for some reason I was expecting critics to like it better. Maybe because fellow-posters here seemed to like it so much better than I did.

I loved "Dessa Rose" as well. I thought the score was wonderful and I loved the number where Dessa Rose sang the siblings.

---

these aren't even "the critics" yet. I'm going to wait until the newspapers come out, because they wait until the show is over to post their reviews. (tonights show isn't even over yet, what are they critiquing? The opening act?) anyway, despite what critics say, I loved it the first time I saw it, and I'm going again in May, so I'm sure I'll love it again...talkinbroadway's review nonwithstanding.

---

Well i am a critic. I loved it.
It was breathtaking in my opinion.

Updated On: 3/21/05 at 08:46 PM

I still want to see it. I love Rachel York. I love LaChanze. I love Norm Lewis. I love Ahrens and Flaherty. So, really, the odds are I will enjoy myself.

I haven't seen the show yet, but I don't understand why these two critics have been so hard on the fact that the two women don't meet until late in Act I. I have read the book, and it sounds like A&F have been very faithful to the source material. I know I should reserve judgment until I actually see the show, but the idea of having the old women narrate action that would otherwise be very difficult to stage seems like a reasonable solution to me. Plus, it conforms to the oral traditions of slave songs that were used as "secret code" that enabled them to communicate with each other without their owners knowing what they were saying. In addition, the moving back and forth in time is, again, consistent with the book. When reading it, I had the sense of the past clashing with and influencing the present. It was quite effective. Both women had strong memories of people and events that were still haunting and affecting them. The parallel development of their stories before their encounter made their meeting that much more meaningful.

One final note: I was actually pretty insulted by the critic who said he would have liked more upbeat material but then dismissed it by saying, "of course, slaves didn't have much fun." How crash. Both reviewers seemed to gloss over what most of the thoughtful posters on this board have felt were very moving songs and situations.

Anyway, that's my two cents. I'll give the whole nickel after I see the show on April 2!

lc

I haven't seen the show yet, but I don't understand why these two critics have been so hard on the fact that the two women don't meet until late in Act I.

Two reasons, as I see it- the central advertising image for the show is of Rachel York and LaChanze side by side, making it seem like the musical is centered on their characters' relationship. In light of that, the fact that they don't meet until very late in is strange at the very least.

The second reason is that Act I of the show- when it alternates between their two separate stories- doesn't really work. It drags and it's not particularly compelling. The show takes off when Dessa Rose and Ruth finally meet and their relationship develops. But it comes so far in, it's really disappointing.

I'm sure they cut tons and tons of the source material to get to the current state of the show- I would have liked it if they cut even more and made it truly about Ruth and Dessa.


And addressing your last point- the show needed more humor. Heavy material doesn't preclude any kind of lightness. Just look at Caroline, or Change, which started getting laughs from the first few lines, spread them around as needed, and still handled its powerful story with dignity and grace.

Updated On: 3/21/05 at 09:22 PM

personally, if the two characters had met sooner, i wouldn't have believed the result of their relationship as much. i needed and wanted the backstory(ies) because it made the moment when they met that much more tense. like you didn't know how each was going to react. i whole-heartedly disagree with the dismissals of the score. i think there isn't a better score on broadway right now (rent maybe excepted)... i just am very disappointed by these reviews.

well long-running no, but once on this island and a man of no importance were both received well if i remember correctly.

i'm talkin Bway Adar. I would have loved to see Man of No Importance! one of the shows thats up their with the original Hair, shows i wouldve loved it see in their original runs

---

i don't understand what show these critics saw.

i can't believe he calls these characters archetypes. there was so much character development i saw between the characters and their emotions and relationships. that's one of the things i loved about the show. also, it doesn't bring "us an uplifting chapter or two in the history of American race relations." it tells us so much more than that. there are negative and positive things about all the different characters and their choices and motives. alright, sorry... i might be ranting more against these critics.