FOLLIES: Thoughts...- Page 9

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/21/11 at 4:52pm

I think one can agree with most of the comments above and still not think Follies is a failure.

Yes, it is more demanding than most of the musicals that came before it. Unless you're an investor, what's wrong with that?

No, it isn't focused on attractive young people with unlimited potential and possibilities. Follies' young people are ghosts and we know they don't live happily ever after.

But that doesn't mean Follies' purpose is simply to throw cold water on the hopes and dreams of the audience. Like all of Sondheim's work, Follies deals with how false hopes betray us.

After Eight says nobody is dumb enough to believe marriage is a panacea, yet oddly that is the very story of Western comedy for the past 2,500 years. Follies asks us to reconsider the tropes of American musical comedy by placing those ideas in a different context.

It's interesting that posters seem to care more about Buddy and Sally than Ben and Phyllis. Americans have always had conflicting feelings about the elite. So we get a member of the patrician Bush family pretending to be a cowboy in order to get elected. Follies was written on the heels of the Kennedy "Camelot", when an interest in fine art and the latest trends in design weren't considered un-American. Audience members could respect Ben's and Phyllis' social climbing while also recognizing what it cost them.
Updated On: 8/21/11 at 04:52 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 3:52am

As someone who is highly critical of the book, otherwise, I find it surprising that many find the ending doesn't work. To me those last four lines by the young principles are the only unsung moment of the show that even begings to match the score in power and poetry.

But, hey, as this thread makes clear, Follies is like a Rohrschach test.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 6:45am

I'm equally surprised, Henrik. The ending never seemed the least bit ambiguous or vague to me. Obviously, the characters are tentative, but since they barely take action in the preceding 2 hours, it wouldn't be believable if they suddenly became firmly decisive at the curtain.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:23am

If Buddy and Sally make a go of it at the end, then what about poor Margie? Is no one thinking about her in all this?

Margie, the ultimate victim in Follies's doleful tale.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:41am

She's been having an affair with a married man! And one that's nearly 2x her age. She deserves to suffer!

Here's a question....of the four characters, do you think any of them will have actually LEARNED anything from this experience? (You know, if it or they were real.)

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:52am

Dramamama,

I see Margie as a victim of Buddy here. She provides him with solace, warmth, and ....., and now that she is no longer needed by him, she'll be unceremonioudly dumped! (or will she continue to be his plaything whenever Buddy has a spat with Sally?)

Well, I just hope Margie will learn fom this experience, find a nice guy her own age, settle down and live happily ever after, the way marriage is supposed to be.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:57am

Dramamama, I think all four have learned something or they wouldn't have numbers in the Loveland sequence identifying their follies for us.

And I have no doubt Ben is profoundly changed when he reaches out to Phyllis in the final moment. And Phyllis recognizes the gesture and reciprocates. I believe I said pages ago that I am sure their marriage is greatly altered and for the better.

I think the futures of Buddy and Sally are more difficult to predict. When I first saw the show I believed that Sally had recognized the foolishness of pining for Ben and was sincerely reaching out to Buddy (rather than merely "settling"). Nowadays I'm not as sure that Buddy's and Sally's respective revelations come soon enough in life to do them much good. (ETA EXCEPT that perhaps they will find some contentment in recognizing the folly of false hopes.)
Updated On: 8/22/11 at 07:57 AM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:00am

I was partially joking about Margie. I do find it hard to think too much about her, since we don't see her story.

I'm not sure if Sally changes, I don't think she's really capable of it without professional help. Therefore, I don't think Buddy (the poor schlub) can either.

I think Phyl and Ben have real possibility at change and some sense of peace.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 5:53pm

Mama, I don't know when you first encountered the material, but i wonder if Sally hasn't come to seem increasingly deranged over time.

In 1971, women's liberation was still fairly new and most narratives (film, TV or stage) still assumed it was "normal" for a woman to center her life around a man. Of course, Sally's folly was to be obsessed with the wrong man and it was clear she was having a breakdown when she suddenly decided Ben was going to drop everything to marry her.

But on the whole, her dabbling in gardening and water colors while pining for Ben 24/7 wasn't that different from the behavior of most heroines.

Nowadays, I hope most of us believe a woman needs her own interests to be a healthy person (and a well-adjusted wife), so Sally seems crazier than ever and, as you say, in desperate need of medical intervention.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 5:56pm

I've known the material since 1980.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 5:59pm

Then maybe you know what I mean, dramamama. (I wasn't condescending to you, just acknowledging that if the show were relatively new to you, you wouldn't have an opinion as to how the characters have been received over time. I try not to make assumptions about anyone's age here.)

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 6:17pm

Margie goes on to star in Michael Bennett's Ballroom, singing that she'd rather have 50 percent of Buddy--or any percent of Buddy--than all...of...

Any Buddy else at all.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 6:22pm

I feel bad for Margie, but frankly, I question her judgment. It's hard to see what she sees in a sadsack like Buddy. And it's easy to see what Sally doesn't like about him!

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:25pm

Okay, I'll ask the stupid question: are these posts about Margie all jokes? Or has she become an on-stage presence in recent revivals?

In the productions I've seen, nobody cares about Margie because she isn't on-stage (except as briefly represented by a showgirl type in "Buddy's Blues").

[dramamama611]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:29pm

No onstage appearances.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 7:59pm

Thanks, dramamama. I knew your original reference to Margie was a joke, but as the remarks continued I wasn't sure. I'm of the "when in doubt, ask" school.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 8:30pm

She may not be onstage, but she is discussed in the text, and her presence looms large in the lives of Buddy and Sally.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:07pm

That's true, After Eight. And we all know who she is.

But there's a wide gap between our involvement with on stage and off stage characters, don't you agree?

Do we care about Oedipus' father, King Laius? I don't think so, and he's actually more central to the exposition than Margie.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:26pm

"But there's a wide gap between our involvement with on stage and off stage characters, don't you agree? "

No, I don't. It's too blanket a statement. In Racine's Bajazet, for example, the offstage character of the sultan Amurat casts a threatening shadow over the entire play, and is more powerful and menacing a presence than anyone on stage.

As for Margie, I have more sympthy and interest in her than in any of the four principals in Follies.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:29pm

After Eight, the only place where offstage characters compete with onstage ones is an English literature class. That's such a fundamental principle of theater I'm not going to argue it further.

Frankly, I think your insistence on your emotional involvement with Margie is just an attempt to be argumentative.

On this, we'll have to agree to disagree.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 9:54pm

Racine is French, so I trust his plays are presented in a French literature class. They are also performed on stage, including Bajazet.

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 10:09pm

Now who's being mean-spirited? I know who Racine was and in what language he wrote. I've read his Phaedre in both English and French.

I don't know Bajazet, but I believe the basic rules of stage craft applied to Racine as well as any other playwright. So while I take your word that an off-stage character is important to the exposition, I don't believe that character is the target of anyone's primary involvement.

I accept that you find the characters of Follies insufficiently engaging. I don't believe for a moment that you were actually worried about Margie.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 10:16pm

Gaveston2,

And here I thought we were friends.

I say I did/do care about Margie. You refuse to believe me. There's no way I can convince you. So how can there be any discussion in a situation like that?

[Gaveston2]

Posted: 8/22/11 at 10:32pm

We can be friends and I can still conclude you are arguing for argument's sake on this one issue.

Personally, when I see Follies I worry about Brenda Frazier and how her last name should be pronounced.

If I've misjudged you, I apologize.