Musicals that have aged poorly with time?- Page 2

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 8:15pm

You can say all the classics have not aged well since we now live in  the age of every one getting their nose out of joint for the slightest perceived slight.

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 8:20pm

Mr Roxy said: "You can say all the classics have not aged well since we now live in  the age of every one getting their nose out of joint for the slightest perceived slight."

I would argue 'he hit me and it felt like a kiss' and 'I'm ashamed that women are so simple' are more than just perceived slights. 

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 8:50pm

Carousel. I don't know. Carousel is performed a lot, due mostly to the score - "If I Loved You" and the Bench Scene - "Soliloquy" - and all the other well known songs that just seem to slide into place at the proper time. It may be one of icecream's period pieces. One you put you characters into small town New England at that point in time, you're pretty much stuck with the re-creation of their social mores.

Strange to having a lot of objection to Oklahoma, which really is dated in time as the second modern American musical after Show Boat, but that came into my head first. The plot is just a silly melodrama with the handsome young cowboy competing against the dark, evil and lonely farm hand for the fair Laurey.

It's not much of a contest. Surprising to me that a man as decent and compassionate as Hammerstein would create such a one dimensional villain and give him no chance at redemption.

Updated On: 3/27/16 at 08:50 PM

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 9:49pm

Agreeing, sort of, on Avenue Q. Either I've outgrown it, or I've just gotten really tired of college-aged libertarians referencing that stupid song to defend their racist jokes.


Jordan Catalano said: "ANNIE GET YOUR GUN would have a place on this list, since when performed now it has to be edited as not to offend people who aren't capable of understanding or wanting to understand things being written in another time. "
 

I, too, miss unnecessary, harmful stereotypes!

Updated On: 3/27/16 at 09:49 PM

[HogansHero]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 9:57pm

by design, musicals are not supposed to age well. They are supposed to be popular entertainment when written so any affection we have for old ones is in the nature of nostalgia or historical interest or, in some cases, a fetish.

[bk]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 9:59pm

aaaaaa15 said: "Mr Roxy said: "You can say all the classics have not aged well since we now live in  the age of every one getting their nose out of joint for the slightest perceived slight."

I would argue 'he hit me and it felt like a kiss' and 'I'm ashamed that women are so simple' are more than just perceived slights. 

 

"

 

All you need to do is answer this simple question: In which era is Carousel set in?  If the answer is "not now when such things would and should not be tolerated" you will understand the simple point: Carousel, even when it played Broadway originally was a period piece with all the attitudes that the era in which it takes place bring with it.  It is amazing to me how people want to rewrite history, ignore history, and make everything relevant to the time in which they live, their generation.  We LEARN from history - we don't have to like, but we learn from it.  There's nothing in Annie Get Your Gun that's offensive to the period in which it takes place.  It's only offensive if you're viewing it without the ability to assign it context - which means you probably should stay away from most period pieces written in the past, many classic novels, some classic plays, some classic TV, and a lot of other stuff, lest it offend today's tender sensibilities.  

 

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 10:06pm

I think Company holds up.  Unfortunately the currently licensed version is based on heavy revisions mad for the 95 Broadway and the 96 London productions.  They make the piece feel more dated than the original 1970 script--it HAS become a period piece, but still has a lot of truth to it if taken as something set in 1970.

[yfs]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 10:34pm

Musicals age poorly when we ask them to behave as if they were written today. In that respect, they're no different than anything else. Has Kiss Me Kate aged any more poorly than The Taming of the Shrew? I don't think so. Without context, everything gets out of date. If we can't understand how to look at them,almost all artworks are trapped in the time of their making to one degree or another, and we're disappointed. We hold musicals up to a "contemporary" standard because they're in modern English, their musical idioms are familiar, and they often take place in places we recognize. But that's no reason not to see them with as much sympathy for their context and the time of their creation as we would see a 19th Century opera or a 17th Century play. That's our challenge, not Oklahoma's or Carousel's or A Chorus Line's. 

There are exceptions, of course -- the genuinely universal works that don't rely on portraying a recognizable society functioning in a realistic way. But they are the exceptions, not the rule. 

