SO many excellent points here.
OKLAHOMA! is my favorite musical, and while I agree with most of the posters here that this concept is not needed to elevate the story in any way, shape, or form, as the show itself stands, I applaud OSF for being willing to take such a bold stance on something that is such a definitive piece of American culture, and in fact, the crown jewel of the art; as it was the first, after all; fully realized piece of the musical theatre as we know it, which still remains the only pure contribution to the theatre that we as Americans have brought to the table.
OKLAHOMA! has always been ahead of its time. At the time it was premiered it truly changed the game in the way music and dance were used to tell stories. When Trevor Nunn directed it in the late 90's with the stunning Josefina Gabrielle and charming Hugh Jackman he brought a sense of true realism to the proceedings which caught us all by storm. When Molly Smith directed her brilliant colorblind (or at least, for the first time, presented with any sense of diversity at hand outside of the "token chorus person"
production at Arena Stage in DC, it was ahead of its time in the sense that we as Americans were ready to discuss the role of people of color in our society in a way that was all-inclusive, and it captured a feeling of joy in a way that was present, and in the moment, if you will, and simply enraptured audiences. I hope OSF's will do the same in this current climate and it brings me joy to know that there are still people out there willing to push the envelope, as R&H did so many times.
However, that being said...
What drives me crazy about the concept is that it feels half-baked. I understand WHY the decision is made to have Curley and Laurey played by women, and Will and Annie are being played by men, as it feels appropriately feminist, but I don't feel it is as effective as it should be. I think it muddles the story rather than telling a new one.
Now, there is no reason a woman should not be able to play Curley (historical accuracy aside), and no reason why Ado shouldn't be played by a man (other than it stereotypes gay men as sex starved airheads, which in itself is a totally different conversation - men have had it too easy for too long but why straight people don't get to feel the sting is the real question)...but I feel like they're only halfway there. To me, they should just go all out and make this an all-male or all-female production...all male being my preference, (not just because I'm gay and want to see some beefcake) but it makes, I think, historical sense, but also serves the piece in a new way dramatically. The first men to breach the frontier, the pent up sexual feelings of being a man in love with other men at that time, but keeping your love a secret...can you imagine how interesting the Curley/Laurey/Jud relationship becomes when Curley and Laurey (and so many others) become two lovers on the d/l, and Jud is tragically ostracized for being outwardly homosexual in the pornography he posts on the smokehouse wall, that Will Parker and Ali Hakim becomes savants of a sort for traveling to urban areas where people are "exploring", that Annie is played by a very young man who is starting to feel all of these things...we get a picture of what gay men, who in certain societies still today, feel forced to be closeted, forced to be hyper-sexualized, forced to cowtow to stereotypes, but in the end still band together as humans and men, both straight and gay, to celebrate expanding a country of freedom and limitless expansion...
...and honestly, the same thing could be said for an all-female production, just needs a different framework - perhaps what the wives and sisters and mothers of these men who push further west and leave them behind to fend for themselves on the land deal with what they are dealt...and how powerful they are - how they have been able to survive without men, but still own themselves as women in a new country,, and how they have thrived. They are "tough", as Aunt Eller as always been. And how they celebrate themselves as sexual women, strong women, women who seek love from other women, and do so in celebration of their settling of a "brand new state".
Both are far more interesting, and paint a full color of the LGBTQ population in today's climate, (at least to me) which is what is really needed and I would hope, the goal of this production and concept.
However, the concept as it stands currently, is just halfway there..."we want to challenge people, but not so much that they don't come". The long running Christmas Carol at the Goodman Theatre in Chicago has recently done the same sort of halfway concept by casting Fred as a woman, which colors his/her base relationship with Scrooge in a totally new and exciting way...but then we see in a later scene that the role traditionally cast as Fred's wife has been changed to a husband, so they are "Fredrika and her husband" as opposed to "Fred and his husband" or "Fredrika and her wife". And while I understand baby steps are the first on a long journey...I think that in terms of storytelling, and getting the full impact of a concept like this, you need to go all the way, or don't do it at all. Perhaps the R&H estate wouldn't let OSF go as far as they should have.
But the news of this production has led me to hope to see a production when I see the title song to be sung by a full chorus of hearty men with gorgeous voices, or women with deep altos in conjunction with angelic sopranos, celebrating their brand new country, for what it is and should be. Cheers to OSF for this baby step...but next time time...let's try to go all the way.
My two cents.
EDIT: My two VERY LONG cents. More like dimes. I applaud anyone for getting this far. I don't post here often anymore but I think this production is a very interesting topic so I kind of opened Pandora's box of passion. lol.
Updated On: 3/22/17 at 12:31 AM
