Why Spring Awakening should win the Pulitzer on Monday, but won't

[jbdc]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:19pm

An interesting article a friend emailed to me from the theatre critic for the Cleveland paper....

Full Article **Spoilers After the Link**:

http://www.cleveland.com/search/index.ssf?/base/entertainment/117610748781540.xml?eabro&coll=2#continue

By Tony Brown

"...Broadway's first alt-rock musical revolutionizes stage narrative to illustrate the universality and timelessness of youthful rebellion, adolescent sexual discovery and teen suicide. Also, it drops the F-bomb, right on target.

And here's prob- ably why, if you don't hear "Spring Awakening" among the winners when they're announced Monday, April 16, the Pulitzer Committee in its wisdom chose to chicken out once again:

Broadway's first alt-rock musical revolutionizes stage narrative to illustrate the universality and timelessness of youthful rebellion, adolescent sexual discovery and teen suicide. Also, it drops the F-bomb, right on target.

That repetition is no typographical error. The attributes that make "Spring Awakening" Pulitzer-worthy are the very ones that could turn off the committee, a fully owned and operated subsidiary of mighty, Ivied Columbia University..."



Updated On: 4/10/07 at 06:19 PM

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:33pm

Or, it might not win the Pulitzer because it is not "particularly American in focus" (A criterion of a Pulitzer-prize winner), having been adapted from a German play and featuring German characters.

Or, it might not win the Pulitzer since it did not have "it's first public performance or debut during the last calendar year." At the very least, you'd have to say the show debuted in 2005 when it had both a staged reading and a three week workshop.

Or they might decide all that isn't really that important and give it the prize anyhow. But in any case, I think it wise to wait till the Pulitzer committee screws up before you blast them for it.

[B3TA07]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:37pm

^Did you mean to e-mail the writer? I don't think jbdc was adopting either stance by posting it. Lol.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:42pm

The phrase is actually "preferably original in its source and dealing with American life." SPRING AWAKENING is neither, but the keyword in there is "preferably." The Pulitzer committee can and has ignored that instruction in the past (notably awarding THE DIARY OF ANNE FRANK -- dealing with a Dutch girl's experiences under the Nazis -- and I AM MY OWN WIFE -- principally about the life of a German transvestite under the Nazis and the Stasi).

The workshops and readings are immaterial. Since its first public performance was in 2006, it is technically eligible. Whether the other factors hurt it (and whether the committee finds the work itself deserving of the award) is another matter entirely.

[jbdc]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:44pm

Thank you. I wasn't endorsing his views. Just thought it was interesting.

And also, I had the same thoughts--about it's content not being American (Although, I am My Own Wife... isn't particular to America) and it's opening date.

Right on, Margo!
Updated On: 4/10/07 at 06:44 PM

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:48pm

Broadway's first alt-rock musical revolutionizes stage narrative to illustrate the universality and timelessness of youthful rebellion, adolescent sexual discovery and teen suicide. Also, it drops the F-bomb, right on target.

And here's prob- ably why, if you don't hear "Spring Awakening" among the winners when they're announced Monday, April 16, the Pulitzer Committee in its wisdom chose to chicken out once again:

Then why did Rent win 11 years ago?

[jbdc]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:49pm

Read the article, he talks about it.

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:53pm

It shouldn't win because is isn't that great. It isn't any different than the Wedekind play except is has loud music fuzzy lyrics halting the plot every 10 minutes or so.

Updated On: 4/10/07 at 06:53 PM

[B3TA07]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:56pm

Why you hatin', fatty?

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:56pm

The Pulitzers move in strage ways, as we have seen over the years. That's why I said they may ignore the "American" part and reward it anyway-- as they have done in the past.

Thanks for the clarification Margo, I couldn't find their definition of "Debut or Public Performance" anywhere. I've seen 'ticket sales' used to define if it's a performance so I assumed-- and yes, I know what happens when I assume!

