NEXT TO NORMAL Revisited - Some Spoilers — Page 3

Commenting on the amount of memory loss diana has is bad because she hasn't seen the show? What, does the show have a sequence at the end that shows that the loss of memory was a bad dream? It's not like she's commenting on character development here!!!!

---

Ok, sorry, I just have to jump in here real quick:

"Bottom line is, if Next to Normal were about stomach ilness... this is what it would look like:

Diana has a stomach ache

The Doctor gives her stomach pills

The pills take away the pain but make her feel like she has no stomach

Diana misses having a stomach

All the other alternative treatments make her feel like she has no stomach

All her other treatments give her the worst possible symptoms.

-Sorry, but that doesn't happen-"


The thing is, I think that when you're dealing with mental and emotional issues, it's not that clear cut. With something like a stomach ache, obviously no one likes to feel sick to their stomach. It's a very simple matter where you do whatever needs to be done to get rid of the stomach ache, and that's that. With bipolar disorder, I DO absolutely believe that certain medications can make a person feel numb. I mean, remember, we're talking about a condition where you get the highs as well as the lows. A person with bipolar disorder has very extreme emotions, and although sometimes those emotions can be terrible, sometimes they are wonderful as well. So when you take away those huge mood swings, I don't doubt at all that it can make a person feel very strange. Yes, technically it may be balanced and healthier, but when you're used to feeling very extreme emotions and then suddenly you don't, it can probably feel, well, numbing.

Don't get me wrong, I DO completely understand what you guys are saying that medication tends to be a saving grace, and it's not something that people should be afraid to try. But I just think that... for some people, it can have that effect. And that's not to say that they should just give up on medication if it does have that effect. I Diana's particular case, she does, but that's just Diana's case, and the show doesn't really suggest that it's the right choice for her to have made. It's simply the decision she herself makes under those particular circumstances.


I'm getting completely rambly here, but basically my point is just that, to compare this to a simple stomach ache seems rather off to me. I don't think the two are comparable. How a person feels emotionally is too complicated to try and simplify it so much, you know? It's not a straight forward, easily curable physical ailment. It's a very imperfect science.

---

LOL!

Right but... curing a stomach ache WOULDN'T make you feel like you're missing a stomach. I don't even think it's possible to feel like you're missing a stomach, is it? :/ bahaha

It IS, however, very possible to feel like you're not really feeling much of anything emotionally.


I get where you were going with the metaphor and everything, but I think they're incomparable because you can't exactly feel like you're missing something that's purely a physical part of your body. Emotions are totally different.

---

No, it's a disagreement. I think that she made judgements that were mostly accurate by listening to just the cast recording because they were displayed IN the recording and are not aaccurate. There is no way 'watching the show' makes it acurate. Now, if she said that so/so is a bad actor... or such character is underdevelpoed I would agree that it is not fair to judge by just a CD. Your concept of 'I am right, you're wrong' that you've practiced MANY times on this board is what is causung people to have a lack of respect for you; "I'm right, you're wrong", is a childish and ignorant thing to beleive when discussing opinions.

---

Updated On: 4/12/09 at 08:09 PM

I actually do have to back KingKong up on this one, because the discussion was about how talk therapy is presented in the show, and a HUGE amount of the talk therapy presented in the show isn't on the recording.

So, SporkGoddess may well have some points that could be true and that she'd be able to back up with evidence had she seen the show, but it's just you can't really make a proper argument if you haven't seen the very thing you're arguing about. Or, well, in terms of this particular issue an audio would be enough to suffice as well haha (that's how I personally know the dialogue changes that have been made recently- I haven't actually SEEN the show since 2st). But yeah, without at least having HEARD the dialogue parts where the talk therapy takes place, there's not really a way that Spork could have possibly backed up her argument. KingKong was probably too harsh in the way he addressed the issue, but the central idea was correct. haha.


I do agree though- KingKong, it's okay to lighten up a bit Being so harsh just makes people not want to take your very legitimate opinions (which I tend to completely agree with) as seriously!

---

Updated On: 4/12/09 at 08:22 PM

Now I'm really curious actually- I promise I wont yell at you if you want to explain what part of the cast recording made you feel that way!

