Does Into the woods Jr do justice to the original? - Page 4
Does Into the woods Jr do justice to the original?
#75Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/4/13 at 7:34pm
I guess with the addition of "Our Little World" and all its attendant hair handling, the uncensored take on the witch and Rapunzel's relationship can get even more (fore)play.
Updated On: 6/4/13 at 07:34 PM
#76Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/4/13 at 8:04pm
And as the Witch later admits:
"I'm not good,
I'm not nice,
I'm just right.
I'm the Witch.
You're the world.
I'm the hitch.
I'm what no one believes,
I'm the Witch."
What would she care about a trivial thing like the incest taboo?
John Adams
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/1/13
#77Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/5/13 at 12:33am
>> it's odd that the Witch's entire aim is to recapture her own beauty and that aim seems related to her child (rather than a man).
I never would have gone with incest in a million years. If I had to go all Linus Van Pelt on the tale, I think that there's a more reasonable scenario.
In the original Grimm brothers tale, the Witch was always old and ugly. In Sondheim and Lapine's version she is not. She is beautiful, and her mother has given her one job to do - tend her garden. Hmmm... what could that be a metaphor of? I know what the British mean when they speak of a "lady garden"... Same thing?
So, the beautiful girl's only task is to tend her garden, but then, the Baker's father climbs over the wall and the beautiful girl catches him in her "garden", in the middle of the night. How does Sondheim have her describe what he's doing there?
He was robbing me! Raping me!Sounds kind'a "heated", no? The Baker's dad seems a little bit like "rough trade". Surly... me likey!
Rooting through my rutabaga, Raiding my arugula
Ripping up the rampion, my champion, my favorite!
But is the beautiful girl upset? Sure. A little. She says she should have been more vindictive, but:
I let him have the rampion, I'd lots to spare.Oh, Witchey-Poo... You dirty, dirty girl! Your "garden" has just been ravaged, but I guess there's plenty to go around...
Anyway, the unexpected happens. Uh-oh... As sometimes can happen to beautiful girls who aren't careful about who enters their gardens, they can lose their special beans. And what are the consequences for that? A baby.
Oh, sure... when she tells the story, it's the Baker's mother who was pregnant, but isn't that a typical way to hide the truth? "No, no officer! It's not my pot! I was just holding it for a friend!" or "No, I didn't fart! It must have been the dog!" uh-huh...
The Witch's mother is furious with her daughter for "losing her beans". She punishes her in a way that ensures this can never happen again - she takes away her beauty.
Out of revenge for what the Baker's father has done, and the horrible punishment that has been brought on her, the Witch punishes the Baker in a similar manner. She ensures this can never happen again by casting a spell that makes the Baker's family tree "a barren one". Perfect "tit for tat" plot symmetry.
After the baby arrives, it's immediately hidden away in a tower. (Of course! You don't have to explain what no one can see, right?)
Years pass, and being hideously ugly, the Witch has no hope of meeting "a prince". The only company she has is her daughter, who has grown up to be just as beautiful as the Witch once was.
Also, her neighbor is the Baker (who is now all grown up, but barren) and his wife. When they express the desire to have a child, the Witch sees an opportunity rectify what the Baker's father has wrought on her. She can get back her beauty.
I don't see the Witch's aim at getting her beauty back having any connection with Rapunzel. She's not doing it for anyone but herself, but in order to accomplish it, time had to pass to allow the Baker to become an adult.
She's always wanted her beauty back, but the circumstances and opportunity didn't come into play until the Baker finally wanted a child and needed his curse reversed. The only way to get her curse reversed was to agree to reverse his. When the Baker was a boy, he had no care about his curse. Time had to pass to create the symbiotic circumstances for both to get what they wanted.
Updated On: 6/5/13 at 12:33 AM
#78Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/5/13 at 7:59amI will say this, when I did into the woods in middle school it was the worst experience ever!
#79Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/5/13 at 1:34pmThe doubling in Into the Woods is brilliant, but I think it should be noted that almost none of it existed when the show was first put before an audience. The doubling in the San Diego production wasn't particularly thematic. The only pairing that made it to broadway was the Giant/Granny/Cinderella's Mother track. George Coe doubling the Mysterious Man and Cinderella's Father makes sense. But who can say why the Wolf, the Steward and the Narrator were doubled? It doesn't make a lot of sense, really. It's also interesting to note that when Tom Aldredge left the show and Dick Cavett took over, The Narrator/MM track was split up again, with Edmund Lyndeck taking over the Mysterious Man as well as Cindy's Father.
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#80Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/5/13 at 4:16pmThis. Thread.
#81Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/5/13 at 7:06pm
Wow, John Adams, you were really inspired there!
I only meant that the play acknowledges the Freudian principle that eros, the life principle, is the basis for both sexual attraction and filial affection--and found a way to dramatize that concept.
I really never meant to suggest the ladies are humping in the tower.
#82Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/6/13 at 3:40amAnother tidbit from the annals of San Diego and the evolution of Into the Woods: At least in the document of the San Diego production I'VE seen, the Witch is never referred to as Rapunzel's mother. She calls her "Dame Gothel" and the relationship is largely unexplored. Stay With Me, Lament and much of the dialogue they share were written later than this early stage, leaving Rapunzel as a weird tangent and the witch's motivations muddled. It's...possible that at this point Lapine was playing a lesbian subtext, but there's nothing that really strongly points in that direction.
John Adams
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/1/13
#83Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/6/13 at 7:45am
>>I only meant that the play acknowledges the Freudian principle that eros, the life principle, is the basis for both sexual attraction and filial affection--and found a way to dramatize that concept.
Yeah, I was pretty long-winded! 
What I should have written:
"I think the show relates more to "street-level", contemporary issues rather than exploring deeper, psychological concepts. More like what the Grimm brothers set out to do."
Whew!! That was a lot faster and easier! 
Updated On: 6/6/13 at 07:45 AM
broadway guy
Broadway Legend Joined: 8/5/11
#84Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/6/13 at 7:54amThis thread is BEAST!
#85Anyone find it odd that Sondheim would sign off on Into The Woods JUNIOR?
Posted: 6/6/13 at 9:59pm
I wasn't criticizing your post, John. I was interested and read it; I'm sure others did, too. Everyone else has a scroll bar.
ChairinMain, thanks for the refresher. When I said the lesbian subtext was strong in La Jolla, I was referring to my subjective reaction. I admit I don't remember what all was different. But in general, I remember the witch rapping more. Was that true or did I add that in my (admittedly flawed) memory?
Videos