Posted: 10/11/19 at 10:19am
Bright Star may have been a Broadway flop, but it's now one of the most-produced shows in America.
Posted: 10/11/19 at 10:30am
These shows don't exist in a temporal vacuum and they aren't behind glass in a museum. The repeated need to settle into a defensive, nostalgic, rail-against-the-PC-police posture every time someone dares to wonder if maybe we should be looking critically at what these shows are saying and portraying before we stick them up before an audience for the umpteenth time is wearying.
Society has changed since these shows were written. That's true. And we need to reckon with that when these shows are produced, so we aren't giving a platform to regressive rhetoric and then hiding behind "well it was written in the 1930s, so get over it, snowflake!"
Posted: 10/11/19 at 10:33am
Posted: 10/11/19 at 10:40am
Posted: 10/11/19 at 11:06am
Kad said: "These shows don't exist in a temporal vacuumand they aren't behind glass in a museum. The repeated need to settle into a defensive, nostalgic, rail-against-the-PC-policeposture every time someone dares to wonder if maybewe should be looking critically at what these shows are saying and portraying before we stick them up before an audience for the umpteenth time is wearying.
Society has changed since these shows were written. That's true. And we need to reckon with that when these shows are produced, so we aren't giving a platform to regressive rhetoric and then hiding behind "well it was written in the 1930s,so get over it, snowflake!""
You had me until you said "regressive rhetoric," which reminds me of why PC is so awful. There's no "rhetoric" in these plays. They aren't trying to inculcate a doctrine. I'd say there's more inculcating of a doctrine and more of a snowflake response in a phrase like "dares to wonder if maybe we should be looking critically at what these shows are saying."
Literally no one has said "Don't you dare question classic musicals." But when you question a classic, there are going to be people who assert the quality that made the work a classic to begin with.
Unquestionably, though, yes, times do change, and that means that--from Gilbert and Sullivan to Rado, Ragni and MacDermot--any work that has longevity that will, when revived, contain elements that longer connect with the current calendar date audience.
Updated On: 10/11/19 at 11:06 AM
Posted: 10/11/19 at 11:33am
Updated On: 10/11/19 at 11:33 AM
Posted: 10/11/19 at 11:41am
I've never really gotten how "Carousel" glorifies or excuses domestic violence. 19th century and mid-20th century attitudes towards domestic violence were really different and horrifying if your husband happened to be an abusive lout.
But even within those confines Hammerstein takes care to show that Billy's behavior crosses the "not okay" line repeatedly. The recent revival cut this scene but there's a scene showing Billy gambling and losing a bunch of money. So drinking, gambling, and not supporting his wife, AND beating her. None of this is presented in a positive light.
This is why Billy isn't allowed in heaven. He doesn't deserve it. Thus the story of redemption. He has to earn it.
I think if anything It's Richard Rodgers' music that creates this illusion that Carousel glorifies domestic violence, because the music Rodgers wrote for Billy is undoubtedly the greatest music he ever wrote. It's so moving and beautiful that one forgets that Billy is spending his days drinking and going home and beating his wife. And Julie has surprisingly little music, so her "voice" is lost. You can stage a Carousel without a great Julie, but IMO a Carousel without a great Billy is a non-starter.
The R&H musical I have a problem with today is Oklahoma! because of the way Jud's death is treated as an afterthought to this happy community's picnic and wedding. There I do feel like serious issues are brushed under the rug.
But in Carousel nothing is brushed under the rug. The darkness is all there, presented without any excuses.
Posted: 10/11/19 at 11:47am
Parade immediately comes to mind. That show would have gotten a lot more love if it had come out today.
Posted: 10/11/19 at 12:16pm
LizzieCurry said: "Substitute "PC" for "reasonable" or "polite" in nearly every sentence and see how it feels after that.
The people who cry about non-existent "PC police" are probably the same ones who haven't appreciated being called out for using the word "Oriental" in the past 10 years.
EDIT: LOL https://twitter.com/rodimusprime/status/1182677397474365446"
PC and "polite" are simply not the same things.
Posted: 10/11/19 at 12:19pm
poisonivy2 said: "I've never really gotten how "Carousel" glorifies or excuses domestic violence. 19th century and mid-20th centuryattitudes towards domestic violence were really different and horrifying if your husband happened to be an abusive lout.
But even within those confines Hammerstein takes care to show that Billy's behavior crosses the "not okay" line repeatedly. The recent revival cut this scene but there's a scene showing Billy gambling and losing a bunch of money. So drinking, gambling, and not supporting his wife, AND beating her. None of this is presented in a positive light.
