The Perfect Musical?- Page 4

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 7:05pm

I believe that if there were objective measures across all of the elemental categories that are combined to create the American musical and the numbers were crunched, sorted and interpreted objectively, the end result would look very much like PalJoey's list. Oh, and I'm not even being hyperbolic.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 7:09pm

CC/FN - as a man of academia, what would you use to deem a musical as "perfect"?

[TBFL]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 7:10pm

Kiss of The Spiderwoman Once they cut 'Morphine Tango; would be a perfect show for me. I saw it openiongnight in London and numerous times after that. its the only cd i have got signed by the 3 leads

[a-mad]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 7:45pm

3. West Side Story
2. Fiddler on the Roof
1. Ragtime

[theatregeek6]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 8:17pm

For structure alone I go with A Little Night Music. I also love the flow of Ragtime as well as the music and lyrics

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 8:42pm

Musicals, as a whole, are works of art and art is completely subjective.

Headband, you are simply wrong, no matter how many times you say it. Reread Aristotle's POETICS for an objective standard for Greek tragedy.

That's not to say you and I may not have a subjective preference for an objectively inferior work. Personally, I'm more interested in the conflict of ANTIGONE (and even Aristotle admits it produces the strongest emotion from spectators), but Aristotle is right that OEDIPUS is the most nearly perfect unrolling of action and plot.

Similarly, I've never cared much for the subject matter, emphasis on dance or sentimental ballads of WEST SIDE STORY. THOSE ARE ALL my subjective complaints, however, and have no place in PJ's objective Top Ten.

Updated On: 6/24/14 at 08:42 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 8:48pm

I share the appreciation of the scores for GUYS AND DOLLS and KISS ME, KATE, but objectively speaking, I don't see how either can be placed ahead of the structural perfection of OKLAHOMA! The latter is actually about something, folks, beyond a collection of romantic/gender stereotypes.

I'm also surprised to see the high critical estimation afforded RAGTIME, even though it's my favorite show of the past 20 years. Every production is ultimately defeated by the fact that the funeral MUST be the Act I curtain, yet makes everything in Act II seem anti-climactic.

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:02pm

I believe that there are five perfect musicals, with a couple that are close.

In my opinion, the "perfect" musical is defined by the following categories: every moment, whether sung, acted, or danced, MUST move the story forward in an actionable way. In addition, it is entertaining, and if well cast, is pretty near impossible to mess up as the material can carry itself...you could do them on a bare stage with a piano and a good cast and the material would still stand.

In my opinion, there are only five musicals that do that to a "t":
OKLAHOMA!
GYPSY
GUYS AND DOLLS
FIDDLER ON THE ROOF
WEST SIDE STORY

Musicals that are close, but don't QUITE hit that mark, include:
MY FAIR LADY
SHE LOVES ME
CAROUSEL
SOUTH PACIFIC
pretty much any major Sondheim piece
and honestly there are a lot of great musicals that come close...but those come to mind for me

Now, I have a lot of "favorite" musicals that don't fit these categories at all. I think that a "perfect" musical does exist...whether on not you LIKE said musical is up to you.

EDIT: I digress. A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC is deserving of a spot in the "perfect five", now a perfect six.
Updated On: 6/24/14 at 09:02 PM

[jnb9872]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:07pm

Gav, not that I disagree with you about OKLAHOMA! belonging high in this conversation, but it being about something isn't automatically a tiebreaker. GUYS AND DOLLS, to me, is a perfect musical comedy. And being about something, while something I admire and treasure deeply, doesn't mean it's any more or less perfect than exquisite fluff.

[inlovewithjerryherman]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:11pm

I agree with jnb9872's sentiments. True, being "about something" (which it certainly is, I think it's a momentous work of art with a terrible reputation) does make OKLAHOMA! better and more palatable of a show overall, but what makes OKLAHOMA! perfect is that it defined a formula - it is meticulously constructed so that every moment not only informs the plot but moves it forward. Every dance move, every word, every note.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:15pm

Musical:
Hello Dolly
My Fair Lady
Most Happy Fella
Gypsy

Plays:
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf
You Can't Take It With You
The Importance of Being Earnest
Streetcar Named Desire

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:16pm

I'll add my vote to the aforementioned Gypsy and A Chorus Line. I'll also add Hedwig and the Angry Inch (it's one of the few musicals I love that I personally feel doesn't have a single song that's a clunker).

I'm glad Liza's Handbag taught us about the concepts of objectivity and subjectivity in this thread. There's never been a thread before that didn't deal in empiricals, and no one would have ever been able to get through this thread without him!

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:16pm

jnb, I might agree about GUYS AND DOLLS if the plot's resolution (at least with regard to Adelaide and Nathan) made any sense to me. Her "problem" for 14 years has been that she can't get Nathan to Niagara, as she explains in one of the greatest musical comedy songs ever written. How, exactly, does "marry the man today and change his ways tomorrow" solve her problem? I think a show that ends simply because 2.5 hours have passed is badly flawed.

