NY Times Arts Beat today - Are Musicals losing their voices? — Page 2

Isherwood does not address the effect that promotion, marketing, and name recognition saleability decisions have on casting. This can override considerations of both best actor and best singing voice in the selection process, particularly on Broadway (and likely in film as well).

It's not necessarily the presumed bombast of an American Idol voice or persona that is at play. Some of the Idol performers have theatre backgrounds and good voices. I went to an Off Broadway performance of Jaques Brel not expecting anything from Constantine Maroulis given I only knew his name in association with Idol and was delighted to discover his devoted talent and musicality holding the stage well with a master of Michael Cerveris' caliber. Constantine turned out to be the rock singer who could shift to more subtle and nuanced demands of a role and deeply assume character.

It may be more the failure to successfully create the unity of a magical world of the musical by players or parts that fail to interweave like the winds and tides, thereby breaking the verisimilitude or detracting from the joy of a cast keeping the balls all up in the air and in play from start to finish. This can happen when you find the singing, acting, pacing, or any of many components jarring or subpar.

I give Isherwood credit for prompting the discussion of hopes and expectations in the present clime of musicals. He doesn't have to be right to provoke our own evaluations of what we've been experiencing of late.

Updated On: 4/15/11 at 02:55 AM

I also do see a slight, yet disturbing shift in what constitutes "great singing," with emotional inflection/nuance/storytelling not being part of the equation.

But I agree there is little to worry about, although I didn't interpret his article as expressing fear or doom for the future of musical theatre, but rather complaining/venting. Perhaps he should have saved the venting and gone for something better suited to a pro journalist?

Vocal quality is the least of my concerns at this time. The live orchestra is the one unique element of musical theatre that is experiencing a truly disturbing trend as of late.

---

People can deny it but the theater is definitely moving or has moved in the direction of the "little voice". This is a trend that seemed to start with Ed McMann's "Star Search" (according to a voice teacher whose name escapes me). Audiences loves the high c that ricochets off the back wall of the upper mezzanine (with a big assist from amplification) and "American Idol" and its many variations abroad, I should say its audiences, reward "little voices" that can pull off the trick.

The teacher went on to explain that advances in sound engineering have made it possible for actresses and actresses to take on roles in musicals that would have gone to classically trained singer/actors 30 or 40 years ago. Exhibit A: Matthew Broderick, "Till Him". He's on almost everyone's shortlist and a much better singer/actor like Kevin Oderkirk wouldn't even get an audition for "The Producers"--who are in no small way responsible for the little voice on the big stage. Broderick sells tickets, a guy like Oderkirk needs advance buzz to fill seats.

Scrub amplified pit orchestras and amplified singers who need the amplification to be heard over the orchestra and then you'll see who is the real deal.

This is what i thought of the article....
"Whatever."

Jeez. When can we go back to a time when critics really knew how to write.


Can Isherwood sing? Dance? Act? write? (not really)

His writing is unconvincing and a bit attention deficit disorder.
It is all over the place. It takes itself too seriously.

His review of Sister Act was....odd.

Ah for the Walters Kerrs... the Clive Barnes... the Howard Taubmans. Bring back real critics.