Which version of AGYG at City Center?

[darpierce]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 1:17pm

Anyone know what version this concert is using? The original or reboot? Can't wait to see it!!

[yfs]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 5:30pm

It's the NY State Theatre version from 1968. 

 

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 6:11pm

How does that version differ from the original?

[yfs]

Posted: 10/22/15 at 10:47pm

It eliminates the subplot couple and "An Old Fashioned Wedding" was written for the 1968 version. 

[AHLiebross]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 1:42am

I hope they're leaving out the song, "I'm an Indian, too." I'm assuming they're keeping the advice to lose the contest so she gets her man.

Annie Get Your Gun, to me, hasn't aged well, because of these issues.

[bk]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 3:22am

Annie Get Your Gun has aged just fine - it is you who hasn't aged well (if you've aged - I have no idea how old you are) - if audiences cannot understand context then they shouldn't go to the theater.  They should not cut I'm an Indian, Too - it's part of the show and in the context of a) when the show was written and, more importantly, b) when it takes place, there is nothing wrong with the number nor is there anything wrong with anything in the show.  Sorry, context is everything and audiences just need to understand that.  We are different today, yes, but Annie Get Your Gun does not take place today.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 8:54am

Great post bk

[Huss417]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 9:06am

Maybe someone can correct me but I dont believe the song I'm an Indian too was in the One Night Only Concert version with LuPone or in the Broadway revival with Peters.

[GilmoreGirlO2]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 10:57am

Sorry, context is everything and audiences just need to understand that.  We are different today, yes, but Annie Get Your Gun does not take place today.

 

True, but a production DOES need to take into consideration how a modern audience will react to the show and if that will have an effect on what that director is hoping the audience will get out of the show. You can’t just say the audience SHOULD understand and leave it at that. A director (and the entire production team and cast) has to consider how certain things might come across to its current audience, even with the knowledge that a show takes place in the past, another country, a different culture, etc.  This doesn’t mean an audience should be shielded from anything offensive or different or what have you, but a production does, at least, need to understand how certain elements will be received by its audience and then decide from there whether that reaction will distract from or aid in the director/production’s actual intention.

 

This doesn’t mean that whatever is in discussion should absolutely be cut or changed, but perhaps it’s a matter of the production making a clear commentary on what is happening or something to that effect. But, to just dismiss the consideration that audiences might react a certain way simply because you don’t believe an audience should is to do a disservice to telling the story or sharing the experience that particular production wants to. If a director decides they WANT their audiences to find that offensive, then that’s fine, but there must be thought paid to it -- what is the point of wanting to tell/share a story with an audience if no thought is paid to how things may actually come off to that particular audience? If something distracts from what a director/production hopes its audience gets from the show, then is it worth ignoring the possible reactions simply because you don’t believe the audience SHOULD react in a certain way?

 

I remember reading an interview with Kelli O’Hara regarding some of the elements of “The King and I” that could possibly be considered offensive to today’s audience how she said how Sher knew certain things must be treaded carefully how it would be come off to a modern audience, even if the original intention when the show was written was not to offend.

[Brick]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 11:28am

Defending racist material as "of its time" is simply unacceptable. If it truly is of its time, then it can stay there.

I absolutely think the deciding factor is the intent of the piece. In HUCK FINN, the use of the n word is rampant, but it's a book about the horror's of racism and slavery in the South. If it's doing Othello in blackface, nope.

I bet that number is out. I can' imagine them attempting to make a case for something as offensive and unnecessary as that number.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 12:24pm

Annie Get Your Gun has aged just fine - it is you who hasn't aged well

Says the grumpy old coot shaking his fist at a cloud.

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 10/23/15 at 12:46pm

Could someone explain the context of this number anyway? I've never seen the show or movie, but from reading synopses it says she's adopted as a member of the Sioux tribe??? Is this a historical fact?? If not why on Earth would it be a plot point.

[beaemma]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 12:35am

It's comedy number reflecting the perceptions of an ignorant country girl. It also involves a big dance number. The song was never meant to be an accurate, serious presentation on Native American culture. While some modern audience members find it offensive, I don't think it was meant to be insulting or degrading, just a funny reflection on the character singing it. I don't know whether it was inspired by a real event. The show isn't all that accurate about every detail in the life of Annie Oakley, so I guess the adoption might have been invented. If she really was adopted by the Sioux, the ceremony probably would have been nothing like the number in the show. 

[chewy5000]

Posted: 10/24/15 at 1:36am

Does it make me a horrible person if I was to say it's one of my favourite songs?

[yfs]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 10:21am

The problem with defending "I'm and Indian Too", I think, is that none of us, as far as I know, is a Native American. And Native Americans are a very, very small minority of theater-goers, so they don't' really get a say.

