Gypsy as a High School Play — Page 2

It seems some posters are still missing my point  Thank you to those who do in fact address it

And thank you to the poster who shared how the scenes were staged in their HS production of Gypsy - that was exactly my point.

From what I understand in Guys and Dolls, the "strippers" there clearly are entertaining the characters in the play - NOT the actual audience.

Gypsy for HS needs to be staged such that it's clear she's entertaining an (unseen) burlesque crowd - NOT the real audience.

Understand, we're GOING to applaud at the end of the sequence showing her transition from clumsy and unsure to a huge confident star.  (In the example the poster here referenced, it seems the director even took THAT away, which I'd have to say perhaps goes TOO far - that's not necessary.

Please realize I'm referring to ONE particular HS production I saw (see my original post) where the 4th wall was broken - WE are now the burlesque house audience.  Further, in this case, the strip and (supposed) nudity behind the curtain is a major focus - and the illusion of nudity is never broken as we applaud.

For a HS play, I don't think that's appropriate.  If people disagree, I will accept that.  But understand I'm not objecting to the play itself for HS; nor am I objecting to somehow portraying (non-explicit) strip scenes.

I'm objecting to staging it such that the striptease is seemingly for OUR entertainment.  No different than I'd object to seeing a striptease as an act in HS talent show.

I'm sure it would be wrong to specify the exact YouTube clip I'm referring to.  As I also said, I later saw a couple others I have no objection to - since the directors seemed to recognize what I'm saying and staged it so that's avoided.

There is one in particular where she does in fact strip - but it's incidental and she's "revealed" behind the fans to not be nude before we applaud.  Comparing those two illustrates my point.

broadwayguy2, thank you. I agree.

Sorry, WW, I have to admit I am having more and more trouble understanding what it is to which you object. I stand by my original statement that you have every right to your reservations, but this particular strip of all strips seems the least problematic because of the character.

***

I've mentioned this some years before, but as long as we're discussing that number, I want to relate that when Nana Tucker was playing Louise with Angela Lansbury in Fort Lauderdale, there was a "wardrobe malfunction" during the strip one night and the orchestra had to vamp while the wardrobe mistress came out and assisted Nana with the change.

"Louise" ad libbed to the audience, "My clothes don't want to get off me. Can you blame them?"

It brought down the house and I thought it an impressive improvisation for a 19-year-old.

dramamama611 said: "Yes, we know what your point is."

In fairness, I asked him again. As broadwayguy2 wrote, there have been several conversations going on in this thread simultaneously.

Of course, the theater audience is the audience for Louise and for Rose in their final numbers. Except for the production that staged the strip with Louise's back to the patrons (a terrible idea, IMHO), what else could they be? And I, for one, don't see the big difference between doing a relatively tame strip for your parents and friends and doing one for some imaginary audience within the narrative.

I hadn't even thought about "Gimmick", but half the numbers in PIPPIN are more sexual than that and I've seen a h.s. PIPPIN.

dmama is certainly right that humor heals a lot of wounds; and Louise's strip is more funny than bawdy. (If it were my show, I might sub something for the reference to "learning Greek", rules or no rules.)

Given the emphasis on Louise's refusal to really bump-and-grind, I can think of dozens of numbers that are more problematic for late teens. Anyone listened to the lyrics of "The Lusty Month of May" lately?