This is why Billy isn't allowed in heaven. He doesn't deserve it. Thus the story of redemption. He has to earn it.
I think if anything It's Richard Rodgers' music that creates this illusion that Carousel glorifies domestic violence, because the music Rodgers wrote for Billy is undoubtedly the greatest music he ever wrote. It's so moving and beautiful that one forgets that Billy is spending his days drinking and going home and beating his wife. And Julie has surprisingly little music, so her "voice" is lost. You can stage a Carousel without a great Julie, but IMO a Carousel without a great Billy is a non-starter.
The R&H musical I have a problem with today is Oklahoma! because of the way Jud's death is treated as an afterthought to this happy community's picnic and wedding. There I do feel like serious issues are brushed under the rug.
But in Carousel nothing is brushed under the rug. The darkness is all there, presented without any excuses."
I agree with much of this. I don't so much agree about Judd's death, but I will say that Rogers apparently wanted the script to deal with the death very quickly and not dwell on it for long. I think there was more of a worry with that first show about "Can we get away with this? Be better move on from this moment really fast."
Posted: 10/11/19 at 1:46pm
"The R&H musical I have a problem with today is Oklahoma! because of the way Jud's death is treated as an afterthought to this happy community's picnic and wedding. There I do feel like serious issues are brushed under the rug."
I thought how they treated Jud's death and brushing it under the rug was intentional? I interepreted as parallels to issues in today's criminal justice system and uneasyness that comes with being complicit. Especially with the transition to final jovial namesake Oklahoma number with everyone singing in unison, clapping and dancing. The audience goes along with it and his death is overshadowed. For me it wasn't until the show ends and I was thinking to myself " hold up... Did that just happened? Curly just straight up killed Jud point blank (and got away with it) vs Jud dying from falling on his knife."
Posted: 10/11/19 at 4:55pm
Phillytheatreguy10 said: "Hamilton closed every show that season- the only one that survived was Waitress. I think American Psycho was an excellent show with poor timing in regard to when it opened."
SCHOOL OF ROCK opened in the same season and ran for three years, so I think it’s a little unfair to blame HAMILTON for all the other shows that season closing. AMERICAN PSYCHO was never destined to be a crowd pleasing hit in any season, though it may have done better regarding awards in a different season. BRIGHT STAR just wasn’t quite good enough, and SHUFFLE ALONG had the whole debacle with the producers closing the show abruptly. Having said that, I do think that if SISTER ACT had opened one season earlier, it may have had a better shot at a few Tonys and a longer run.
Posted: 10/11/19 at 8:12pm
Posted: 10/11/19 at 9:32pm
I agree with dramamama611. This is actually a reasoned, thoughtful discussion with lots of good points. Why ask for it to be deleted? There are so few of these conversations here...
Posted: 10/12/19 at 5:36am
Posted: 10/12/19 at 5:42am
dramamama611 said: "Thank you, OP."
I’m sorry I did that! I just wanted to think of a better way to phrase that because “bad shows” wasn’t what I was trying to imply. I DEFINITELY don’t feel that way about the shows I used as examples. I just had to think of the right wording. I’m sorry!
Posted: 10/12/19 at 6:46am
I admit to being somewhat puzzled as to why the musical theater is held to such a high standard of compliance with the current social and cultural mores. Why not just look back at them to be reminded of from where we have come? A cynic might say that it is not necessary to look back. Just keep looking forward and we will eventually arrive back at the place from where we came.
No one urges others to stay away from the novels of Jane Austen because they depict the relationships between men and women so differently than today, and the of the time women don't seem to mind. Was it not the 90s that was the decade of Jane Austen, with almost all of her novels going to film or miniseries.
I will say, at great danger to myself, that men have been a little mistreated with respect to domestic violence. Back in the 70s when I was reading court cases and law review articles about domestic law, the focus was on the experience of the police officers called to respond to domestic review, These calls were universally despised. When they arrived often the wife said she would file no charges and would they please leave. Often they were threatened at gunpoint.
Deep relationships can be very intense. Before anointing domestic violence a black and white issue remember, as Cher and so many other great philosophers have put it, "Words are like weapons, they wound sometimes." My parents were married sixty years and over the course of the marriage grew contented and dependent on each other. But in earlier days my mother would launch into my father at the dinner table for no justifiable reason. I could see where another man might have laid hands on her. My father, a saintly man, merely got up from the dinner table and went down into the den to watch the business news and read the Times.