The song is innocent, and means no harm, but it contains lyrics that essentially make fun of the way Native Americans chose names for their tribe members, as if such a thing were worthy of parody. I think that if a song made fun of similar cultural norms for African-Americans or Jews, for instance, we'd have a much harder time defending them. And any defender of the song has to ask him or herself, I think, how would I feel if my own heritage were being treated this way? Would it bother me? Would it bother me more if I were part of a relatively unrepresented cultural group? Heaven knows the Jews have been a dominant force on Broadway, unlike the Native Americans, but no one is going to get up and sing Berlin's "Cohen Owes Me 97 Dollars" any more without at least some explanation of the context -- and in that song Berlin was stereotyping and making fun of his own religious and cultural heritage.

Also, to be fair, one of the reasons "I'm an Indian Too" is often cut is that the actress playing Annie is really uncomfortable singing it, with some justification. It will be very interesting to see how George C. Wolfe handles all of this in Shuffle Along, which contains "Bandana Days," "If You've Never Been Vamped By a Brownskin", and a number of other politically tricky numbers. 

[darquegk]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 11:19am

As far as I've heard, "Shuffle Along" is a musical ABOUT the original production, so it's commenting on the material instead of revising it.

[yfs]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 11:32am

I believe that's right, but it will be interesting to see how it comments. The material is stereotypical, but it was created by African American artists of great stature, who were working in an era where a certain kind of stereotyping was expected. Which isn't the same as Irving Berlin making jokes about the names of Native Americans. I'm really excited to see Shuffle Along for just that reason. It's a fascinating challenge to figure out how to treat that material in a way that's "commenting" but also respectful of the artists who created it, who were, to some extent, hamstrung by convention. 

Not that I don't have respect for Irving Berlin, who has never been surpassed, but the situation is different.  

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 11:34am

When bk does one of his remastered recordings, he is essentially "recreating" history and I have no problem with him including the score as it was originally sung.

 

But either the theater is "wonderful" because it takes place only in the present or it isn't; and if it is, then for whom is "I'm an Indian, Too"" being performed in 2015? Theater historians and the ignorant? No, no harm was intended in the 1940s, but that's hardly an excuse. Blackface was still being performed on TV when I started college in 1972--and, no, no harm was intended--but that doesn't mean I need to see it today.

 

And, yes, Annie throwing the contest at the end makes me grit my teeth in a way that Sally Adams offering Lichtenstein millions of U.S. dollars in CALL ME MADAM does not. In the latter, it's an obvious joke; but the idea of skilled women having to hide their talents to be loved is NOT such an obvious joke. My sister's marriage broke up for exactly that reason about 10 years ago. (If it were my production, I'd ask for permission to let it end in a tie. I saw a production of TAMING OF THE SHREW where that was implied and worked quite well.)

[Fantod]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 12:56pm

Racial stereotypes were wrong back then and they are wrong today. The number should be cut from the show. Unfortunately, I actually really like the song...

[darquegk]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 1:05pm

Doesn't the 1960s revival, like the 1990s one, end in a tie?

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 1:37pm

"I'm assuming they're keeping the advice to lose the contest so she gets her man."

I think this works in context because in every version of an Annie Oakley story I've seen, Frank is a little arrogant/conceited and played right, he knows that she's better than him but sees her attempt to soothe his pride as a willingness to compromise. She's in no way weak or passive but she has to be the first to bend because of who he is as a character, not because he's a man. 

 

"I'm An Indian Too" is not a great song and it's unnecessary.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 10/25/15 at 10:44pm

darquegk, I don't know. The only version I've seen (pre-1990s) ended with Annie throwing the contest to get her man. My preferred ending would be for Annie to deliberately miss her last shot and for Frank to realize what she is doing and deliberately miss his as well. Maybe that's what they did with the Peters revival.

 

villagesnarker, in my view the problem with your analysis is that Annie's concession isn't just rooted in Frank's character; it's a long-held cultural trope in everything from CAROUSEL to HELLO, DOLLY! and beyond. Either the man has to fend for the dim little woman or she has to pretend to be dim to bolster his ego. If it were a plot device unique to AGYG, nobody would be bothered.

[SmoothLover]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 12:48am

Going on Wednesday. Cannot wait!

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 1:52am

I'm with bk.  The song is not derogatory as Annie is thrilled to be inducted into the Tribe and the jokes about Native American names are benevolent, not nasty.  The jokes about Jewish kids not knowing how to play baseball in Falsettos promotes more of a stereotype and who blanches at that?  And Annie throwing the match to get her man makes her the smartest person in the room.  It's an old-fashioned musical comedy, not a documentary, and I like a woman figuring out how to get what she wants.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 10/27/15 at 3:29pm

I'm not weighing in one way or the other (although I always missed losing Who Do You Love, I Hope, and that minor and, yeah, unnecessary subplot,) but: "The jokes about Jewish kids not knowing how to play baseball in Falsettos promotes more of a stereotype and who blanches at that? "

there is so much about this comment--whether one thinks Indian Too (a song, I admit, I love despite myself) shoudl remain or not...  But let's start with the fact that Falsettos was written and directed by Jewish men.