The Wild Party

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:14pm

I cannot for the life of me figure out what the Juggernaut is. I have done tons of research on it and I cannot figure out what kind of dance it is or how I should interpret it. Any help?


Also, does anyone have any pictures online of any other productions of the Lippa version?
Updated On: 8/15/05 at 01:14 PM

[HouGuy77002]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:36pm

Its an excuse to have a dance number in the show.

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:44pm

Well, okay, but can anyone give me more information than that?

[Aigoo]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:48pm

pictures:

http://images.google.com/images?q=lippa%20wild%20party&hl=en&hs=L22&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N&tab=wi

http://community.webshots.com/album/303797320UFTquN

And the Juggernaut happens to be the "latest dance craze" at the time. And yes, an excuse to have a dance number.

Updated On: 8/15/05 at 01:48 PM

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:53pm

So I can basically choreograph it however I want?
Thank you for the pictures.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 1:59pm

Yeah, it's not an actual, period dance.

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 2:18pm

One other question:
Jackie--he is a tongueless dancer who has this dance at the end of the show. What is that dance supposed to be about? I have heard varied responses on this. It is really his only chance to shine as a character on his own so I was just curious.

Thanks

[Yankeeboy]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:03pm

The meaning behind Jackie's dance depends almost entirely on the director's vision. As a mute, it is ironic that he is also a dancer - he MUST express himself through his body, he has no choice. In the original poem and in LaChuisa's Wild Party (where Jackie is not mute), Jackie is portrayed as dangerously indulgent, not being able to say no to anything - drugs, liquor, sex, whatever. Lippa's Wild Party glosses over the idea of Jackie getting with one of the D'Armano brothers and inciting a fight between the two of them. In the Lippa' version, which concentrates more on the Queenie/Burrs/Kate/Black plotline with the guests of the party making up a sort of singular organic character, Jackie's dance comes after the "Come With Me" orgy. Depending on the vision of the director, choreographer, and actor, his dance can be an expression of yearning for escape from this world of parties, dramatic realization of his dangerously fatalistic lifestyle, or any other number of possibilities.

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:20pm

That was a really helpful answer, thank you!
If you have any other insight on the rest of the show please let me know.

[Yankeeboy]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 5:28pm

Well what do you want to know?

[serifhue]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 8:13pm

Hey, I have questions on this too.

What exactly is Black's motivation for being there? Is he just mooching off of Kate? He just seems really quick to move on to the next girl. Is he then taking advantage of Queenie too?

Same goes for Kate. Clearly she wants Burrs and is there to cause turmoil as well. Then why does she point out where Black and Queenie are at the end? Why let Burrs go away from her when he is sleeping next to her?

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 8/15/05 at 11:40pm

Some of these questions are major issues I had with the Lippa version. Any speculations?

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 9:06am

All these things are true. However, I feel as though the Lippa version handles the ending conflict far better.

But lets not let this thread get dragged into a broadway version vs off broadway version fight.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 11:28am

Which ending conflict? and how?

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 11:38am

I think LaChiusa's version handles everything better.

[Yankeeboy]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 11:54am

From the poem to the two musicals, the Wild Party exists as a sort of adult comic book. There's even a newly released edition of the poem that is illustrated by famed graphic novelist Art Spiegelman. It's a sort of Brechtian style show where characters and plot are blown up to larger-than-life proportions. The original poem doesn't cover all the motivations and character backgrounds, so either we have to embrace the mystery of these unexplained things, or the director and actors must provide a worthy explanation, whether it's made clear to the audience or not. The most profound difference between the two musicals is that the Lippa one chooses to focus much more on the quartet's tragic story while the LaChuisa version gives us a cross section of all the characters at this one party. The LaChuisa version follows the poem a bit more, and personally, I find it a bit more interesting dramatically, but that is not to say the Lippa version is defunct. They're just two very fundamentally different interpretations.

[mamey345]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 4:15pm

I think you totally right. It is too bad that they will be endlessly compared....

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 5:11pm

I don't think it's too bad at all. I mean even if they were years apart, they'd always be compared. They're virtually the same musical interpreted different ways. Generally there are the same characters with the same title. It's like a famous actress doing a role of another famous actress. Or a revival being compared to the original. I personally find it interesting to find the similarities and differences between the pieces.

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 5:28pm

Both the Broadway and Off-Broadway version ran at pretty much the same time. Neither is completely true to the poem by Joseph Mancure March. I actually put together a reading of a version that I wrote where all dialogue was directly from the poem that used songs from both productions and songs from the era as well. It worked wonderfully but of course could never come to full fruition due to the rights that are involved.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 5:31pm

I try to like the Lippa version but I can't get past the electric guitars.

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 5:33pm

I personally don't care for the Lippa version at all. I like the secular characters songs but I don't care for Queenie, Kate, Black or Burrs' songs at all.

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 5:46pm

The songs work when you don't put them in that time period or in that story. They are fine songs, but don't really fit the mood of the piece the way LaChiusa's do.

[WonderBoy]

Posted: 8/16/05 at 6:08pm

Agreed wholeheartedly.