Rodgers and Hammerstein

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 3:21pm

Both one of the best composers in theatre history, I am sure you will agree.

I got a question here, one that needs a bit of thinking about and a very rhetorical question about the composers and the Tony awards.

'South Pacific' won the Tony for best musical in 1950, this was only the second Tony awards, after 'Kiss Me, Kate' won the inaugural one the year before, 'The King and I' also won the Tony in 1952 and 'The Sound of Music' tied for the Tony in 1960 with a show called 'Fiorello'.

My question is simply, if the Tonys was around before 1949 would Oklahoma in 1943 and Carousel in 1945, would these two great musicals gone on to win the Tony for best musical?

[TxTwoStep]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 3:51pm

how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

which is more, a ****load or a buttload? or a crapload?

QUE IS MAS MACHO?!?!

[Ourtime992]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 5:51pm

It's all conjecture, of course, but I looking through ibdb.com I can't see any shows that (from my distorted perspective 60 years later) seem likely to have been better received than Oklahoma!

In 1945, On the Town could have contended for the top prize. The only other shows that really pop out at me are Song of Norway and I Remember Mama.

[Jon]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:24pm

I Remember Mama (1945) was not a musical. Richard Rodgers DID write a musical version of it in the late 1970's.

[jv92]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:26pm

Both would have won, especially Carousel, which, if I am not mistaken, won numerous Donaldson Awards (the precursor to the Tony Awards). I've always thought that Carousel's reviews were much better than Oklahoma's, particularly because I think the critics started to understand what Hammerstein was trying to do by now.

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:32pm

I beleve Oklahoma! wasn't nearly as successful at the time as we now imagine it was. While it was popular,it wasn't getting universal raves. Carousel, however, was a huge hit with both critics and audiences.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:37pm

"While it was popular,it wasn't getting universal raves."

Sounds like Love Never Dies to me!

[jv92]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:39pm

Oklahoma! did sell out houses and do great business. The reviewers, though, still thought of musicals as light musical comedies that had little to no development of characters, flimsy plots, girls, gags and hit tunes. I think they were sort of startled by Oklahoma!. By the time Carousel came along, though, I think they were ready.

Oklahoma! did get a special Pulitzer though. People who knew plays knew what was going on. I hasten to add that Carousel is a better show, whether one wants to admit it or not.

[hockeynut2]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:42pm

Here's an interview I did with Oscar (Andy) Hammerstein III. I hope you enjoy it.
Andy Hammerstein Interview on DC Theatre Scene

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:45pm

@jv92, I agree that Carousel is the stronger of the two.

@ClapYo'Hands, I hope we don't think of Love Never Dies as a classic in 70 years, as we now think of Oklahoma!

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:45pm

Well, I for one certainly do!

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:47pm

Lloyd Webber is a wonderful artist, and I wish him all the success in the world, but I will admit I am not particurally fond of the score for Love Never Dies.

[jv92]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:50pm

I was sort of shocked at how much I didn't like the section on Oscar II in Andrew Hammerstein's book. The first section was very insightful and wonderful, but the section on Oscar II was just not good. It left me wanting to re-read Hugh Fordin's excellent biography, Getting to Know Him, with a very moving Introduction by Stephen Sondheim.

However, that interview from DC Theatre Scene was very good and interesting, particularly the grandson's memory of his grandfather watching him on painkillers due to his illness. I hasten to add I think Oscar would have admired Sunday in the Park with George and Into the Woods more than Sweeney Tood of all of Sondheim's works.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:50pm

Have you seen it?

[jv92]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:51pm

Let's not turn this into a Lloyd Webber thread, please.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:53pm

It's relevant! I'd rather that than a Spiderman thread!

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:56pm

No, I have not seen the show, although many people have assured me that the recording doesn't showcase it well.

And I would much prefer this to a Spiderman thread. I am on permanent Spider Man overload.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 6:58pm

I hope you see the show when it comes to Broadway. The recording did showcase it well, but of course it has now changed so much.

It is certainly one of my favourites anyway, and wayyyy above Oklahoma or Carousel.

[jv92]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 7:00pm

Oh, boy-- Any Lloyd Webber over Carousel or Oklahoma! is almost perverse. Sorry.

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 1/12/11 at 7:00pm

Thanks for the endorsement. I'd love to see it whenever it arrives, although Carousel is wonderful, so let's not make comparisons.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 6:06am

Lets keep this thread on Rodgers and Hammerstein.

ALW is another conversation for another day.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 10:57am

Well, considering Andrew Lloyd-Webber cites Richard Rodgers as one of his biggest musical influences, and there are huge comparisons to be drawn between the two, it is not irrelevant.

[frontrowcentre2]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 1:37pm

I beleve Oklahoma! wasn't nearly as successful at the time as we now imagine it was. While it was popular,it wasn't getting universal raves. Carousel, however, was a huge hit with both critics and audiences.

A little research is always a good thing.

OKLAHOMA! opened in 1943 and received the following reviews:

Raves - 5

Favourables - 2

Mixed - 1

Unfavorable - 0

Pans - 0

The critics perhaps did not fully understand the show's impact - how could they? - but quite a few applauded its audaciousness:

HOWARD BARNES: "Songs, dances and a story hae been triumphantly blended"

BURNS MANTEL: "Oklahoma! really is different - beautifully different..... The most thoroughly and attractively American musical since Show Boat"

The lone mixed notice came from Wilella Waldorf who constantly decried Hammerstein's homespun sentimentality. She disliked SHOW BOAT, CARMEN JONES and CAROUSEL. She was felled by a fatal heart attack just after filing her nitpicky review of the 1946 SHOW BOAT. (She was only 45 at the time.) She wrote for the Post from 1941 to 1946.

Others tended to call it "charming", "leisurely", "homespun" and (I'm sure this was meant as a compliment) "certainly not topical."

Still, the reviews were positive enough to sell a few months worth of tickets and beyond that audiences spread the word. The release of the original cast album (on 6 10-inch shellac records) spread the score far beyond New York and soon Broadway had its first tourist attraction musical. No musical had ever run more than a year ad a half: OKLAHOMA! ran 5 1/2 years.

Reviews for the original CAROUSEL were even better:

Raves - 7

Favourbles - 0

Mixed -1

Unfavourable - 0

Pans - 0

The one mixed was Ms. Waldorf again. It does seem the critics appreciated CAROUSEL even more, even if audiences didn't fully embrace it the same way but CAROUSEL is a dark show, while OKLAHOMA is sunnier and easier for some people to digest.

So, I don't buy the argument that either show "wasn't nearly as successful at the time as we now imagine."

Updated On: 1/13/11 at 01:37 PM

[broadwaybabytn]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 6:16pm

Thank you for the thorough research! Interesting to see some of the actual reviews.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 6:48pm

OMG,

Let me agree with the sentiment of the post above.

Where did you get so many gens of info from?

That is a terrific post and I really appreciate the time you spent on research and posting.

Thank you