Yes, there is always that side to the argument.
But everyone knows that Rodgers and Hammerstein are some of the greatest musical composers / lyricists to have ever lived: and their shows ran for (like) two years, at the most, each. And that was that. They moved on...
But Les Miserables has been around for twenty years, that's most of my life, not to mention Cats and The Phantom of the Opera and everything else Lloyd Webber and Mackintosh cooked up to take over the world and stop the competition thriving (then to have them whingeing in the 90s about no one producing new theatre: they've got no one else to blame butthemselves. Whowants to produce a new musical these days when it's all about excessive production values, millionaire budgets, (in 20 years they'll probably be as big as Hollywood), and only a few 'independents' to have emerged: and all of them stunning, but under-rated.
It's sad. While those shows deserve all the success they get, we know about them. We all love them. Stop beating them for the umpteen time. Let the children come in and shw that they've got what it takes, like bac in the old days, and let it be as big as the mentors that inspired them to do this in the first place
I do understand and appreciate your argument, I really do, but me and my friends feel passionate with our opposition. There's a lot of talent out there that's not being heard: and the idea that Wicked and etc. are being brought over, and that one horrendous musical tells everyone that we're not worth the time doing our own stuff, you really start to worry. But there is talent and they need their chance
Who can explain it, who can tell you why?
Fools give you reasons, wise men never try
-South Pacific