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:56pm

I did read it. So just because Mimi doesn't die (of course, the article made no mention of the fact that Angel did), the "snobby" Pulitzer committee had no problem overlooking the f*cks and heroin use? But Spring Awakening will be faulted for the f*cks, the heroin use AND the deaths? That sounds like a totally sound argument to me.

Updated On: 4/10/07 at 06:56 PM

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:58pm

Mama aint' hattin' Mama is full of love..

Come here Little Boy..

*mama opens wide her big flabby arms*

[Lavieboheme3090]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 6:59pm

Caroline or Change should have won, Spring shouldn't

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:00pm

The article does read like it was written by someone who really likes the show, hardly looking at it objectively or giving a more in depth look at other possible winners compared to SA - sounds a bit like "why the musical I love rules, but it's so above them it won't win".

I wouldn't bring Rent up, though, there was nothing more American than that, of course it was an instant favorite.

Updated On: 4/10/07 at 07:00 PM

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:01pm

I think it odd to blast them before a decision is announced. What will he write if it DOES win?

[trinaaron]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:02pm

I would consider Spring Awakening a musical adaptation of Wederkind's play. Characters, events, setting, etc are the same, just with music added. Do I think it's fantastic? Absolutely. I do not however think it deserves the Pulitzer.

[BigFatBlonde]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:05pm

*tsk* *tsk*

Now, now.. trinaaron, blaxx, Lavieboheme3090 don't say or suggest anything againt Spring... it will make B3TA07 sad.

And Mama needs him happy.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:07pm

It's an okay musical. I think it could be better and the music/lyrics could have more charater depth into them besides pretty lyrics that sometimes don't really make much sense on first listen. But I'm sure there are better things out there, and I do agree that Caroline, or Change should have won, or at least been considered.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:07pm

I agree. RENT took a 100 year old story and completely rewrote it to be about the current American climate. SPRING AWAKENING while fresh and fabulous is at its core simply a straight forward musical version of Wederkind's original play. I don't think it should be eligible for Pulitzer Prize consideration.

Now I may be wrong but I believe it actually says somewhere in the Pulitzer rule book that the Pulitzer can't be awarded to an adaptation of an existing play, which is why OKLAHOMA! was given only a "special citation" by the Pulitzer committee.

RENT was also able to circumvent that because LA BOHEME was a novel before it was an opera. Updated On: 4/10/07 at 07:07 PM

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:11pm

I just think that Spring Awakening has far too many problems as a piece of theater to win the Pulitzer. Critics and audience members have been able to look past these flaws (weak lyrics being a particularly glaring one) in their excitement to see something innovative on Broadway, but I don't think that the Pulitzer committee would or should.

[jbdc]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:12pm

I think he's looking at Spring Awakening as in a totally different musical genre as Rent. Alternative Rock. Rent isn't Alternative Rock, and it didn't really break any rules. (Please don't respond and tell me about all the rules you feel it may have broken.)
I also think Spring Awakening is extremely relevant in America today, what with all of our abstinence only sex ed policies, even if it doesn't take place in the U.S. (Please don't reply telling me it's not good enough to win. I never said it should win.)

Updated On: 4/10/07 at 07:12 PM

[B3TA07]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:15pm

BigFatBlonde - ehh, I don't care THAT much.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:16pm

But those issues have always been a problem. I don't think it's just THIS time in American history. We've always been dealing with censorhip/abstinence/etc.

[jbdc]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:22pm

Bill T. Jones (SA's choreographer) said that he feels the show is a social discourse, as all good theatre and dance should be. (Again--his words, not mine). I think the fact that mothers leave the theatre talking about their kids (they do--ask the ushers) and their kids' own struggles is important. In that sense, SA provides a contemporary dialogue on an age old subject. Because, you're right, RentBoy, the issues are not particularly new, but knowledge is being assaulted by the powers that be in America and in the script.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 4/10/07 at 7:22pm

If the author were looking at it solely in terms of musical genre, he wouldn't have made a big deal about the controversial content and focused more on the music, other than a passing reference to modern influences. In addition, if the comparison to Rent were about musical genre, he would have said that instead of (once again) discussing the content. Your inaccurate defensive responses are only making the argument weaker.