RAGTIME - Clehouse Walker's Identity?

[faeri]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:33pm

I was listening to this soundtrack, and I noticed that most of the characters that really were people had names, while the other, fictional, characters were left with titles - younger brother, mother, father. The few that didn't go by this rule were the son, Edgar, Colehouse Walker, Sarah, and Tuttle (I think I spelled that wrong.) Were these actual people? Or is the fact that they are given names supposed to be symbolical?

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:39pm

If I were you, I would quickly edit the word "soundtrack" out of your posting. You're gonna get flamed by some crabs on this board.

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:43pm

First of all, a recording of a Broadway show is an "Original Cast Album", not a "Soundtrack."

(Sorry about the clarification, but somebody was going to do it.)

Regarding RAGTIME, I think you're on the right track. The historical figures were of course known by their real names (Emma Goldman, etc.) But the whole purpose of RAGTIME, according to writer Ethan Mordden, is to serve as a sort of "guilt" slap in the face to the white people who enslaved black people. The white characters in the show are given generic names, i.e., "mother," and "father," while the black characters are given actual names. Colehouse. Sarah.

I think Doctorow was driving home his point this way. It is a powerful point, and one of the things that makes RAGTIME such a powerful work.

Regardless of what Mr. Mordden has to say about the show (and I'm not articulating his point very clearly here), you are absolutely on the right track in regards to Mr. Doctorow's original intentions.

[gcal]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:44pm

The characters with the "generic" title (Mother, Father, Tateh, The Little Girl, etc...) are symbols of their culture and their type of people. It really could have been ANY mother, not just THE one in the story. I suppose that Coalhouse, Sarah, and Edgar have real names because their story is specific to them. NOt every African American bought a car like Coalhouse.

Does this help? Is this right?

[Plum]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:48pm

I disagree, gcal. I think Mother, Father, etc. have very distinctive characters. They aren't just archetypes.

Also, I'm pretty sure Edgar didn't have a name in the book version of Ragtime- he was just The Little Boy. Feel free to yell at me if I'm wrong about that.

All the characters had names (or at least nicknames like Tateh) except the nice white American family from New Rochelle. Take from that what you will. :) Updated On: 11/19/04 at 05:48 PM

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:51pm

I've really got to head downtown to see Finding Neverland --another great work about life at the turn of the century -- but this thread caught my attention.

Veuve, I'm glad to see another person on the board who finds Ragtime so powerful! But I think it's going a bit far to say that giving the New Rochelle family generic names was Doctorow's (or Ahrens and Flaherty's) "guilt slap" to white people. Remember that Mother embraces Coalhouse's son almost immediately? And that one of the other major storylines in the novel and musical involves class conflict? The show goes so much deeper than "white guilt." Father, Grandfather and the maid Bridgette are the only racist members of the New Rochelle household.

EDIT: Tateh's wife in the novel is named Mameh, so I think their names might just be "foreign" takes on Father and Mother. The Little Boy is named Edgar because the novel is written as a reflective piece, and of course, EL Doctorow's first name is Edgar! :) Updated On: 11/19/04 at 05:51 PM

[Gothampc]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:54pm

I agree with Evelyn. Don't forget that Mother marries a Jew and adopts Coalhouse & Sarah's child.

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:54pm

Good point, Plum. The Jewish characters also had names.

It is clear that Doctorow's point in naming these characters is to acknowledge the racism that exists in our society. And his point was made even more powerful, as he set the novel during the turn of the century, nearly 100 years before he wrote it (or it was musicalized). Yet, racism, bigotry and homophobia still exist in our society.

It's an important lesson to learn, even though the naming of the characters "mother" and "father" might seem a bit heavy-handed.

[Plum]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 5:58pm

I don't think he de-named the white American family to paint them badly, but perhaps to reverse the trend in a lot of art of making the whites in every story the most human characters while reducing the minorities, immigrants, etc. to stereotypes.

He didn't actually make the New Rochelle family stereotypical in anyway, but he was doing something with his name trend.

And Evelyn, are you sure the Little Boy was named Edgar in the original book by Doctorow as well as in the musical?

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 6:00pm

Veuve brings up an interesting point about homophobia. Those of you who haven't read the novel might want to look into it, because there are at least two homoerotic episodes -- each of which involve encounters between the historic figures.

