I'm always intrigued by the outrage over omissions/inclusions, as if the Tony show is being performed for a select crowd of afficianados and devotees. The Tonys -- as a piece of broadcast television -- are a shrewd, calculated informercial for the highly commercial venue known as Broadway. One reason running shows are included is to promote success, highlight shows people can (still) buy seats to. It's not a night designed to inspire or comfort an elitist coterie of followers to feel validated and vindicated. It's to celebrate a money-making end of show-business. That's a proven fact. BRIDGES might've spent money for O'Hara to sing (say the exquisite "Almost Real," the solo that wiped up). But the show is gone, and the pockets ever emptier. Whose dollars would be forked over in the interest of somebody's idea of fairness?
This O'Hara vs Menzel debate is rather pointless. Menzel has earned a place on this telecast for three obvious reasons: she's a nominee of a running show her producers want to promote (fund) on-air; a Tony-winning star of a show being recognized for a decade run; and a soloist on the best-selling album in the entire world. Gee, I guess it's fair that she got a slot.
O'Hara will be there, clips will be shown for sure. But is the evening a tragedy for its focus on success? Maybe not; maybe just about keeping a highly profitable enterprise -- Broadway -- a tourist stop, and making sure that what it exports on the road sells, too.
"I'm a comedian, but in my spare time, things bother me." Garry Shandling
