Into the Woods Observation- Page 3

[icecreambenjamin]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 2:39pm

There was a production that dressed the witch in vegetables to play into that theory. It worked very well actually.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 7:09pm

Showface,
She "lost" the beans in that they are no longer in her control or possession.

I love that vegetable witch, even if other choices in that production were questionable.

As far as the rape theory, interesting but worthy of an eyeroll at someone with a very narrow defintiin of the word and its usage.

[Showface]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 7:17pm

I completely agree with all of you. That was NOT my theory, but it brought up an interesting discussion on where it was first posted.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 7:25pm

Fair.
Debating Sondheim with anyone that doesn't understand depth of language is not only pointless, but headache inducing.

[Hex3]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 8:09pm

Oh, lord, what a blast from the past! That was posted on the Musicals.net boards AGES ago and I was the "sweetie" who was very wrong. That poster was so full of himself and praised his own opinions as gospel. He would go all over the place with his theories. Every time I or some other poster would poke holes in it (such as how could you rape some one that could turn your dingaling into a newt before you finished unzipping your fly?) he would just change his tune and say that that is what he meant all along. I stopped posting in the thread because there's just no use talking to people like that.

[Showface]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 10:21pm

YOU were the "sweetie"?!? Small world.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/6/14 at 10:23pm

Isn't it?

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 8/8/14 at 2:03am

Also, her saying "safe behind walls as I could not" could still mean keeping her home and garden safe from thieves. But people did more bad things to her than was ever revealed.

Updated On: 8/8/14 at 02:03 AM

[ChairinMain]

Posted: 8/8/14 at 2:13am

I think, Sweeties (Nope, can't do it with a straight face, sorry) that it is totally possible that the Baker's father and the Witch's relationship could have sexual overtones and that his violation of her garden is a rape in a very Jungian sense. I don't think it has to necessarily be a literal sexual assault, but there absolutely could be more to that story than the Witch cares to share with us. It's at the very least a potent metaphor.

[Hex3]

Posted: 8/9/14 at 1:43am

It's a complete possibility that the baker's father and witch shared a sexual relationship behind her mother's back. It could have been that the baker's father was using his relationship with the witch to be able, after their tryst, to steal the herbs from her garden to feed and satiate his pregnant wife. The witch could have been blind to his theft and betrayal until her beans were stolen and the lightning flashed. It's the physical RAPE that I wholeheartedly disagree with.

[nicnyc]

Posted: 8/11/14 at 1:46am

They had the narrator be the Baker's Son in the version at Shakespeare in the Park. I thought it was a nice touch.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 8/11/14 at 2:50am

Not exactly.
The Baker just also played the Narrator's father, two roles really... And I beg to differ. It wss an awful touch, that should should NOT be narrated by a child. It was one of the worst decisions in a production laden with disasterous choices. The "good things" in that production could be listed on two hands. And the director could not even be bothered to present the four crucial and very specific items losted within the show in his production because he was too concerned with flaunting a concept and not using a concept to support the show.

[brldisteach2]

Posted: 8/11/14 at 8:11am

I didn't get to see the production in the park with a child playing the Narrator. So, asking for a Spoiler-do the characters still drag him into the story and give him to the Giant to kill in that version, or how was that scene handled?

[Showface]

Posted: 8/11/14 at 8:12am

Yes, they do. THe second act was a nightmare I think.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 8/11/14 at 5:11pm

The second act is a dream.

At the (incredibly awkwardly staged) end of act one, the child narrator climbs into a sleeping bag with the fairy tale characters looming over him.
Before Act Two, he is replaced by a body doible (obviously dont in full viewof the audience) in the sleeping bag. When he is thrown to the giant (awkwardly but effectively staged), the body double in the sleeping bag begins tossing and turning as though having a nightmare.
The body doible then settles back into his slumber until the finale.. This was one of the choices, among dozens that bothered me, that bothered me most.