Musicals: Showing their age? Or timeless?

"best12bars...i think you should start a thread regarding how a musical ages. I found what you've wrote extremely intriguing as well as disheartening. To see how musicals have developed over the years (through interpretation, a changing society, new structures) and how the characters and material resonate differently (or not at all)." - thez914

Okay, thez914, first thanks for the compliment, and I'm taking you up on your suggestion that we have a dedicated thread about this! I personally haven't seen one yet (or at least recently)...

Which musicals do you think are standing the test of time? Which are aging or stale already? Let's try to keep these to shows originally on Broadway AT LEAST ten years ago. I don't think you can form any opinion on something "younger" than that.

And I have an even BIGGER challenge for y'all... Tell us WHY you think they've either survived or gone stale.

No, this isn't a homework assignment... I'm just curious, and so it seems are others.

I'll start with what I said on the other thread (below):

You know, an interesting thing is happening with The Music Man as I get older. When I was a kid, there were people around who grew up at the turn of the 20th century (yeah, the one BEFORE this last one). They understood what Meredith Wilson was satirizing with his affectionate yet pointed "valentine" to Small Town Nostalgia Americana. It was almost a sacred cow subject back then. The "great old days" were so much better and were given much reverence when talked about. His answer, in a way, was The Music Man. It was his "Oh, yeah?" retort. A fond trip back through Memory Lane for some, but with a clever and discerning raised eyebrow.

Today, people don't have a frame of reference. Actors and directors don't understand (or even care to learn about) what they're spoofing in this show. They just crank it out in "cartoon mode" and think people will laugh at these crazy characters on stage, or at least enjoy it because they know all the songs.

They're wrong... and they're ruining The Music Man for future audiences and performers.

I wonder if the same thing will happen to "How To Succeed" in another 20 years or so? Will people look back and say these characters are really annoying, instead of understanding that it's a spoof... and WHAT they're spoofing?

I would imagine so, and that's too bad for the posterity of shows like this.

I'll add this in for the "flip side" perspective on Music Man... people shouldn't have to go to the theatre and read up on the history of what it was like at the turn of the century, and how people regarded the idealized "small town way of life" in the 1950s when this show first opened. They should be able to sit down and watch a show without Cliffs Notes, in other words. I think directors can help modern audiences out a lot, by adding some pre-show visuals and era music. Maybe an old fashioned soda fountain set-up in the lobby, or just some old corset ads and "there's no place like home" -type artwork here and there. It might get them in the mood more and even start making fun of it a bit themselves. Then when the show starts, they're already in the mood for a satire.

Thinking more about this, it makes me wonder how some of our current shows will be perceived in 25-50 years... like Rent, for instance. Something that is so tied into its era. "A Chorus Line" is already showing signs of age, which never occurred to me at the time it burst onto the scene. First it was the music (with that Wa-Wa guitar from "Shaft"), but now it's the whole frame of mind and all the "modern" references throughout.

I think the ones that will age the worst are satires (where you have to know what their spoofing in order to fully get the joke)... or pieces like Rent, Angels in America, etc. which are tied into the "voice" of a generation or era. I'll bet 50 years from now, people will be scratching their heads wondering what the fuss was all about. Some of them already are.

---

I love the thread Best 12.

I am going to see the Doyle-Sweeney again at the moment and have little time to comment as I would like.

I agree that audiences should not need to read Cliffs Notes to enjoy and understand a show, although I say why not, I would. The creative team needs to do major research though, not only in helping the audience understand, but in realizing the tone themselves.

I want to discuss the examples but, "There is no time!" *factory whistle*

---

Marquise & smartpenguin78 - Thanks! I'm looking forward to reading your comments on this.

---

Thanks, Jose'... The style of music can definitely date any musical, particularly if it's rooted solidly in any "pop" genre. The story of course is loosely based on La Boheme which was first produced in 1896... but Jon really tied it into the modern era of late '80s, early '90s (some of the lyric references like Thelma & Louise are early '90s).

I think there is a "heart" to Rent, that is the same "heart" to La Boheme, that will always be timeless. Youthful idealists, artists, self-centered, passionate, etc., all trying to survive and make sense of the world they are living in.

The "details" of Rent (the AIDS epidemic experienced from that era, the rock music and pop-culture-reference lyrics, the clothing, even the Village itself) will all become a time capsule, I'm sure... and as you say, some of it is already happening.

What I'm not sure of yet is if this will ultimately add to its charm, take away from its point, or just confuse people 50-odd years from now.

EDIT: Jose' - I think our posts are crossing.