Stepping back for a moment, I will argue that LI'L ABNER is smarter, fresher and more stylistically consistent than KISS ME, KATE. IMO, KMK endures in part because it is about so little that every era can empty their heads and appreciate it anew (see, also, ANYTHING GOES).

And I'll risk being repetitious by saying that, in its political satire, LI'L ABNER has more substance than GUYS AND DOLLS (which is a key criterion to me, even in a light comedy). The fact that the Cold War ended is not Norman Panama and Melvin Frank's fault.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:22pm

Headband, I got interrupted, but I want to readily concede that the existence of objective standards doesn't mean every critic uses the same standard or even that any two critics must agree.

inlovewithjerryherman lists his objective standards very clearly a few posts above, as have many others in this thread (and some are admittedly hard to quantify--"entertaining"--but not impossible). Sondheim claims he cares most about form following content. Brecht wants theater to promote critical thinking; OKLAHOMA! wouldn't make his list at all because Brecht would find the show's famous cohesion a fault rather than a virtue. Etc. and so forth.

But that doesn't make all artistic criteria subjective. It just means that in attempting to have an objective discussion, we have to state our criteria clearly and keep a sharp eye out for creeping subjectivism.

Updated On: 6/24/14 at 09:22 PM

[jnb9872]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:27pm

I remember that objection to GUYS AND DOLLS' ending, you've written it before, Gav. And to the extent that a superior production of "Marry the Man Today" delights me, I honestly don't care by that point. But I see your point, of course.

The subjectivity conversation also interests me, and I think the wisest measure to consider is simply what each show sets out to be. Roger Ebert was particularly genius with articulating this idea, saying that a movie isn't simply what it's about but how it's about it. So how successful is a show in conveying the ideas/story/jokes/emotions it intends to convey? If it's damn near 100%, it's in this conversation.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:41pm

Another great post, jnb. I know I'm repeating myself in places, but I actually like G&D and can't come up with a new argument against it every time we talk about it.

This is NOT a problem with the show to me, but am I confused or does Sky take Miss Adelaide to Havana and back in less than 18 hours? (It always seems like just overnight to me.) That's a trip of over 2,600 miles in the days before commercial jet travel. AND they stop to sing a duet while they are out of the country!

(I found one site that shows a TWA ad offering Phoenix/Chicago (roughly equivalent r.t.) in 12 hours, but that's five years later and may reflect the arrival of jets.)

Again, not a central factor in the action, so I'd don't care. I just always end up calculating air miles while they sing "If I Were a Bell".

Updated On: 6/24/14 at 09:41 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 9:47pm

Back on topic: JNB, you've hit on the objective measure I do my best to invoke. How best does a show achieve what *IT* wants to accomplish? That pushes shows like FOLLIES--and even PASSION--waaaaaaaay up the list.

But of course there are shows where I don't like the show's own goal, and that becomes a subjective issue (SUNDAY IN THE PARK).

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:16pm

CC/FN - as a man of academia, what would you use to deem a musical as "perfect"?

What am I meant to do now, accessory? Just engage in a public online conversation with you now? After everything?

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:17pm

In my opinion, I'm just not sure any piece of art can ever be deemed "perfect" because one could probably be able to find flaws in any theatrical piece. Including, yes, the beloved classics and more revered works. No piece will ever be "perfect."

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:30pm

With respect, Headband, I think you misstate the question.

It is NOT whether there is a work of art that every human being in every culture will admire equally? (You're right: they lied when they told us "music is the universal language". All art is based on conventions, "rules" which vary widely from culture to culture, place to place and, even, person to person.)

It IS, according to a given set of standards, does a particular work meet all the criteria?

That was the point of the dada "found object". According to one set of conventions, a urinal is a perfect work of art.


Updated On: 6/24/14 at 10:30 PM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:33pm

But what is the criteria and who is determining said criteria? That's my question.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:40pm

What *are* the criteria?

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:44pm

I would imagine the criteria are what they are for every other post in every other thread on this board: the personal opinion of the poster.

At least, I've never thought otherwise when reading the boards, unless we're talking about verifiable facts and events, mostly on the off-topic board. And even then . . .

Updated On: 6/24/14 at 10:44 PM

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:52pm

Headband, if you read the posts just on this page you will find that most of us have been openly defining our criteria as we go. And that's the way it should be.

Nobody is calling for a Ministry of Culture to dictate universal rules for the Broadway musical. On the other hand, if we all just shrug and say "everything is subjective", then it's all just random typing. Because I have no way of comparing your opinion with Regi's or mine.

Thanks in no small degree to you, at least in this thread we can see that several different systems of objective criticism are being employed.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 6/24/14 at 10:58pm

Why do you keep calling Namo "CC/FN"? I imagine "FN" is Finding Namo (duh!) but WTF is CC?

"Credit card?" A measurement? CC Ryder?