Posted: 11/26/16 at 3:57am
The Hamilton dust up is a controversy only within the theater community. I doubt that my sisters, nephews and brother-in-laws, who know nothing of the theater, are even aware of it. To call it a "national controversy" is a bit far reaching.
Posted: 11/26/16 at 8:29am
Wilmingtom said: "The Hamilton dust up is a controversy only within the theater community. I doubt that my sisters, nephews and brother-in-laws, who know nothing of the theater, are even aware of it. To call it a "national controversy" is a bit far reaching."
Hm, I don't think this is true. I've seen multiple stories on TV news shows about it, for example. I imagine anyone who's into reading or watching the news has heard about it, whether or not they're interested in theater.
To address the OP's question, I think the last time something like this happened was with Miss Saigon and its casting controversy. I know that my family members, who are not theater enthusiasts, were aware of the situation and had opinions on it that we discussed at the time. It was definitely prominent in the mainstream news - as is the Hamilton/Pence thing.
Posted: 11/26/16 at 8:34am
I'm posting again so that my previous post will show up! But I'll tell a little story. Last night I dreamed I was seeing Hamilton, but in my dreamscape Hamilton was presented on board a helicopter! Lin-Manuel Miranda was on the helicopter and he was rapping out the story as the pilot took us to various historic locations. I think this dream arose because (1) I'm excited to see Hamilton again in March, and (2) I recently read about Karlheinz Stockhausen's string quartet where each player is flying on a different helicopter.
Posted: 11/26/16 at 10:59am
Definitely not political,
But Spiderman DEFINITELY made national headlines at its height of insane non safe performances and show getting stopped.
Posted: 11/26/16 at 12:10pm
Wilmingtom said: "The Hamilton dust up is a controversy only within the theater community. I doubt that my sisters, nephews and brother-in-laws, who know nothing of the theater, are even aware of it. To call it a "national controversy" is a bit far reaching.
Everyone's aware of it. People boycotting and picketing Hamilton are not part of the theater community.
Posted: 11/26/16 at 12:36pm
I have to go back and research it in detail, but way back when (I think in the 1930's) there was a huge fuss over a political show. I think the venue backed out, and the show wound up being performed for free in a union hall. If I recall, the performers were all members of various trade unions having nothing to do with theatre, and the public worried about creeping socialism.
If anyone else can shed some light on this, please post. Otherwise, I'll go back and research it when I have time, which may literally be in January after school is out, the December holidays are over, and I'll have gotten my 90-year-old mom settled into her home around the corner after her coast-to-coast move.
I'll be back (which no longer requires a Schwarzenegger accent to be funny. Thank you, King George).
Peace,
Audrey, an extremely distressed Clinton supporter who is still asking "What the hell happened?"
Posted: 11/26/16 at 8:35pm
Wilmingtom said: "The Hamilton dust up is a controversy only within the theater community. I doubt that my sisters, nephews and brother-in-laws, who know nothing of the theater, are even aware of it. To call it a "national controversy" is a bit far reaching.
"
And the president-elect and the media have already moved on, haven't they?
HAIR, in particular, was invoked as proof of national decline for years after it opened.
Posted: 11/26/16 at 9:01pm
OlBlueEyes said: "Show Boat was controversial not only when it premiered in 1927, but as recently as the 1994 Hal Prince revival.
It was the first integrated musical, with both races playing on the same stage at the same time. Some thought that the slaughtered version of the English language the African Americans were given to speak was insulting, others just thought it was meant to be accurate.
Where's yo' all gwine?
Tell dose stingy men o' yourn
To step up here in line!
And of course the first word that greeted the audience was as reprehensible in 1927 as it is now.
n*s all work on the Mississippi
n*s all work while the white folk play.
That Hammerstein guy didn't ****foot around.
The Hal Prince revival spent a year in Toronto before transferring very successfully to Broadway. Many black communities in Toronto were angrily opposed to it: SHOW BOAT SPREADS LIES AND HATE and SHOW BOAT = CULTURAL GENOCIDE.
I didn't get it either.
"
"As reprehensible" in 1927? I wonder. I don't pretend to know what African-Americans thought about it, but I doubt white audiences were as horrified as we would be today. It wasn't until a couple of decades later that a cast simply refused to sing the word "n*" and Hammerstein subbed "colored folks" instead.
