Was Audra's 1998 Tony win unexpected? — Page 2

AC, how interesting that you mention Donna Murphy. I swear I remember Donna leaving the revival of The King and I to participate in Ragtime. When Marin Mazzie was announced as Mother, I was a bit confused.

I also had the advantage of seeing the original production for the first time from the 2nd row. That seat made all the difference in the world, as I saw it my 2nd time from the mezzanine and felt a bit disconnected from the proceedings on stage.

---

How was Marcia Mitzman as Mother? I've tried looking for "archival footage" of her performance, but have always been unable to find it. I saw her light years ago in Tommy and loved her voice. I imagine she'd be a good Mother.

Speaking of Mothers, I was never enamored with Marin Mazzie's take on the role. Yes, she belted Back to Before for all it was worth, but there was a coldness to her portrayal. Her Mother didn't come across as warm at all. I found her replacement, Donna Bullock, much better suited to the role (and ultimately, thought Christianne Noll in the revival was the best of all).

I enjoyed Audra as Sarah a great deal, too. I wasn't upset she won the Tony, but I felt she was almost too regal to play that role. It needed someone who could play "earthy" better. LaChanze was out the night I saw it when she was in the company (and her understudy, Tonya Dixon, was dreadful). Darlesia Cearcy, who I later saw, sang well, but her acting was boring. Stephanie Umoh made no impression on me in the revival. Call me crazy, but after seeing her in The Color Purple, I bet Fantasia would make an outstanding Sarah.

"How was Marcia Mitzman as Mother?"

I have to say that Marcia was a bit cold in the role too, but her voice was warm and deep. Marin is a belty soprano with a wonderful low range, but it's not the same as having a mezzo in the role. Marcia's comfortable notes were all in her lower register, and her belt was terrific ... until she got to the highest notes (at the end of Back to Before, etc.). She couldn't sustain it without using her head voice occasionally. It didn't sound bad at all, but it was a bit of a letdown after hearing Marin on the Toronto recording. I saw Marin after Marcia, though. And toward the end of the L.A. run (which I saw four times), the notes at the end of Back to Before had been altered. She didn't go up on the last "Back." She repeated the previous note instead, since that wasn't out of her belt range.

As far as acting, they both brought an aloofness (or otherworldliness) to the role, which I found wonderful. It made the initial contrast of Mother's superficial demeanor and her actions all the more surprising. You don't expect her to take Sarah and the baby in. It comes as a shock. I might have felt that more from Marcia, even. Then as the story progresses, she begins to show her emotions more openly. I think Marcia played her more "composed" at first, where Marin was more obvious with her feelings.

I would rate them almost equally as "Mothers." But I'll give the edge to Marin, because she sang it better overall (and I'm admittedly biased where Marin is concerned). Still, Marcia's belt voice was great. She has a bit more "rock and roll" in her tone (i.e., Tommy), and even though she sang Mother legit, there was a "color" every now and then that took it in a different direction. I liked it. But she just couldn't hit or sustain the high notes like Marin.



Marcia Mitzman Gaven and John Dossett in the American Premiere of "Ragtime."

---

Updated On: 8/16/11 at 02:50 PM

I am partial to Noll's interpretation, too. I saw Marin on Broadway and Donna Bullock's understudy, about whom I remember nothing (not even her name) she was so bland. I've also heard Julia Murney and her vocal performance--both singing and acting--is superb. I'd love to see her in a full production.

Did anyone here see Rachel York's Mother at Paper Mill?

---

I had the privilege of seeing both the original and replacement casts for the original Ragtime. My memory is a little fuzzy about both unfortunately, however, I do remember the original cast being far superior to the replacement cast. I felt this excitement and buzz with the OBC, and then when I saw the replacements, it seemed tired and not as exciting. Maybe I was just so used to listening to the cast recording that I had trouble hearing (or seeing) anyone else play these roles.

I do remember Donna Bullock being the strongest one of the replacements.

---

That was the magic of Audra's performance: She took secondary character and made her, essentially, the character that everybody was talking about. And it really felt like a discovery to everyone who saw it.

---

For me, the the problem in the second act is toward the end. It's just WAY too "power ballad" heavy.

