The Scottsboro Boys

I heard a number from The Scottsboro Boys on SiriusXM On Broadway today and was wondering what the general thought is on this musical.

I know there was controversy surrounding the musical and it closed pretty quickly. A friend and I went to see it and while she didn't like it (for much the same reason that the critics and other audience members didn't like it), I found myself oddly drawn to it. I thought the music was really good, the performances outstanding, and though an uncomfortable subject, still an important story to tell. Especially in this day and age.

It was truly heartbreaking what happened to those young men and it opened my eyes to a story I knew little about.

I know this was probably discussed back when, but would this show have been more accepted as a straight play rather than a musical. Is that part of what the audiences were saying back when it opened? Or did it go even deeper than that? I wasn't a member of the boards at that time. I could do a search I know, but I was just curious what others thought of it now that we're a few years removed from the shows opening, and closing.

Updated On: 1/18/17 at 01:30 AM

I thought it was brilliant. Loved it, immensely. It might be the only show I've ever been upset about its premature closing.

People were told to be upset that it was a minstrel show....and never shown the light as to WHY they chose that structure.

Twas a pity to be sure. My favorite show of the season.

I hear you, but I'm not sure I agree wholly. This is a show that should have brought in African American audiences in DROVES as did the original TCP. I'm not sure why it didn't.



I was disappointed that the producers backed out so quickly.

I thought it was easily the best show of the season, but it was about something real and ugly, and it was about race. A Broadway musical is only going to succeed if it appeals to the yahoos from the hinterlands (which includes New Jersey and Connecticut), and the yahoos won't go to an ugly musical about race; if you make race issues cute, like in Hairspray, or simpleminded, like in Memphis, they'll accept it, but not otherwise.

kdogg36 said: "I'm not 100% sure but I think Scottsboro Boys may have received the most nominations in Tony history without getting a win."

It did, even beating the previous record held by two other Kander & Ebb shows, Chicago and Steel Pier.

Being away during the whole run is a regret I have never gotten over.

I'm with those who loved the show and who think the controversy/problematic marketing hurt it immensely. I suspect plenty of people were intimidated or put off by by the (ill-informed) picketers.

I liked the score, but it felt not confrontational enough for me. Shocking satire doesn't really juxtapose well with genuine emotionality. Pick one. Yes, it's Broadway and you have to appease your audience somewhat, but coming post-Wooster Group Emperor Jones, I couldn't help but feel it was all bark and no bite.

Fantastic dancing though.

BakerWilliams said: "I liked the score, but it felt not confrontational enough for me. Shocking satire doesn't really juxtapose well with genuine emotionality. Pick one. Yes, it's Broadway and you have to appease your audience somewhat, but coming post-Wooster Group Emperor Jones, I couldn't help but feel it was all bark and no bite.

Fantastic dancing though.



"

At last a kindred spirit! I agree the score is gorgeous and the tour staging was quite engaging. But, as I posted in the thread at the time, I thought it was the political protest equivalent of a Hallmark card, or put another way, a case of picking low-hanging fruit.

Of course, false accusations are wrong, perjury in court is especially reprehensible.

Of course, the justice system was slanted against African Americans in the 1930s, especially in the Deep South.

Of course, the justice system everywhere is too often a victim of the politics of the moment.

All set safely in the past so those who wanted to think racism is a problem solved were allowed to do so.

Marketing issues are one thing, but in terms of the actual show, the problem wasn't that it was too controversial, but that it wasn't controversial enough. (And people need to read a history book before they organize a protest. Minstrelsy was originally an AA form of theater; it was later taken up by whites in blackface. It was a key contributor to what we now call "American" musical theater.)

Updated On: 1/18/17 at 04:40 PM

Saw this in LA during the mini-tour and it was one of my top five theatre experiences. It's also the show that made me a Joshua Henry fan for life.

I was glad to be able to see him in Shuffle Along too. Great performer. He was outstanding in The Scottsboro Boys. I really did like this musical a lot. It was a very important story to tell. In whatever format.

I don't believe either the script or score of SCOTTSBORO BOYS contains the kind of pointed implication of the audience's collective guilt that you're speaking of. The show is plenty strong enough and its moral center perfectly clear without any overt finger-pointing.

newintown said: ""Minstrelsy was originally an AA form of theater; it was later taken up by whites in blackface."

I confess that I have never heard that statement before - do you have any kind of legitimate footnote for it? Everything I have ever read (or can find at this moment) states that minstrel shows had their origin in blackface characters (that is, white men in blackface) from theatrical pieces as early as the late 1700s.



"

The problem, newintown, is that minstrel shows have become so stigmatized by our outrage at the use of blackface that we think of the two as synonymous. It's hard to find internet sources that don't begin with the issue of "When did when white men starting corking their faces?" In fact and though the practice became universal (even black men wore artificial "blackface" by the late 1840s, there was a lot to minstrelsy other than make-up.

See this site for example:

https://chnm.gmu.edu/courses/jackson/minstrel/minstrel.html



"The Minstrel Show presents us with a strange, fascinating and awful phenomenon.... But in the US they began in the 1830s, with working class white men dressing up as plantation slaves. These men imitated black musical and dance forms, combining savage parody of black Americans with genuine fondness for African American cultural forms...."

(Emphasis added.) As I'm sure you noticed, there's no way white men corked their faces and imitated AA forms of song and dance UNLESS those AA forms predated blackface.

In serious academic sources (dissertations, etc.), you'll find young academics reclaiming the contribution of early African American minstrels to the history of our national song and dance. Yes, later white parodies were appalling; but they in no way detract from the performances they were imitating.

I.e., "blackface minstrelsy" may have begun with white performers in the 1830s or early 1840s, but it wasn't blackface that gave us the American musical. It was, in large part, the song and dance that began earlier with African American minstrel performers.

The following site shows an ad for the Virginia Minstrels in 1843, often called the first true example of "blackface minstrelsy". You'll notice that though the performers were white with corked faces, the material they perform is billed as "THE CELEBRATED NEGRO MELODIES". I'm in no way excusing the use of blackface by white actors, but I think the contribution of AA music and song is the greater legacy.

http://www.allday.com/the-history-and-legacy-of-minstrel-shows-2180790936.html

Updated On: 1/22/17 at 08:57 PM