Btw, the novel was written in 1975 and the storyline covers the years of 1906 to 1917 (though in a blur, so to speak). When it was first published, only some fifty years had passed between the last event covered -- which I believe was Harry Thaw escaping the asylum and marching in a parade. That's part of the reason why it was so controversial; Doctorow was treading familiar terrain for quite a few people still alive at the time. In fact, Evelyn Nesbit had only passed away a few years before, and her most famous silent film costar -- her son, Russell Thaw -- was still very much alive. He was also around when Elizabeth McGovern played his mother in the film version...

It would be interesting to find out what he thought of Ragtime. Updated On: 11/19/04 at 06:00 PM

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 6:03pm

Evelyn, you made your points beautifully, and I agree with all of them.

The issue of "white guilt" is much more complex than I have remotely articulted here, but that's the beauty of RAGTIME, isn't it? It forces you to think about these things.

It's why I think RAGTIME is one of the best musicals of all time. It continually makes you think. And not about yourself, but about real, humanitarian issues. Moral issues. Important issues. What other musical does that? I can't think of one.

Yes, I agree with Mordden that RAGTIME is constructed to make one feel a certain way (his "white guilt" theory). But the beauty of the show is that it allows all of us to feel differently. It's an amazing piece of musical theatre.

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 6:19pm

While we're on the subject, I'd like to praise the brilliance of RAGTIME, specifically.

While there are many glorious things in the score, the stunning achievement, for me, is "New Music." In musical theatre history, has there ever been a number which says so much in so little time? It's a plot number, with Colehouse is trying to win Sarah back. It's a musical metaphor, with ragtime music taking over the white household (and indeed, the entire United States). It's a character defining piece, in the way that Mother relates to her life. It's a political statement, in Father's reaction to the actions taking placein his household. All in less than four minutes, to an irresistable tune by Flaherty.

Wow. Updated On: 11/19/04 at 06:19 PM

[brdwaybaby17]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 6:20pm

Whoa, it's so odd how people can take completely different views on something... I agree with all of your points now, but I had never thought of it before.

I always thought that the family had no given names as if to say, you know these people, but you don't truly know these people and to mask who they really are. To keep you out of the story somehow... I don't know, it's hard to explain here.

But Coalhouse Walker Jr. was a real person. Someone in my cast looked up all the characters on the internet and were telling us about them. Apparently the little girl grows up to be a stripper? How ironic...

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 6:40pm

You know, interestingly, I went to see RAGTIME a number of times. I always took friends with me to see it, and sang its praises. In all those viewings, I never once had a friend agree with me about the show. Everyone unequivocally HATED it. And these weren't dumb, unintellectual friends who would have been better off at LION KING across the street. They were people whose opionions I respected. And yet they hated RAGTIME.

I'm still trying to figure that one out.

[Jon]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 7:58pm

The reason that the "white anglo" family have no "names" is that they represent E.L. Doctorow's own family - his mother, his father, his mother's younger brother. The little boy - "Edgar" - is E.L. Doctorow himself.

"Tateh", of course, is Yiddish for "father" - and he later takes the fake name of Baron Eshkenazy.

[Plum]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 8:22pm

*bows to Jon*

Well, thank you.

[Jon]

Posted: 11/19/04 at 11:53pm

By the way, the house exterior depicted in the opening of the original production was taken from a photo of Doctorow's family home in New Rochelle - it still exists.

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 12:37am

Great posts, all. It's amazing that Ragtime isn't discussed more often.

I especially agree with Veuve's statement that the beauty of Ragtime is that it "continually makes you think." Part of that has to do with the moral and social issues that it raises. Of course, it doesn't hurt that once you're done watching the show, you have several real-life characters that you can learn much more about than you did during your hours in the theater. Honestly, I don't know when I'll get past Nesbit long enough to read my first Goldman and Houdini biographies!

And apart from all that Veuve said about "New Music," consider that it also involves Younger Brother -- who sings the "his fingers stroke those keys..." line that, on the cast recording, sounds as though it could have been sung by father as well. I'd say that it's one of the best numbers in the show, except I think that all of them are such accomplishments that comparisons are difficult to make. What I find really compelling when watching the Broadway production, apart from the musical numbers, are moments that only those who've seen the show would know exist -- especially the police/protest riot that occurs immediately after "The Night That Goldman Spoke at Union Square." The choreography of this show was almost reminiscent of Fosse, except Ragtime extraordinarily manages to incorporating lighting and shadows into the dances. I'm always so upset when I learn that a production has been severely scaled down from the Broadway version...

The Little Girl grows up to be a stripper? LOL. That might be appropriate given that, in the book, she becomes very close to Evelyn Nesbit and is admired for her small though shapely body. I'm pretty confident that Coalhouse was not a historic figure. He was loosely based on Scott Joplin, according to Doctorow, but that's about where the history ends. Obviously there have been more than a few African-American who, throughout history, felt compelled to take justice into their own hands because the government wouldn't respond to their needs.

