So, I FINALLY Saw "Spring Awakening" — Page 2

That is an approach.. not a very interesting one, but an approach.

So the great break though in Spring Awakening is to stop the dramatic action cold and listen to some generic alt-rock inner monologue?

Cole Porter and Gerswhin did a similar thing 80 years ago with what was "popular" music then. Nothing new

There is a reason why we still sing those songs, but don't do those show.

I suspect that this approach to musical theatre writing has more to do with the inability to write for character and story. Which is MUCH harder to do than write some random generic alt-rock song just to fill up time between scene changes.

As for Ebersole. I think she has a lot to do with Grey Gardens popular success. But the show is well written regardless of her.

---

Updated On: 6/20/07 at 07:21 PM

For what it is worth. As I've said before, the problem with Grey Gardens first act is that should be about Big Edie, not little Edie.

The major dramtic want in Act One is given to Little Edie..she wants to marry and leave Grey Gardens.. most of the conflict in act one stems from that.

However....

The problem is that Little Edie is written as a supporting character in act one and Big Edie is written as the main character - but without a main character's over-all dramatic need.

Thing work better in Act Two when the overall dramatic "need" - again, to leave grey gardens - is matched with the central character.

---

Thank you for giving me a right to my own opinion.

I'd be very interested in Duncan Sheik's take on dramatic writing. I may not agree with his theories, but I'm always open to hearing new ideas.

Post a link, please.

---

Updated On: 6/20/07 at 07:46 PM

Spotted an older couple sitting in the 1st row today-- they looked like they were having root canal against their will.

Testing1232: You really should see the show from out front. I think most (but not all) of your criticisms would be alleviate from a regular seat. There's a reason those stage seats are only 30 bucks...I saw it twice on stage first, and loved it, and was shocked how much better it was, even, from a normal seat.

I agree with what PARIS said. Is it maybe POSSIBLE the Tony voters simply thought SA was a better show? Must there be all sorts of other primary motives? Did they really like GG better but felt OBLIGATED to vote for SA for some other reasons? I saw both, and liked both very much, but in several respects I thought SA was the "better" (for lack of a better word) overall.

"Why is this so revolutionary in SPRING AWAKENING?"

Because they have microphones? I don't know, I don't see it being revolutionary either.

A number of songs in "SA" sounded the same to me.

You hit the nail on the head with that statement.

IMO, SA hits you over the head with one sentiment and one sentiment only: TEENAGERS ARE ANGSTY. Song after song after song, and they're all about teenage angst. "Oh, but every character has their own kind of angst! They all deserve a chance to show that off!" Well, that's all fine and dandy, as long as it doesn't get repetitive.

The problem, IMO, with the score is that not enough difference is shown between the varied kinds of angst. We have "straight and sexually repressed" angst, "gay and sexually repressed" angst, "I don't know what sexual repression is because my mommy doesn't tell me anything" angst, "my daddy beats me" angst, "my daddy rapes me" angst, "my daddy threatens to disown me because my grades suck" angst, and the quintessential "I have a crush and I talk to myself pretending he's hanging out with me" angst, which Les Mis did better. If each character/type of angst had been given a specific style, maybe the score would have felt less plodding.

A number of songs in "SA" sounded the same to me.

OK, I'm gonna get flamed royally for this, but I thought most of the songs in GG sounded alike to me. And I really thought there would be more of a difference in style between Acts 1 and 2. That would have made more sense.

SA hits you over the head with one sentiment and one sentiment only: TEENAGERS ARE ANGSTY

I completely disagree (as this pertains to the songs). If you were unfamiliar with the show, you wouldn't think most of these songs are about specific TEENAGE issues. Considering that the book (from the 1890s play) DOES deal with all these angsts, I think the score is pretty good at expanding that to more universal feelings, and not specifically addressing the plot points. And I think there is more variety in the music than most shows. If there's any hitting over the head, that is arguably in the book...but that goes back to the original play.

I think the people who are determined to dislike it are going to remain thus. I've come to terms with it. Spring Awakening is an impressionistic musical full of almost disconnected vignettes, thoughts, feelings, that almost bleed together. I think some people just don't like getting their mind to that place.

So while we're talking about Grey Gardens, I don't think the problem is with the characterization in the first act at all. I think the problem (with the show) is that the first act takes place and is a build up to the drama, the second act takes place after the drama, and we never actually see the drama. It's a static musical. I like it quite a bit but it's also an impressionist musical, just in a more traditional style (much of Grey Garden's score is irrelevant to any sort of plot, but rather evokes ideas and pictures about the characters adding up to an impression and a feeling).

---

...Should I get the picture?

"I think the problem (with the show) is that the first act takes place and is a build up to the drama, the second act takes place after the drama, and we never actually see the drama."

But I think what Grey Gardens does is makes you think "What happened to them, what made them turn out this way?" The show couldn't really show "the drama" because it didn't happen at one moment. Their descent was a gradual thing.

---

i feel no need to even post in this thread, because BigFatBlonde has said pretty much everything I wanted to say :)

i agree that GREY GARDENS was, in my opinion, the better show over SPRING AWAKENING because
1) the score in GARDENS actually focuses around the story, and while still talking about a person's inner feelings, moves the story ahead. also, the music sounds much more diverse, with songs like "Hominy Grits", "The House We Live In", and "Around the World" as just a few examples of how different each song was tune and lyric-wise. SPRING's music sounded much the same, and just didnt move the story forward. I respect its just trying to be an "inner monologue", but it just kind of gets boring, at least for me.
2) I think the book for GARDENS was better. I mean, come on, though the 2nd act may have been based on the documentary, the writers had to pinpoint all sorts of bits of the documentary and turn it into one flowing 2nd act. And they had little to base the 1st act off of, so I can understand a few minor flaws there. For SPRING it was based off of a whole play, and many of the lines in there came across kind of 'cheesy' you might say, or pretty basic.
And I also want to add that Ebersole is not the reason most people love the show. Sure, many people may go to see her, but people leave the theatre thinking about the show more than her, if you get my drift. The show is beautifully written, and theres so much more to it than her 1 performance alone. If not for the other marvelous performances of Wilson and Davie and everyone else- the show wouldn't be all that great, even if it did have Ebersole. And hey, many, but not all, SPRING fans see the show just to see Groff or Gallagher or someone else- not just because they like the show.

And that was much much longer than I expected, but those are my thoughts. Yeah, and I don't mean to criticize anyone- I like both shows, but prefer GREY GARDENS.

---