The Rise and Fall of the Broadway Musical: Is The Fabulous Invalid Beyond Recovery?

[Rob]

Posted: 1/13/05 at 11:30am

https://www.broadwayworld.com/l.cfm?id=57200

[ElTico68]

Posted: 1/13/05 at 12:14pm

Wow... I don't know if to agree or disagree with this article. People will always look back and think of the past as "the Golden Age". Things change... evolve... adjust to changing society. In this day and age of MTV, short attention spans, video games, 160 cable channels, will audiences really be engaged by the more "book driven" musicals and direction? I don't believe so. I, for one, don't enjoy *most* of the "Golden Age" musicals because I find them slow, and the songs trite. Yeah, I've changed my mind about some as I've gotten older, but not so much. For the most part, my favorite musicals are post 1966. (I *would* like to see shows with more substance on B'way... better written and well rounded.)

Also into play is good 'ole capitalism. No one will argue that Stephen Sondheim is one of, if not the, best writer of the 20th century. Yet his shows are not financial successes. For producers on B'way, that's the bottom line. As long as the "rock" shows pack the houses, that's what they're going to produce.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 1/13/05 at 12:41pm

I finished reading this book a couple of weeks ago and while I was bothered by his seeming dismissal of every show written since 1970 and by his constant "they don't make him like they used to" refrain (and the sometimes tortured -- and not always completely accurate -- extremes he goes to to make his points), he really does have an extremely thorough grasp of the last 150 years of musical theatre history and that makes the book well-worth reading. He separately tracks, in stunning detail, the history of the book, the music (including how rhythms, melodies and lyric composition changed and evolved over time), the construction of the orchestra, the various design elements and the influence of technology, the choreography, the orchestrations, the function of the director, and changing face (and voice) of the performer (how the more legit operatic sound eventually gave way to the "belter" sound). It's virtually a text book on the how each element that goes into the making of a musical evolved over the course of more than a century -- and an entertaining one at that.

While many of his conclusions and negative opinions on the merits of most of the shows and individual theatre professionals of the past four decades can be very galling, narrow-minded and, well, outrageous, to say the least (he all but dismisses Kander & Ebb and Gower Champion, and has some fairly controversial things to say about Sondheim), the actual "meat" of the book (without his conclusions) is very valuable. On more than one occasion I wanted to curse his name and toss the book across the room, but I kept reading nevertheless, because he's really done his homework and the book is a real treasure trove of fascinating information, whether you agree with his conclusions or not.

Updated On: 1/13/05 at 12:41 PM

[uncageg]

Posted: 1/13/05 at 12:58pm

I am currnetly in the middle of Ethan Mordden's "The Happiest Corpse I've Ever Seen". Guess I need to get "The Rise and fall..." on my list!

[sipos]

Posted: 1/14/05 at 12:36am

"... But you'd be better off saving your money to see a show. It's healthier and more fun."

Well @#%!*&% said, Michael John LaChiusa.

A view from the top.



https://www.broadwayworld.com/viewcolumn.cfm?colid=1947