Not sure when eight shows a week became the standard -- it goes back many decades (at least to the 30's). It was also pretty much standard until about a generation ago, for the star to then tour the show around the country for a year or more after they had completed the Broadway run.
And you're right that the standard schedule is a Herculean task for many lead roles and all the more startling when you consider that body mikes didn't become the norm until the 70's and 80's (floor mikes and primitive body mikes were around in one form or another going back to the 50's). Just how in the world Ethel Merman sang Mama Rose for 700 performances without amplification and still have every syllable heard and clearly sung all the way up to the last row of the Shubert is all but a mystery to this generation (Lansbury, Daley and Peters all had major problems vocally and missed performances trying to sing that role eight times a week -- in spite of the fact that they all wore body mikes to help them get through it).
The work ethic in the old days was that you just didn't miss a show under any circumstances -- colds, fever, sprained ankles, a death in the family -- you worked through it ..... and being an understudy for a star was the most thankless job in show business. I mean no offense to our current generation of performers, but attendance records like Hugh Jackman's or Harvey Fierstein's -- zero missed performances in a year or more -- have become the very rare exception rather than the rule. And as much as people want to argue "well, the shows written these days are harder to sing," I'm sorry, no one can convince me that singing Rose or Don Quixote or Annie Oakley or Cunegonde in Candide or Porgy or Bess or Billy Bigelow without a mike or any amplification whatsoever eight times a week was somehow easier to pull off than anything anyone is doing today with the current state of the art sound designs which are so advanced that a performer can literally whisper and be heard clearly up to the last row of the balcony.
It's a different time and a different era, performers have a different kind of training (that relies heavily on microphones) and a different ethic concerning missing performances (which, unfortunately means it's apparently totally fine to skip a few shows to go to LA to shoot a sitcom pilot or a tv commercial). Mind you, most stage performers are still extremely dedicated and disciplined in what they do and would never miss performances without a very solid reason. I just find it fascinating that the Mermans and Channings and Brynners and Mary Martins and Alfred Drakes and John Raitts NEVER missed -- for decades at a time.
Were they simply made of a stronger stock back then? Is it a question of training and technique (and remember no one in the old days ever went through an MFA program in musical theatre -- there was no such thing in those days) or vocal coaches (which also didn't exist for musical theatre singers until a couple of decades ago) or is it a question of the level of dedication to the audience and their fellow cast members and to the artform as a whole?
"What a story........ everything but the bloodhounds snappin' at her rear end." -- Birdie
[http://margochanning.broadwayworld.com/]
"The Devil Be Hittin' Me" -- Whitney
Updated On: 9/21/04 at 11:44 PM
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