(I can't speak for KingKong, but.. I'd hope he'd be nice. haha)

Just because I know there are definitely some parts of the recording where it seems like all the dialogue could be there but it's actually not. They did a really good job of cutting stuff down. So you could completely have a point with what you're getting at. But it also might be that there's some stuff missing from what you're hearing that, with some explanation of it, could make you understand it differently :)

I really didn't mean to help jump on you, for the record. It's just I really don't know that there's any part of the cast recording which includes a full dialogue section ("Make Up Your Mind" might be pretty close...), so it could possibly make a difference

---

Updated On: 4/12/09 at 08:31 PM

Responded

sorry it took me so long haha

---

I know I'm somewhat late to this discussion (I don't frequent BWW as often as I used to), and while I don't want to rehash old arguments, I would like to briefly talk about my discomfort with "Next to Normal". I saw it on Second Stage, and it was one of the most painful, and in many ways, irritating theatrical experiences I've had. A lot of my concerns with the way psychotherapy is portrayed in the show have already been brought up, and while I understand the arguments in its defense, I can't reconcile my own discomfort with the subject matter. My uncle suffered from undiagnosed mental illness for his entire life. It went undiagnosed because his mother, ever since he was a child and began showing signs of pschyzophrenia, flat out refused to let him have medical attention. She was strongly opposed to medication for mental illness, and planted those ideas in his head. As a result, my uncle always refused to take any form of medication, or therapy, and led a very sad, lonely, dangerous and troubling life right up to his premature death this past December. His illness affected every single member of my family. I have seen, up close, the effects going unmedicated can cause a person. And it's ugly in ways I can't eve begin to describe. And while I can understand the criticisms towards psychotherapy, how some medications can deprive a person of feeling and freedom, make them "numb", as been said throughout this board, in my experience, the dangers of going unmedicated are often far worse, and very dangerous. When I saw the show, I felt it trivialized mental illness as a whole, and made a mockery of its treatment and doctors. I felt offended at the way the show *seemed* to portray all medication and psychotherapy as an evil, or at the very least, as dangerously incompetent. I worry at the possible influence on susceptible people, who might decide that being on medication *is* always worse, that feeling numb is a greater danger than going untreated. Had my grandmother seen this show (at least, the Off Broadway version I experienced), she would have seen it as an affirmation of her beliefs which had harmful and longterm repercussions. I simply couldn't distance myself from my personal experience, and the knowledge that if my uncle had been on medication, if my grandmother hadn't hammered into his head the "dangers" of psychotherapy, he might have had the chance to lead something approximating a normal life. As it was, he was lonely, he was confused, he was extremely dangerous, and devastatingly sad. Having to take care of him because he cut himself off from the world due to extreme paranoia, having to deal with his outbursts, explain to the neighbors why he'd do the things he did, having to clean his diapers because in his last days he convinced himself his legs were no longer functional, and ultimately watching him die, quite literally, because of a psychotic breakdown; all of these were traumatizing experiences in my life. And in many ways, the show felt like a slap in the face to that suffering, and all my family's futile attempts to get my uncle to take medication.

I understand changes have been made (and, like the original poster, am relieved to hear "Feeling Electric" is no longer in the show, as it was, to me, a very, very offensively staged song), but I simply can't bring myself to watch it again. I can't. Not after his death. I only hope the people who see the show understand that this is a far, far more complex condition, that it's not clear cut, that medication is sometimes absolutely needed, and there are far, far worse fates than feeling numb. And I also think that my and other's personal discomfort with the subject matter, while completely subjective, has merit.

I wish I could keep an open mind, and allow myself to see it again, but I can't. Even if I were to come around and acknowledge that the show has improved regarding my initial concerns, it would still hit too close to home for it to be in any way enjoyable. And while I would never challenge the people who love and support the show (and a lot of very, very valid points have been brought up in this thread), and do recognize that the score and performances were wonderful, I just wanted to at least voice my trepidation. And to add that I'm glad at least a few people share my opinion.

Please don't jump on me, I'm only commenting on ECT and not the show.

Scott: AFAIK, retrograde amnesia is a side effect, but really severe memory loss (which I would categorize losing decades as) is not as frequent.

---

Updated On: 4/22/09 at 01:56 AM

Scott: AFAIK, retrograde amnesia is a side effect, but really severe memory loss (which I would categorize losing decades as) is not as frequent.

I'm not "jumping", but once again, you are going by what the books say about the subject and have no clue what they say in the show. They SAY that it is not as frequent. "This much memory loss is rare, but it has been reported." They SAY it is rare. Yet another thing that is not on the cast recording but is CLEARLY in the dialogue of the show.

And "not as frequent" does not mean it doesn't happen. Even if it only happens to one or two people, it still happens.

---

Updated On: 4/22/09 at 06:47 AM

I was responding to Scott's remark ("My understanding is that temporary and even permanent memory loss is not that uncommon."), not anything in the show...

---

Updated On: 4/22/09 at 12:54 PM

I am very amused that this thread brings up an ad for Dianetics.org

---