My solution would be to cut "Make Them Hear You." It's out of step for Coalhouse to sing anything at that point. He has been the heart and soul of the music until then, but right then is where it all comes to a halt. His time runs out. It's as bad as having Maria sing at the end of West Side Story. They wisely decided to make that a dialog-only scene. And they should have done the same in Ragtime. If you doubt it, watch the Milos Forman movie again. Those final moments in the library are MUCH more powerful than the same moments in the musical. Particularly when Booker T. comes to visit Coalhouse. He asks him to forgive and move on, and Coalhouse can't do it. He's too filled with rage. And Booker T. looks at him and says, "Then, my son, you are damned." If they could only put that moment into the musical, and then have the rest of this scene play without music until he is gunned down on the steps, it would take things to a whole new level. Then bring the music (and reprises) back in after he's gone to finish out the show.

But to have "Back to Before" followed by "Make Them Hear You," it lessens the overall impact, because it's one too many heartfelt "anthems." It's like ending a very rich, satisfying meal with two desserts. You may like them at the time, but in the end (no pun intended) you'll feel the weight of it.

---

Updated On: 8/16/11 at 04:55 PM

I don't think Coalhouse needs a big musical number in Act II. His dramatic arch is the climax to the entire show. It's like saying Paul needs a big song to go with his 12-minute monologue in A Chorus Line, or Maria needs something weighty to sing after Tony dies.

Ragtime needs to be balanced with impact, not with music or musical numbers. The Wheels of a Dream is when the music soars for Coalhouse (and Sarah). Neither Mother nor Tateh have a moment like that in Act One. In Act Two, they both have numbers (and they find their way as characters, too), and Coalhouse's music should stop completely for that library scene.

For me it would be symbolic as well as literal that "the music has run out" for him. He's the one who introduces this strange New Music to the white family, and at his big moment in the second act ... he has no music. It would be so much more powerful. Just play the scene as if it were in a play. No underscoring, no songs. (Add that powerful exchange of dialogue with Booker T. Washington.) Let it feel claustrophobic at that point. Then he ultimately leaves the library and we see/hear him get gunned down. Then bring the music back in and finish the show.

---

Updated On: 8/16/11 at 05:20 PM

No, it's a typo. I've done it before, too. I'm always messing up you're and your when I go too fast, too.

(At least I get "too" right.)

I understand the metaphorical impact of having "lost his (singing) voice" and that's fine for the last scene, but not for most of the second act.

Oh, I agree! I wouldn't cut anything but Make Them Hear You. All of his other singing in Act II is fine. He's full of rage and emotion, and musicalizing it is fine and very effective.

And I think if the show wasn't structured the way it is, Make Them Hear You, could work. And I have nothing against the song as a stand-alone ballad. But in the context of the show, it's "one too many," and it's not needed. He has lost his hope, his voice, and his rage. He is numb. He sends the other men out into the world, telling them to keep his story alive ... but for him, the story is over. And he knows it, as he leaves the library with his hands raised over his head.

---

Updated On: 8/16/11 at 05:54 PM

I know we've totally threadjacked here, but ... one more comment!

I suspect the show wants us to believe that Colehouse is more than just defeated, that his act of defiance lives on and influences later civil rights resistance movements. (Metaphorically, of course; Ragtime isn't a history book.)

And it's there already. I hate to go back to WSS again, but we get a glimmer of hope that things can change when the Sharks help carry Tony's dead body out of the playground at the end. To do anything more there, such as a "Next"-type number, or something "positive and hopeful," negates the power of the murder we've just seen.

In Ragtime, our glimmer comes at the end, when we see the new family formed out of love and respect for each other. We have the immigrant Jewish father and daughter, the white Anglo mother and son, and the African American Coalhouse III. A true melting-pot family, formed out of the hatred that killed Coalhouse Walker Jr. and Sarah, but transcended to form a family unit for the future. I remember when that little kid ran across the stage into Mother's arms the first time I saw it, I totally lost it. Cried like a baby. So the ending is there already, and we (IMO) don't need a "Next"-type number to hammer this point home.

---

It's been 10 years and I'd forgotten that last tableau. Shame on me: as a gay man with stepchildren and grandchildren, I am all about "constructed" families!

I was almost as moved as you by that moment (I admit a little voice in my head was saying, "Not in that time period. No way."). You are right: that new family is Colehouse's legacy.

Musicaldudepeter---glad you enjoyed the threadjack.

As for your questions, it remains to be seen how successful the new Porgy & Bess will be. I"m sure with all this talent involved, it will be given careful consideration.

And I would find it hard to believe that even if some of these creative decisions prove to fail that Audra would turn in a lousy performance. She'll be a wonderful Bess, even if the rest is a mess. I would expect the same from Norm Lewis. Of course, aside from the creative brouhaha, a big question will be "do they have any chemistry?" That also remains to be seen and could affect their success in the roles.

---