2ND EDIT: I'll bet that "La Vie Boheme" will be completely lost on just about EVERYONE 50 years from now. Just ask the "new kids" today what they think of the lyrics to "Ain't Got No" (parts 1 & 2) from Hair. I'm sure it goes right over their heads, and it's the same kind of song as La Vie Boheme (parts 1 & 2).

---

Updated On: 12/3/05 at 06:14 PM

Agree that the Boheme milieu is timeless. Puccini's intrepretation works across the ages because it remains accessible to everyone across soocio-economic and demographic lines, and even language barriers, remaining universal. RENT, unfortunately, appears to have written to appeal to a "generation," and like all those who came before, and will come after, what once appealed to a generation will cease to be attractive to that same generations because the components of that generation, people, change in themselves as they mature. Also, in the very near future theatre-goers who are the same age group as those who are attracted to RENT today will find RENT "old fashioned" in its sound, in its dress, and in its sense of hipness. In the 1920's what person in their teens and twenties wanted to dress and act like their parents did in the 1900s? Same is true for the twenty-somethings of the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s...it's called life.

Updated On: 12/3/05 at 06:26 PM

Here's my take:

Period--shouldn't be a factor. Whether we produce a Greek play, a Shakespeare play, a 30s musical written in the 30s, or a 30s musical written in 2005, universality is what matters.

When one produces a play these are the factors you have to take into account:

--the worldview of the play's setting
--the worldview it was written in
--the worldview you are producing this play
--MAYBE, the worldview the play was first produced, if diff than when written

And, you try to find the universality that connects these three.

The Music Man: deception/con artist, love, censorship, trying to find a place to belong, dealing with outsiders, etc

How To Succeed In Business...: trying to get ahead in life, office politics, love, putting love behind work, accepting status quo or taking risks, etc.

Oklahoma!: settling down or staying single and carefree, jealousy, love, class, embarking on a new era in history, dealing with others who differ from you, etc.

West Side Story/R&J: do I even need to go there with this one? lol

Rent: I think the only things that could limit Rent or Hair or A Chorus Line is having specific references in the lyric and dialogue. That's been the main thing I have always heard. Certainly, Hair can resonate now as we have an unpopular war and major culture clashes? Surely, A Chorus Line will always resonate as a story of people trying to make their dreams come true. Rent deals with love and acceptance and various issues and there has been plenty said on the meaning of all this in other threads.

Pop music: This is questionable. First off, I don't think you are the best judge of Rent, Jose--am I wrong?
Musicals used to be the pop music of the day. We've strayed from staying in touch with pop music for the most part. I don't think we will come to a consensus about how well or not pop music will age. I do think that rock/pop/hip hop/rap musicals are a direction musicals can and should go. And what really is the difference between the music stylings of Mamma Mia!, Hairspray, Jersey Boys, Rent, etc.? It's all "pastiche" if you think about it.

---

Thanks to all for giving this a lot of thought! I'm loving these responses...

Here are my thoughts on "period" and "satire." (And then I'll shut up and let others type for a while. Plus I need to stop and think more about what you've said!)

Chicago is a great show to talk about here. I don't think it's dated in the least. The show was written in 1975, but isn't about 1975. It takes place in the '20s, but really isn't about the '20s at all. You don't have to know much (if anything) about that era to enjoy this show. Its universal themes (fame and fortune at all costs, media frenzies, crimes of the centuries, etc.) are not directly tied into the '20s. And while it's definitely satirical... it's satirizing its own universal themes, not the 1920s era specifically. (I don't think it will kill the opening number's impact if the audience doesn't know who "Lucky Lindy" is in the lyrics.)

EDIT: But take a show like "Of Thee I Sing," a political satire that was the first musical to win a Pulitzer Prize for drama, and nobody produces it today. The satire was all about the politics and specific politicians of the day. No one would get it, so the show comes off as a mildly interesting entertainment, instead of a fall-down funny, brilliant take on the modern world.

I personally agree, jerby, about a music style itself not killing a show entirely. It definitely dates a show, even with just its orchestrations, but (for me at least) never in a "permanently damaging" way. But "Rent" is way too early to tell. Many people are still listening to this kind of music today. But play "Show Boat" for them, with its story lines that can still stir up controversy to this very day, and some people cringe at its "old fashioned" music and lyrics. They can't even get past it enough to see how amazingly powerful that story is.

---

Updated On: 12/3/05 at 06:57 PM

best: And that's a shame (regarding Show Boat), but people react to Shakespeare that way.

So, we find ways to make Shakespeare reach across from the stage into the audience.