I know some people who found Ragtime boring. It's a tough sell to a generation that has sexy shows like Cabaret, Chicago and Rent to attend repeatedly. Some people also think its approach toward race is rather heavy-handed, while ballads like "Back to Before" and "Wheels of a Dream" overwhelm and are easily parodied by Forbidden Broadway.

I'm glad Jon brought up the house. At the time, Doctorow was living in a house in New Rochelle that had been built around the turn of the century -- and one day he just started writing about the architecture of it. The rest is Ragtime history. Doctorow is one of those writers who freely admit that instead of developing some great scheme or political intent for their work, they just let it "sort of develop" from their imaginations.

[Booming Baritone]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 4:24am

I'm one of the ones who saw it on Broadway with all the "stars" in the roles they originated and was quite unmoved. I thought everyone was talented, but I was emotionally distanced from the production. I felt like I was seeing a panorama of the story but never felt the over-riding passion of these people's lives.

A few months ago I happened to catch a production of Ragtime in Lancaster PA and finally I understood the emotional potential this show holds. The way this show was directed made everyone's story their supreme passion in their life. I'm not explaining it very well, but I was profoundly moved by the performances of this cast and the way the production was focused. It was heartbreaking and inspiring and I cared deeply for these people and their story. Congratulations to the director, Rob McKercher and the wonderfully fine performances of the cast.

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 4:41am

Baritone, I really admire you for giving the show a second chance. Your comment that the panorama effect on Broadway trumped compelling characterizations is one that I've also heard before. What was the staging like in Lancaster? Did you find that making characters like Goldman and Nesbit resemble their real-life counterparts was only a minor concern in this production as in others? Updated On: 11/20/04 at 04:41 AM

[Jon]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 9:07am

EvelynNesbit1906 -
Interesting that you bring up the question of the characters resembling the real life counterparts. It bothered me quite a bit that Evelyn was plauyed as a blonde in the original production, since we know she was a brunette in real life. Especially with Mother being blonde in the original, it seemed an odd choice.

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 11:46am

Oh god yes... the Evelyn Nesbit as a blonde debacle. I think the casting director must have wanted the audience to connect to the Nesbit character on a surface level by making her as much like a popular and relatively contemporary icon (Marilyn Monroe) as possible. The "hello gentlemen" line in Crime of the Century is a dead giveaway. How appropriate that when "The Girl in the Red Velvet Swing" was about to be filmed in the early 1950s, Joan Collins got the part of Evelyn Nesbit only after Marilyn Monroe turned it down!

I think that had the musical addressed the darker aspects of Nesbit's life as presented in the novel -- such as all of the claims that she was having affairs while her husband was in jail and that she was a masochist -- then it would have been necessary to drop the giddy Marilyn Monroe schtick in favor of a more vampish Nesbit. And we all know that vamps tend to be brunettes.

Lynette Perry's interpretation is very entertaining, but ultimately I think it would have been more interesting to imagine how Nesbit was different as a sex icon from successors like Madonna, Clara Bow and Marilyn Monroe. Updated On: 11/20/04 at 11:46 AM

[erinrebecca]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 12:56pm

Evelyn, I'm not sure where you're located but did you, by any chance, see the production of Ragtime that Steinhardt put on at NYU last year? It was amazing. I had seen the show in Toronto and also when it came to Broadway several times, and there were aspects of Steinhardt's production which I found superior. It was a lot of fun, and I happened to be sitting behind Ahrens, Flaherty, and Doctorow at one of the performances I saw. After the run, Flaherty sent an email to Steinhardt praising the production. :)

[EvelynNesbit1906]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 4:15pm

I'm actually in the Chicago area for most of the year so unfortunately, I missed Ragtime at NYU! What aspects of the production did you find superior? It's good to hear that Doctorow attended. He really seems to hate the film version of Ragtime, so Ahrens, Flaherty and Galati were relieved when he approved of the musical (despite a few reservations, such as making Nesbit the comedic relief of the show in all probability).

I would love to see pictures of this production if any are available. :)

[CurtainUp]

Posted: 11/20/04 at 5:36pm

Never seen the show, but I HAVE heard clips of the music and I adored the novel. I always thought that Mother, father, Tateh, Little Girl, etc. were unnamed to show they could have been anybody in that time period. How Mother symbolized many mothers of the period, etc. The fact that they could be relations to Doctorow adds another level. I WOULD LOVE to see this show!