The law itself recognizes a lesser class of murder call manslaughter when the killer has been whipped up into a rage by his victim. Still, that last blow landed by Billy on his daughter is hard to reconcile.This article from a year and a half ago should at least cause one to consider viewing it from another angle; the angle that Billy has been run down into hopeless despair and frustration by the social order.
O’Brien competes with a legendary, critically lauded Carousel that is still within living memory: the London National Theatre’s 1993 stark and unsentimental production, which came to Lincoln Center in 1994. British director Nicholas Hytner paid great attention to the way poverty grinds down even the young. His Billy Bigelow (Michael Hayden) appeared deeply embalmed in dirt and sweat, and grew more haggard as the play went on. Injustice and toil were everywhere — they seemed to emanate from the gigantic clock that oversaw Julie and the other mill workers, an instrument so heavy it would crush them if it fell. Hytner’s Carousel provided an argument about class that contextualized Billy’s violence.
https://www.vulture.com/2018/04/rodgers-and-hammersteins-carousel-after-metoo.html
As I said, the relationships between men and women can be very complex. Taking this one step further, what does one who is unhappy with fact the Billy struck Julie even once due with what is usually referred to as the finest play of one of our greatest playwrights: "A Streetcar Named Desire" by Tennessee Williams.
Stanley abuses Stella in about every way, but she won't leave him. It is hard to grow old alone.
Posted: 10/12/19 at 9:43pm
joevitus said: "GavestonPS said: "
Joe, I agree with your thesis that the shows listed by the OP are indeed "great shows", even if moral values have changed over the decades. But I promise you nothing about CAROUSEL suggests Hammerstein was an insufficient playwright. Rather, he was in a lifelong love match with his wife andbelieved that feminine influence was the great civilizer of men. That was HIS take on Molnar's LILIOM, not a product in inadequate talent."
Thank you for the compliments in you post.I am no fan of PC, either, and I agree with you that he sawfeminineinfluenceas the greatcivilizer of man. But the above portion of your postconfuses me. How does Hammerstein's personal life suggest he isn't an insufficient playwright? An artistscan have the right personal experiences and still lack skill in some aspects of theirart.
For the record, I heartily believe Hammerstein was a great architect whenit came toscript planning. He knew what would work, he knew what in an ailing show (adaptation or not) needed to be fixed. He could even be genuinely funny (not just corny funny), as Oklahoma! shows.
But that dialogue between Julie and Louise is flat-footed, and it isn't the only instance in the R&H canon. There's just no way Hammerstein meant--as the words of the script could be literally taken to mean--that if you love someone, being hitby them can feelas sweet as a kiss. So, he wasn't doing the best he could with the material, whether the material originates elsewhereor not (and though I no longer possessmy copy of Liliom, I'm pretty sure there's nosimilar passage about abuse not hurting if the person loves youin Molnar'sscript).
None of this takes away from the real achievements of Carousel's script, or Hammerstein's work throughout his careertreatingserious issues and creatinga more intellectually complex kind of musical theater than anyone had previously seen. He just fumbles a little occasionally in his dialogue. Nobody's perfect.
"
My point about Hammerstein's personal life was that CAROUSEL and the rest of the R&H canon grew out of his personal worldview. The shows are exactly what Hammerstein wanted to see on stage. (Even--no, especially--ALLEGRO.) His worldview was far more idealistic than Stephen Sondheim's, but both artists know exactly what they are doing. They aren't failures just because you don't like a line here or there.
And if I remember the libretto of CAROUSEL correctly, it's only suggested that Billy backhanded Julie once in a fit of pique. I'm not suggesting that is excusable and of course we don't want women to justify the abuse dished out by the men in their lives, but Julie's response about a slap feeling like a kiss may be a more sophisticated understanding of marriage than one is apt to find in GUYS AND DOLLS or CALL ME MADAM.
Hammerstein's greatest contribution to musical theater is allowing characters to sing in their own voices, rather than his. CAROUSEL is no light musical comedy. Even if we are horrified at Julie's justification of Billy's anger-management problem, that doesn't mean she isn't saying things a woman in her position in that era might indeed say and think.
Posted: 10/12/19 at 9:51pm
^^^ Great post above mine, Ol' Blue Eyes. I agree with every word.
