Someone Should Drop A House On Him

[A Director]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 2:04am

I just finished reading MAINLY ON DIRECTING by Arthur Laurents. What a vile book and author. A more fitting title would be MAINLY ON GETTING EVEN or FOR ME! Laurents is becoming Rose, but with none of her charm.

There is no sense of reflection. He writes, "Wholesale did very well for me." On the other hand, he gives the impression, he was the best thing about the show. Nick & Nora" never had a chance because Joanna Gleason and Barry Bostwick weren't William Powell and Myrna Loy. Could it be the show didn't have a chance because of the rotten book and direction by Arthur Laurents? In my opinion, the major problem with Anyone Can Whistle is the messy, unfocused book.

The book could have used a good editor. Laurents never defines 'In The Bones." There are times in the chapter on Gypsy when it isn't clear if he is talking about the production when it was done at City Center or when it was done on Broadway. I have no idea why is use Patti's last name so often.

I found it interesting his habit of praising someone and then managing to get in a little dig. This happen a lot when talking about Angela Lansbury and Tyne Daly. Did he really mean to turn on Martin Pakeldinaz in print? Did he really mean to put down Jerry Mitchell several times in the book? Now, that I think of it, YES! to both questions.

There seems to be a hint of glee in his tone when mentioning someone died of AIDS. Is it some badge of honor that Tom Hatcher did not?

There are two major mistakes that jumped out at me. Laurents implies/suggests the idea of the boys pulling mics out of their coat in Spring Awakening originated with Bill T. Jones. No, it originated with Michael Meyers. He calls In The Heights a musical about Puerto Ricans.

His discussions of Gypsy and West Side Story are too much. Boy, does he piss on the contributions of his co-creators. He creates the impression that with the original productions, he was just along for the ride, but with his recent productions, he saved both shows. He comments that some of the characters in Gypsy are stick figures. As the book writer, isn't he responsible for this? In the Gypsy chapter he gives the impression he is the only director who does table work.

There are many jaw dropping sections in the book. One the leaps off the pages is on page 144. "Obviously, the actors have to ask: why is my character doing this? What about asking, Why am I singing? Why am I dancing? Those questions are for the director even if the authors have or think they have answered it. With West Side Story, however, those questions were never asked -- not by the director, not by the cast, not by the audience, not by the critics. not by anyone, because we never asked them." Really! So Bernstein and Sondheim threw in songs wherever they felt like? Did Robbins do the same? If so, why didn't the show flop in 1957? It is clear Laurents, in the current production of West Side Story, attempts to erase Robbins from the show. Why is Laurents still fighting a dead man?

The dig at Harold Clurman is over the top. ". . .Clurman was grateful to direct the road company of a play like A Streetcar Named Desire which has originally been directed by Kazan." Gee, Arthur, let's dismiss all the plays Clurman directed before and after Streetcar!

When it comes down to it, Laurents is third rate playwright. His plays are seldom produced. He is lucky to have worked on Gypsy and West Side Story. I left with an image. Laurents is standing in a spotlight on a dark stage. Suddenly the names Robbins, Bernstein, Sondheim and Styne appear in lights. Laurents starts to yell, "This time for me." His spot goes out; the names in lights remain.

[ljay889]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 2:09am

Omg. Why did you bother reading it? You devote so much to hating this man. You probably don't even have a reason to like PalJoey does.

[nomdeplume]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 2:31am

There are some posters on here who post nothing but bile; by all means send them under the house if you're dropping one.

[A Director]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 3:13am

ljay - I read it because I was curious. I have never meet Laurents and don't care to. My dislike of him is based on what I read in this book. Things might be different if there was a little self-reflection in the book, but that would be asking or expecting too much from Laurents. Have you read the book? If so, what are you thoughts?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 9:25am

I don't hate Arthur. The way I speak about him is the way people speak when they know him and love him.

He's a vampire who lives off the blood and talent of his friends and collaborators.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 9:32am

That genius who writes BWW's CD/DVD/Book "Roundups" loved it, so I'll probably hate it.

Yeah Laurents is a jerk. Not new news. But I'm not going to read his book just to confirm what I already know.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 10:37am

How bad can a guy be who Pal Joey hates so much?

[A Director]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 8:37pm

PalJoey - Are you Renfield to his Dracula?

[Pgenre]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 8:44pm

Love him or hate him, LA CAGE had some of the best direction of any musical since the Golden Age. Easily in the Top 10, if not in the top 3 or 4. "La Cage Aux Folles", "A Little More Mascara" and the opening and closing sequences are some of the very best moments in Broadway history in the last 50 years, and this comes from someone who does NOT like the score or book all that much at all (though Arthur had nothing to do with either, credits-wise, though the structure is all Arthur).

Plus, WICKED was his idea, so there's always that.

P

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 8:55pm

I'm just glad he invented Christmas, the cure for polio, and Post-It notes.

He's my hero.

[Patti LuPone FANatic]

Posted: 1/2/10 at 9:47pm

A Director is entitled to his opinion. from RC in Austin, Texas