 

 

 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 10:37pm

"It's only offensive if you're viewing it without the ability to assign it context "

That's not necessarily true. Some of what you say is undoubtedly true but it depends on the intention of the "context." When the "context" is intended to ridicule for the audience's enjoyment, it is per se offensive. (Think, e.g., Amos and Andy.) I think in the case of Carousel, or AGYG, it is not so much that it is offensive as that it is not something most audiences want to see. Which is why it gets re-engineered. 

[Tom5]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 10:50pm

It has occurred to me that a "period piece" musical should be divided into two categories. The first, a period piece by design (The King And I, Annie Get Your Gun) and then a period piece by accident (West Side Story) The period piece musicals by accident that still hold up are usually the more impressive ones.

[BroadwayMan5]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 10:59pm

HogansHero said: "by design, musicals are not supposed to age well. They are supposed to be popular entertainment when written so any affection we have for old ones is in the nature of nostalgia or historical interest or, in some cases, a fetish.

 

"

I don't agree with that at all. I think it all depends on the design of the show. Some shows like Fiddler on the Roof are so well-structured and were period pieces from the get-go that they hold up in any time or place. Others like West Side Story were contemporary hits but the themes have transcended the era it was written in.

 

To answer the original question, I agree with Rent and Bells are Ringing. I also don't think Sweet Charity has aged very well from a storyline/script standpoint though the music is still great.

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:01pm

HogansHero said: ""It's only offensive if you're viewing it without the ability to assign it context "

That's not necessarily true. Some of what you say is undoubtedly true but it depends on the intention of the "context." When the "context" is intended to ridicule for the audience's enjoyment, it is per se offensive. (Think, e.g., Amos and Andy.) I think in the case of Carousel, or AGYG, it is not so much that it is offensive as that it is not something most audiences want to see. Which is why it gets re-engineered. "

It's almost like diverse audiences don't enjoy casual racism and sexism.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:16pm

OlBlueEyes said: "Carousel. I don't know. Carousel is performed a lot, due mostly to the score - "If I Loved You" and the Bench Scene - "Soliloquy" - and all the other well known songs that just seem to slide into place at the proper time. It may be one of icecream's period pieces. One you put you characters into small town New England at that point in time, you're pretty much stuck with the re-creation of their social mores.

Strange to having a lot of objection to Oklahoma, which really is dated in time as the second modern American musical after Show Boat, but that came into my head first. The plot is just a silly melodrama with the handsome young cowboy competing against the dark, evil and lonely farm hand for the fair Laurey.

It's not much of a contest. Surprising to me that a man as decent and compassionate as Hammerstein would create such a one dimensional villain and give him no chance at redemption.

 

"

In the first place, Hammerstein didn't invent the characters in OKLAHOMA! Lynn Riggs invented them in GREEN GROW THE LILACS, the source adapted for the musical.

In the second, who said villains have to get a chance for redemption? Oddly enough, the great-grandfather of all Western dramaturgy, Aristotle, never mentions anything of the kind.

Third, what Hammerstein DOES do is argue for his villain's point of view. Although "Lonely Room" wasn't used in the film and isn't as well known, it does an excellent job of dramatizing the bleakness of Jud's life and explains why he acts the way he does. "Poor Jud is Dead" does its job in showing how Jud is a target of ridicule by the others in the community. Jus is NOT a melodrama villain, who is evil just for evil's sake.

Fourth, the show was written in the middle of a world war against fascist dictators. How would you expect it to portray a bully? (And if you'll check the news, I think you'll find we're still struggling against fascism, at home and abroad, today.)

Fifth, I'm not entirely sure what "a chance for redemption" means to you, but Jud certainly has every opportunity to abort his plan to kill Curly in Act II. In fact, his first attempt is foiled and Jud could have quit at that point. "The Farmer and the Cowman" ought to give him a clue, but he's too focused on his own grievance to get the point (of the song and of the show).

What OKLAHOMA! is about is the need for unity in the face of a common threat, a theme that will never be out of date. It's just that we've heard all the songs a million times, so it tends to feel more like a pageant than a musical play. But that isn't the fault of the piece, nor does it mean the effort is out of date.

And even if you could convince me that OKLAHOMA! is out of of date in 2016, it ran quite well in numerous revivals from the late 1940s up and through the early 1990s. That's hardly "aging poorly", even if you're tired of it now, 73 years after it opened.