The use of the word in the original is more fairly compared to its use in contemporary rap music, as a taking of ownership of the word by the people it describes; the problem, of course, is that the writer was white, but I suspect that is at least occasionally true today. Unless I've forgotten a line somewhere (and I know there are a lot of different scripts floating around), the word is used by Joe, speaking of his own community, and then by a villain: the sheriff who comes to arrest Julie. It's not as if Magnolia and Cap'n Andy throw the word around casually.
As for Hammerstein, his greatest contribution to American musical theater was the writing of lyrics in the vernacular of the character who is singing. (Larry Hart, Ira Gershwin, Yip Harburg, Cole Porter, et al., all wrote lyrics in their own voices. In a Porter show, a maid sings with the same sophistication as a duchess.) So of course Hammerstein would use the word "n*" in the context of SHOW BOAT.
The word was always among the rudest of racial epithets, one not to be used by decent white people in the presence of blacks. But it was still a lot more common in 1927 than it is today. I'm afraid to speculate about tomorrow.
BTW, the cast wasn't just interracial. It also included white people performing in black face, something we would certainly find abhorrent today. The role of Queenie was played by a white actress who made her career in black face playing "Aunt Jemima", eventually netting a fortune from advertising. To my knowledge, none of this was considered controversial in 1927, though I can imagine African Americans disliking it privately.
***
As for modern protests of the show, I suspect the complaint is the lack of agency of black characters in the play. Hammerstein certainly meant well, but he wasn't educated in post-modern theories of colonialism and racism. Queenie, Joe, Julie, etc., only exist (and this begins in Ferber's novel) when they are needed to give aid to the white characters. Julie even gives up her job, to Magnolia in Act II. It's as if people of color have no lives (or even thoughts) of their own.
This is a fair criticism of every version of SHOW BOAT, I think. But I'm not one to throw out the classics because they fail to meet our standards.
Posted: 11/27/16 at 3:24am
I can't match your knowledge of theatrical history; this is an insight that I didn't have: The use of the word in the original is more fairly compared to its use in contemporary rap music, as a taking of ownership of the word by the people it describes.... Hammerstein we know is shielded from accusations of using that word in the opening chorus for any purpose but to strengthen the cause of the African Americans against the race that presumably coined it. Did he err? One might think so to see all the ways that future productions have changed what he did.
Almost all subsequent productions, including the three films, I was surprised to learn had not begun the show with that word in the chorus. I think that this represents mostly the desire of the producers to avoid any risk of sharp criticism, and not a belief that Hammerstein had misguidedly offended the race by putting the word in their mouths.
Are today's audiences more offended by the use of the word "n*" than audiences of almost a century ago or do today's audiences just feel more pressure to pretend that they are more offended?
Darkies, Colored Folk (used in the Prince revival), Negros and Here We All Work (used by Ol' Blue Eyes when singing Ol' Man River, effective enough, to the surprise of Ol' Blue Eyes himself, to have brought tears to the eyes of Martin Luther King when performed at Carnegie Hall.) Perhaps the least courageous decision was that of Kennedy Center in 1966 just to drop the lines from the opening.
As for Hammerstein, his greatest contribution to American musical theater was the writing of lyrics in the vernacular of the character who is singing. (Larry Hart, Ira Gershwin, Yip Harburg, Cole Porter, et al., all wrote lyrics in their own voices....)
Something else that had never occurred to me. Seems to hold up well. Some exceptions, mostly in the later days? Pal Joey (judging only from the Sinatra film), My Fair Lady, (but there the language of different classes was integral to the plot), Guys and Dolls.
Posted: 11/27/16 at 5:24am
Loesser never had a problem writing in the voice of the characters.
as for that opening line of Show Boat, I think the original is the best because it evokes a visceral reaction.
Posted: 11/27/16 at 7:51am
Not a musical but the Mae West play 'Sex' saw the cast arrested and West sent to a Workhouse for a period of time in the 1920s. I believe this is the controversy that made her a household name.
Posted: 11/27/16 at 9:08pm
gypsy101 said: "Loesser never had a problem writing in the voice of the characters.
as for that opening line of Show Boat, I think the original is the best because it evokes a visceral reaction."
Yes, I can imagine the effect that it had on those at the premiere who, when the curtain rose, were still settling into their seats and shutting off their cell phones. Quickly they knew that they weren't in Kansas anymore. But almost all were afraid to use that opening in the future. Maybe there were a lot of little Rev. Al Sharptons around looking to publicize themselves.
