Interesting Theatre Mania piece on Beane's book to Cinderella.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 12:40am

http://www.theatermania.com/new-york-city-theater/news/04-2013/give-douglas-carter-beane-a-break-about-broadways-_64754.html

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 12:54am

Since when does TM do editorials? (And not label them as such?)

[Musical Master]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 1:17am

I honestly have no clue. But hey at least it is interesting perspective about the most hated aspect of the new Cinderella which I will personally give a chance.

[John Adams]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 8:30am

It is interesting to read, but I don't buy into Rickwald's defense of Beane's book.

It's true that R+H chose to contain political and social morals within the storylines of their musicals. It's also true, however, that they chose *not* to do so with Cinderella. I think it's a bit disrespectful of R+H's work to ignore that fact.

The strongest contemporary social statement R+H made in the version of Cinderella they wrote might be Boys and Girls Like You and Me, where they point up the "sameness" of people regardless of station in life, and a singular connection we all share (love). With all the material chosen to be restored to Beane's version (and actually written for the original Cinderella), for some reason that song was omitted.

R+H took great care to write their scores purposefully. Referencing back to the Carousel thread, look at how specific they were in writing that score:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carousel_%28musical%29#Musical_treatment
If R+H had wanted their Cinderella to "further a cause" (as stated in the TM article), dont'cha kinda think they would have done so? And (most importantly to my mind) wouldn't it be reflected in the score?

When Beane wrote this new book, he created a story that does not align with the score R+H purposefully wrote. Heck, his book doesn't even align within its own context, as pointed out in the Chicago Tribune article by Chris Jones, referenced by Rickwald. Jones writes:

"...you cannot help but reach the inescapable conclusion that Osnes' 'Cinderella', as conceived here, just wouldn't have any interest in elitist dresses, balls with princes or glass slippers — which, in this case, were designed by Stuart Weitzman, aka Prince of the Pump. So what is it, folks? Designer product placement or Up With the Revolution?"

I understand, and I don't dispute the idea Rickwald uses as her singular defense of Beane's book; the idea that R+H often incorporated social and political statements in their work. What she's not recognizing is the fact that, in the case of Cinderella, R+H chose *not* to be political.

I feel that Rickwald is forcing a socio/political defense of Beane's book in the same way that Beane forced socio/political motivations into Cinderella. In both cases, the slipper just doesn't fit.

(oooooooooooooooooh! See what I did there?)

Updated On: 5/6/13 at 08:30 AM

[Musical Master]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 10:32am

John Adams, I already know that you haven't seen the show yet, and I for one am going to give Beane's new book a chance unlike Hawng's (must-not-be-mentioned-ever-again) book to Flower Drum Song. Once I finally see the show I will judge this new Cinderella on my own views and opinions.

And you do make sense but I can't help but to wonder everytime I see the three versions of Cinderella, IF both Rodgers and Hammerstein wanted to have some political touchs in it much like The King and I or South Pacific. It's too bad we will never see that cancelled Broadway version in the late 50's.

[After Eight]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 11:51am

This article is so much GARBAGE, and illustrates all that is wrong with today's theatre.

[John Adams]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 12:50pm

>> John Adams, I already know that you haven't seen the show yet, and I for one am going to give Beane's new book a chance"

You seem to be scolding me... as if all the information about the new book that is readily available online, as well as the "sneak peek" of the new recording, or the previous versions of the show might somehow have been... I dunno... "falsely reported" in some way?

[HeyMrMusic]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 1:12pm

I didn't find the new book too in-your-face political. I was delighted by the production. It's inherently political with the prince choosing a bride and future queen of the land. The show still has the romantic aspects, but it has also given the Prince have some kind of motivation from the beginning. Or at least I think that was the attempt. I read all the threads and reviews and was expecting the worst when I saw it, but I was enchanted and just let myself enjoy.

[suestorm]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 2:43pm

i saw the show and loved it... im usually very sensitive to having politics shoved down my throat... especially those left of center, but i must say in all honesty i didn't feel that here. sure there was a couple of so-called obamaesque "redistribution of wealth" comments, but it was rather tame and not in your face.

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 2:46pm

I completely agree, from what I read about the original script to what was edited during preview I found the script and the show as a whole remarkable.

[SamIAm2]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 3:12pm

I loved the show and found it to be quite enchanting.

I have some issue with describing this new book and production as "political". Today's world has become so divided that it is easy to loose track of universal values that have been taught in families, religious settings, schools and children's literature for many generations. What's radical or offensive about teaching sensitivity to those around you, caring about your community, acting with integrity and fairness?

[bdn223]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 3:14pm

Most of the political aspects of Beane's original script were taken out during previews. The only ones left are the Jean-Michael protestor subplot. Sebastian's stripping peasants of their rights beneath Topher's nose fits completely in fairytale world since he is plotting to take down Topher as well. The issue that was caused by the extreme editing and omissions of the political plot leaves the first act somewhat bare bones, but the second act more than makes up for that.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 3:29pm

Wow from what everyone is saying about the book here already sounds like Beane made a pretty decent book, unlike Hawng and his (shudders) book in Flower Drum Song...

I will still hold judgement until I finally see the show, which I hope will be in the summer.

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 3:29pm

Wasn't at one time Jon-Michel an evil brother trying to take the throne?

[Musical Master]

Posted: 5/6/13 at 4:05pm

John Adams, I had no intention of scolding you at all, I'm just saying that we all shouldn't judge untill we finally see the show with our own eyes and ears. Also, Rodgers and Hammerstein DID consider to put Cinderella on stage, but due to their comittments with Flower Drum Song, it never happend.