Posted: 10/12/19 at 10:01pm
Kad said: "These shows don't exist in a temporal vacuumand they aren't behind glass in a museum. The repeated need to settle into a defensive, nostalgic, rail-against-the-PC-policeposture every time someone dares to wonder if maybewe should be looking critically at what these shows are saying and portraying before we stick them up before an audience for the umpteenth time is wearying.
Society has changed since these shows were written. That's true. And we need to reckon with that when these shows are produced, so we aren't giving a platform to regressive rhetoric and then hiding behind "well it was written in the 1930s,so get over it, snowflake!""
Kad, if you are talking about the critical discussion about revivals I agree with you. But agreement doesn't mean we have to rewrite every show to pander to today's values. Why can't an intelligent and even slightly sophisticated audience understand that characters in Billy's and Julie's day had different attitudes, including ones we don't want anyone to adopt today?
What's so wrong with people being shocked by Julie's and her daughter's attitudes toward a slap from Billy?
(I actually think it's more a problem with comedies: I'm not so much offended by the Orientalism in ANYTHING GOES; I can accept that as period. But doing so does nothing to make it funny to me.)
Posted: 10/13/19 at 7:37am
OlBlueEyes said: "I admit to being somewhat puzzled as to why the musical theater is held to such a high standard of compliancewith the current social and cultural mores. Why not just look back at them to be reminded of from where we have come? A cynic might say that it is not necessary to look back. Just keep looking forward and we will eventually arrive back at the place from where we came.
No one urges others to stay away from the novels of Jane Austen because they depict the relationships between men and women so differently than today, and the of the time women don't seem to mind. Was itnotthe 90s that was the decade of Jane Austen, with almost all of her novels going to film or miniseries.
I will say, at great danger to myself, that men have been a little mistreated with respect to domestic violence. Back in the 70s when I was reading court cases and law review articles about domestic law, the focus was on the experience of the police officers called to respond to domestic review, These calls were universally despised. When they arrived often the wife said she would file no charges and would they please leave. Often they were threatened at gunpoint.
Deep relationships can be very intense. Before anointing domestic violence a black and white issue remember, as Cher and so many other great philosophers have put it, "Words are like weapons, they wound sometimes." My parents were married sixty years and over the course of the marriage grew contented and dependent on each other. But in earlier days my mother would launch into my father at the dinner table for no justifiable reason. Icould see where another man might have laid hands on her. My father, a saintly man, merely got up from the dinner table and went down into the den to watch the business news and read the Times.
The law itself recognizes a lesser class of murder call manslaughter when the killer has been whipped up into a rage by his victim. Still, that last blow landed by Billy on his daughter is hard to reconcile.This article from a year and a half ago should at least cause one to consider viewing it from another angle; the angle that Billy has been run down into hopeless despair and frustration by the social order.
O’Brien competes with a legendary, critically laudedCarouselthat is still within living memory: the London National Theatre’s 1993 stark and unsentimental production, which came to Lincoln Center in 1994. British director Nicholas Hytner paid great attention to the way poverty grinds down even the young. His Billy Bigelow (Michael Hayden) appeared deeply embalmed in dirt and sweat, and grew more haggard as the play went on. Injustice and toil were everywhere — they seemed to emanate from the gigantic clock that oversaw Julie and the other mill workers, an instrument so heavy it would crush them if it fell. Hytner’sCarouselprovided an argument about class that contextualized Billy’s violence.
https://www.vulture.com/2018/04/rodgers-and-hammersteins-carousel-after-metoo.html
As I said, the relationships between men and women can be very complex. Taking this one step further, what does one who is unhappy with fact the Billy struck Julie even once due with what is usually referred to as the finest play of one of our greatest playwrights: "A Streetcar Named Desire" by Tennessee Williams.
Stanley abuses Stella in about every way, but she won't leave him. It is hard to grow old alone."
This. Yes. I totally agree. We’re even getting a new Little Women movie!
Posted: 10/13/19 at 11:43pm
GavestonPS said: "joevitus said: "GavestonPS said: "My point about Hammerstein's personal life was that CAROUSEL and the rest of the R&H canon grew out of his personal worldview. The showsare exactly what Hammerstein wanted to see on stage. (Even--no, especially--ALLEGRO.) His worldview was far more idealistic than Stephen Sondheim's, but both artists know exactly what they are doing. They aren't failures just because you don't like a line here or there.
And if I remember the libretto of CAROUSEL correctly, it's only suggested that Billy backhanded Julie once in a fit of pique. I'm not suggesting that is excusable and of course we don't want women to justify the abuse dished out by the men in their lives, but Julie's response about a slap feeling like a kiss may be a more sophisticated understanding of marriage than one is apt to find in GUYS AND DOLLS or CALL ME MADAM.