Updated On: 3/27/16 at 11:16 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:32pm

I think someone else alluded to this, but, personally, I am not offended by the original ending of ANNIE GET YOUR GUN. It just isn't emotionally satisfying to watch the lead character throw a contest. Yes, I understand the context and why she does it, I'm just not able to cheer for her choice.

Likewise and though I think "What's the Use of Wondering'" may be R&H's most beautiful ballad, I still cringe a little when I hear it. (Ditto the verse of "My Man", BTW.)

This isn't to say CAROUSEL should be rewritten, nor that ANNIE must be rewritten. In the case of the latter, I think there are other endings that could work. In the case of the former, I think we need to leave well enough alone.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:38pm

Rent has aged awfully. 

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:52pm

I would say "Little Shop of Horrors" has aged poorly.  I'm am somewhat aware of it, but not sure of the time period.  There's a song from the show that I hear on Sirius XM every once in a while.  These lyrics make me wince:  "Seymour's the greatest...but I'm dating a semi sadist." Then she says something about being in a cast and having a black eye. Yuck.  

[Jarethan]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:55pm

Mr Roxy said: "You can say all the classics have not aged well since we now live in  the age of every one getting their nose out of joint for the slightest perceived slight.

I agree.  If they do a good job reflecting the age they were in, that doesn't automatically date them.  In some cases, weaknesses become more evident over time; corny becomes painful to watch, as in Oklahoma (which I admit hating, despite the great score); beatniks just aren't funny anymore...but Susansweephone would reflect the time I which the show took place.

"

 

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:56pm

bk said: "All you need to do is answer this simple question: In which era is Carousel set in?  If the answer is "not now when such things would and should not be tolerated" you will understand the simple point: Carousel, even when it played Broadway originally was a period piece with all the attitudes that the era in which it takes place bring with it.  It is amazing to me how people want to rewrite history, ignore history, and make everything relevant to the time in which they live, their generation.  We LEARN from history - we don't have to like, but we learn from it.  There's nothing in Annie Get Your Gun that's offensive to the period in which it takes place.  It's only offensive if you're viewing it without the ability to assign it context - which means you probably should stay away from most period pieces written in the past, many classic novels, some classic plays, some classic TV, and a lot of other stuff, lest it offend today's tender sensibilities. "

But Carousel does not look back on these attitudes and criticize them, it condones them. By all means have a show that looks at sexism, racism etc. of the past but in modern day people are going to get offended if these attitudes are not outwardly presented as bad.

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that Carousel is a bad musical or that it shouldn't be done anymore. But has it aged badly? Absolutely and I don't see how anyone can say otherwise. There will always be at least a few people inwardly cringing at some of the lines in that show.

yfs said: "Has Kiss Me Kate aged any more poorly than The Taming of the Shrew?"

The difference is is that everyone who knows The Taming of the Shrew knows that it's Shakespeare and knows he lived 500 years ago. Kiss Me Kate was less than 100 years ago. There are people alive today that saw it open. And the show portrays the same attitudes 400 years later. There have been other adaptations of The Taming of the Shrew that don't do so. They are very clever in the way that some productions of Kiss Me Kate use the blatantly sexist lines as tongue in cheek but it is still difficult for those lines not to make a modern audience uncomfortable.

[bk]

Posted: 3/27/16 at 11:58pm

Charley Kringas Inc said: "HogansHero said: ""It's only offensive if you're viewing it without the ability to assign it context "

That's not necessarily true. Some of what you say is undoubtedly true but it depends on the intention of the "context." When the "context" is intended to ridicule for the audience's enjoyment, it is per se offensive. (Think, e.g., Amos and Andy.) I think in the case of Carousel, or AGYG, it is not so much that it is offensive as that it is not something most audiences want to see. Which is why it gets re-engineered. "

It's almost like diverse audiences don't enjoy casual racism and sexism.

 

"

Right, because those things never existed and should be ignored as if they never had.  To which I say, um, no.  I enjoy Carousel as the beautifully written show it is.  I enjoy Annie Get Your Gun as the funny and charming show it is - I don't need them rewritten because I have a brain and can understand when they were written and when they take place.  But let's just burn all copies of Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation and Showboat and anything written in a time that wasn't this little insular politically correct world we inhabit now.  No thanks, but I'm happy that you're happy in that world.  I prefer a world in which there is history and if I see something on stage that makes me uncomfortable because it's of a different time, then GOOD - I learn something or I say, "Wow, isn't it nice that things have changed."  What I don't do is act as if anything that makes me feel that way should be revised or "reengineered".

