'Light in the Piazza' is all sugar and fluff — Page 2

i also thought that his lack of information (not even knowing that the show won best actress) really gave this review less credibility

Amen to that. What was this critic smoking? The Light in the Piazza was one of the best shows I've ever seen. Sugar and fluff, my butt!

---

I think it is down to personal opinion and frustrating as it might be when people have different views or they do not "get" something that you do, and vice-versa, it happens.

I love Piazza but there are bits of it that are deathly dull. I think it is good for people to have, and air, different opinions on productions and the actors etc. I, for instance, cannot bear Bernadette Peters' singing voice yet she is revered in an almost god-like manner it would appear.

Of course his statement that there really was no competition for best score if totally accurate. Was there ever a doubt it would win with those other weak contenders? However, I think this score would have stood a fine chance of winning in any year.

---

Piazza did win best actress

I can't believe this. This show is possibly one of the greatest musicals ever written for the stage. It really is up there with GYPSY and A CHORUS LINE.

---

GYPSY was based on something, a book I think.

---

Gypsy is loosely based on the memoirs of Gypsy Rose Lee, the famous striptease artist, and focuses on her struggle with her mother, Mama Rose, whose name has become synonymous with "the ultimate show business mother."

---

When did Jim Farber become a theater critic? Isnt this the guy who does album reviews for The Daily News here in NYC?

I too am one that did not get the "Piazza Craze." I found it overly sentimental, boring, and trite.

Different strokes for different folks.

I think Jim Farber is actually a jack of all trades reviewer for all things artistic at the Breeze. HE's got music critiques, dance critiques and theatre critiques. When I see this it makes me a little leery of the review. I think the same of John Simon who seems like a vicious reviewer who doesn't like theatre.

I often wonder what makes a person be able to review. An English major? I find it odd that so many people carry these 3 hats. Do you really know that much about ALL of that to be reviewing it? I mean really if one has NEVER taken a dance class, how can they know what good technique is? If they don't know basic theory and compositional structure, how can you say this person is a great composer? If you don't direct, have enver taken an acting class and have never really sat in on a rehearsal, what makes you think you can tell everyone what's great theatre or great acting? This has ALWAYS bothered me. I wouldn't tell a surgeon his stitch is off, I wouldn't know what's on.

Though I actually like Piazza and think it's a beautiful show, I hate it when people insist that if you didn't like or see the appeal of something, you didn't understand it. That's so insulting... is it that difficult to imagine that a show just might not have been one person's cup of tea, even though they fully understood what it was trying to say?

Exactly. And I do think it's funny that fans of a show will let a critic's mistake slide if it's a postive review. "Oh, they liked it, so that's okay..."

---