---

Updated On: 12/3/05 at 07:02 PM

Oh, and orchestrations are redone for most every revival. I think Webber's big mistake is that he refuses to completely update the orchestrations for shows like Jesus Christ Superstar and Evita. That's the key (I think) to making any score relate to a modern audience better.

---

And Jose, how much pop music DO you enjoy? That's my question. I'm not negating your right to your opinion of Rent. I'm only saying what I would say to someone who hates opera--is that person's negative opinion of La Traviata really valuable to me? They have a right to hate La Traviata, but if the piece never had a chance to begin with...

---

I'm glad you enjoyed my Music Man thoughts on the other thread, Best12bars.
On the topic of dated musicals, I tend to agree that universality is the key to whether a musical ages well or not. There are shows written in a very specific time that I doubt will be more than curious, period pieces in 50 years. I think Avenue Q might fall into this category. I'm not sure Spamalot will age well either. Unless you understand its source-material, a lot may be lost on you.
I've enjoyed everyone's discussion on "Hair." When it first appeared, it was cutting-edge, revolutionary (in more ways than one) and steeped in late '60's-early '70's relevance. Then, for a number of years, it virtually disappeared from the theatrical consciousness because America had moved on. Now, as the country is again divided over policies and is in an unpopular war, it is suddenly of interest again. I completely agree with Jose. It's creators knew how to write for the theatre. It isn't a rock concert.
I think Rent may actually have a shelf-life, because it, too is based on universal themes, albeit in already somewhat dated trappings. As a sidebar, I'm amazed at the number of young people (and older ones, too) who don't realize that the core story of Rent is a take on Puccini's La Boheme! Regardless, this opera is still popular for a reason - at least among people who enjoy operatic singing. It speaks to themes that occur in every generation. In 50 years, though the story's details will likely be dated,(they already are) the story will not be. There will still be young people full of hope, looking to grow and love and change the world. (At least, I hope there will be. I'd hate to think that the only option they'll see is a suicide bomb.) So, I think Rent might make it.
As a whole, I think Jerry Herman's work will probably last, even a show like La Cage Aux Folles. Again, because of the universality of the themes, even though it's '80's "shock value" is passe.
A thought has just occured to me. I think what makes a show "timeless" is not its political or cultural setting, but its characters. If they are recognizable to the audience as human beings that the audience can care about, the piece will still have a way to connect to an audience. That's way we can still be moved by the plays we call "Classics." They were new once, and their characters spoke to audiences about themes and emotions that never really change.
My apologies for long-windedness. I just read the preview and saw how long this is.

---

Good points, all. Especially the one about RENT being dated before it opened. It was. The show still took place int the past of Jonathan Larson, which is why the choice to give the film version an actual date of 1989 makes sense. in fact, I've read several interviews with the cast that saiod that's JL's intent to start with. Therefore, if that is true RENT was dated on purpose.

I also agree with the saying about H2$ and Guys and Dolls being timeless because even though they were written "as they were happening" they were created in fantasy worlds. Perhaps that's the biggest point missed here. Theatre IS a fantasy world. What makes a musical timeless or anything for that matter isn't necessarily the content, but the universality of the work.

A Chorus Line: I don't think many of you were alive when that opened and even some of you were likely born after it closed. After the first season (maybe after 2)it was on Broadway, the Playbill was changed from saying "The Time: Present" to "The Time: 1975", and before that, the dates of birth of the characters were added to to keep them the same age. However, the one major criticism AGAINST the show in 1975 was that while the show took place then (at time of opening) the music was old-fashioned Broadway. A "Shaft"-style guitar sound only places it in the 70's. The reason A Chorus Line succeeded and will again is its universality. You don't need to be a Broadway dancer to relate to it anymore than you need to be an AIDS infected crack whore to relate to Mimi in RENT, right?

I know we weren't going to talk about shows youinger than 9 or 10 years, but Hairspray is a good example of something that will age well. It is written in THE STYLE OF the time period in which it takes place, and is a complete fantasy world. I live in Baltimore, and found some things HILARIOUS that no one around me even chuckled at (How many of you understand why it's funny that Edna wears terry cloth open toe slippers and a house dress, or why it is funny (and sad) that Tracey hopes one day to attend Essex Community College?) and yet I'll bet lots of people not from Baltimore loved it. Why? Because it is universal. Everr been the underdog? Ever been judged without being known? Ever felt the pangs of any kind of prejudice (not just racial)?

Hair, by the way, was music of its time. Aquarius and several other songs from the show were top 20 songs.

---

FYI -- it was actually around 1980 (5 years into the run) that the Playbill of A Chorus Line was changed to read 1975.

---