Hammerstein's greatest contribution to musical theater is allowing characters to sing in their own voices, rather than his. CAROUSEL is no light musical comedy. Even if we are horrified at Julie's justification of Billy's anger-management problem, that doesn't mean she isn't saying things a woman in her position in that era might indeed say and think."
Hammerstein rewrote scenes and lyrics in South Pacific while it was running on Broadway. He said of Me and Juliet "I hate this show," and found the first twenty minutes of Flower Drum Song boring but somehow uncuttable. He turned to re-write Allegro when he discovered he was dying. So no, his plays aren't all exactly what he wanted to see onstage. And even if they were, that itself wouldn't mean they are as good as they could be.
I don't want to go to the library to transcribe dialogue from Carousel (I will if you want), but I remember it well enough that Julie says specifically he hit her (not just backhand her) because he's unhappy and tells Lousie in the next to final scene that someone can hit your really hard and it not hurt at all. This is just not great writing. It's a bad, sentimental approach to a serious problem, and it obscures the drama of a man who is on some levels very likable but on others disturbingly violent and deeply in need of redemption.
Sondheim called Hammerstein a man of infinite soul and limited talent, and Rodgers a man of limited soul and unlimited talent. I think he was right.
Posted: 10/15/19 at 10:52am
^^^ Great post above mine, Ol' Blue Eyes. I agree with every word.
I'm not sure that I agree with every word myself, but I love the flattery. Where are you located if I wanted to leave you a small legacy?
Sondheim called Hammerstein a man of infinite soul and limited talent, and Rodgers a man of limited soul and unlimited talent. I think he was right.
I wonder how Sondheim rates himself. Leaving Carousel out of the discussion for now, I think that Hammerstein is underappreciated. He was a giant. Show Boat and Oklahoma were the two towers from which hung the bridge from the old, usually light and frothy musical to serious drama with integrated music. And Hammerstein was the driving force behind both. Where did Show Boat come from? It broke every rule. It dealt with serious issues of racism, addiction, abandonment. The great anthem "Ol' Man River." Oscar wrote the books as well as the lyrics.
I don't want to go to the library to transcribe dialogue from Carousel (I will if you want)
Are libraries still around in the Age of Internet? Yup. My local library is not only still around, but manages to get its budget increased every year.
Here is the original script from Carousel. It's in PDF format.
https://www.mauriceparent.com/uploads/1/2/5/7/12573416/carousel-libretto.pdf
One observation. As Julie kneels over the body of Billy, she says, "I know why you hit me. You were quick-tempered and unhappy." In the New York Philharmonic 2013 concert production which starred Kelli O'Hara and Nathan Gunn, Kelli adds, "That don't excuse it none."
Not a criticism. Just an observation.
Posted: 10/15/19 at 11:19am
Agree Hammerstein is unappreciated. My comments should not be taken as dismissing his influence or his importance, just pointing out a weakness in his dramaturgical skill. No one's perfect. Hammerstein is the central figure in the development of American musical theater from a lighthearted diversion into a serious art form. He was a skillful lyricist and librettist, and his sentiments are--to me--still moving and inspiring. But he stumbled sometimes in his his work. No biggie.
Posted: 10/15/19 at 1:36pm
seaweedjstubbs said: "Phillytheatreguy10 said: "Hamilton closed every show that season- the only one that survived was Waitress. I think American Psycho was an excellent show with poor timing in regard to when it opened."
SCHOOL OF ROCKopened in the same season and ran for three years, so I think it’s a little unfair to blame HAMILTON for all the other shows that season closing. AMERICAN PSYCHO was never destined to be a crowd pleasing hit in any season, though it may have done better regarding awards in a different season. BRIGHT STAR just wasn’t quite good enough, and SHUFFLE ALONG had the whole debacle with the producers closing the show abruptly.Having said that, I do think that if SISTER ACT had opened one season earlier, it may have had a better shot at a few Tonys and a longerrun.
I agree with you. Audiences saw the shows they wanted to see, and they didn’t want to see American Psycho, Bright Star, and Shuffle Along without Audra. I disagree re Sister Act, which I mildly enjoyed. Based on its reviews, I thought it would run for several years. After seeing it, I didn’t think so...my logic: if an expensive musical was not as good as the movie on which it is based, and the movie had much better music, why pay a lot to see it?
Updated On: 10/15/19 at 01:36 PM