[nsguy45]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 12:00am

Woman of the Year, a dreadful musical.

[Charley Kringas Inc]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 12:42am

bk said: "Right, because those things never existed and should be ignored as if they never had.  To which I say, um, no.  I enjoy Carousel as the beautifully written show it is.  I enjoy Annie Get Your Gun as the funny and charming show it is - I don't need them rewritten because I have a brain and can understand when they were written and when they take place.  But let's just burn all copies of Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation and Showboat and anything written in a time that wasn't this little insular politically correct world we inhabit now.  No thanks, but I'm happy that you're happy in that world.  I prefer a world in which there is history and if I see something on stage that makes me uncomfortable because it's of a different time, then GOOD - I learn something or I say, "Wow, isn't it nice that things have changed."  What I don't do is act as if anything that makes me feel that way should be revised or "reengineered"."

 

Annie Get Your Gun isn't good enough to not be rewritten to excise the racism. Imagine if, at the end of act one, she'd befriended a bunch of black people, and put on black face, and sang "I'm a good ol cotton-pickin' [expletive]!" I'm not saying we shouldn't recall and even present our own thunderously violent, bloody, and ongoing history of racism but Annie Get Your Gun is probably not the hill you should be dying on here.

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 12:55am

There's a large difference between a piece that deals with racism, like Ragtime or The Scottsboro Boys, and piece that is racist, or sexist or homophobic for that matter. I think an audience is capable of understanding that something like Annie Get Your Gun was written in a different era with attitudes, but that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable watching it. And frankly, I would rather spend my time watching a show that doesn't include racist portrayals of other people and cultures, even if it is otherwise funny and enjoyable. That's not "politically correct" (which is easily becoming the most tiresome and lazy critique of the past few years) but merely a belief that there are better works of art that don't have these damaging portrayals. To be "politically correct" in this instance doesn't mean one wants to disengage with shocking attitudes, but rather that one doesn't care to further promote these attitudes through pieces of art that don't see them as a problem and instead think they're harmless. 

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 1:10am

wonderfulwizard11 said: "There's a large difference between a piece that deals with racism, like Ragtime or The Scottsboro Boys, and piece that is racist, or sexist or homophobic for that matter. I think an audience is capable of understanding that something like Annie Get Your Gun was written in a different era with attitudes, but that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable watching it. And frankly, I would rather spend my time watching a show that doesn't include racist portrayals of other people and cultures, even if it is otherwise funny and enjoyable. That's not "politically correct" (which is easily becoming the most tiresome and lazy critique of the past few years) but merely a belief that there are better works of art that don't have these damaging portrayals. To be "politically correct" in this instance doesn't mean one wants to disengage with shocking attitudes, but rather that one doesn't care to further promote these attitudes through pieces of art that don't see them as a problem and instead think they're harmless."

Brilliantly said.

[aaaaaa15]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 1:10am

wonderfulwizard11 said: "There's a large difference between a piece that deals with racism, like Ragtime or The Scottsboro Boys, and piece that is racist, or sexist or homophobic for that matter. I think an audience is capable of understanding that something like Annie Get Your Gun was written in a different era with attitudes, but that doesn't mean I have to be comfortable watching it. And frankly, I would rather spend my time watching a show that doesn't include racist portrayals of other people and cultures, even if it is otherwise funny and enjoyable. That's not "politically correct" (which is easily becoming the most tiresome and lazy critique of the past few years) but merely a belief that there are better works of art that don't have these damaging portrayals. To be "politically correct" in this instance doesn't mean one wants to disengage with shocking attitudes, but rather that one doesn't care to further promote these attitudes through pieces of art that don't see them as a problem and instead think they're harmless."

Brilliantly said.

[SweetLips]

Posted: 3/28/16 at 1:56am

When I  saw a production of My Fair Lady I was shocked at what Professor Higgins was saying to and about Eliza.

I was looking and listening with 21st centuary sensibilities but this was written in a time and place where this is what it was.

I did feel uncomfortable and couldn't 'laugh' at the situations and took the edge off allowing me to enjoy and accept it as written.

So--MFL won't 'age' as it is totally in period but I as an audience have aged and become less tolerant with things that disturb[help me find a better word].

 

SL........x