Would anyone want to see a revival of Torch Song Trilogy?

I've read the script several times and just love it to death. I'd kill to see it return to the Great White Way. Thoughts?

One of the best plays I've ever seen in NY (with the OBC) ... but I think the material is dated now.

And I'm not sure how well it would work as a period piece. It's not just clothes and styles that have changed, it's people's sensibilities.

---

I don't know that I agree with that, best.

I think the material has kind of come back around. The AIDS crisis (which came after these plays were written) did more to damage the viability of revisiting this work cause, for a long while, how could any gay play NOT address AIDS?? But now, the crisis has shifted into management, and the focus on the gay movement right now is on building families (of all sorts). And that's really what Torch Song is about. Finding and keeping a gay identity, while trying to build something that resembles a traditional family.

This piece means a great deal to me. When I was fifteen (and just starting to figure out who I was as a gay person), I was cast as David, the adopted son in Act 3, in a community theatre production (with Blanche Lewis! Richard Lewis' mother...big thrill for me!). And as I grew older, I assumed the that play would no longer be relevant. But I picked it up recently, and was struck by how, though now a period piece, the themes resonate strongly with the movement today.

Oh...I think what would have seemed shocking about the piece in the early 80's would have mellowed with time. But, I think what replaces that is a really deep sense of great family drama.

Weren't the same type of arguments made about THE NORMAL HEART, though? Wondering if it would be too dated and if it would resonate with audiences now?

IMO, finding an age-appropriate Arnold would present an enormous challenge. I saw the show 11 times when it was new and have nothing but fond memories of it. Most of the cast would repair to Ted Hooks afterwards and that was part of the fun of the show. Ethel Merman was in the audience one night and she obviously was not enjoying herself. Apparently she stopped by Harvey's dressing room afterwards and said something to the effect of "I thought your play was a piece of ****, but what the **** do I know?"

---

Plus...to make it viable, you'd probably need some star casting. Like Zachary Quinto and Neil Patrick Harris as Arnold and Ed.

It certainly would be a radically different animal than it was originally; the New York City of Torch Song is long dead and buried. The play, in its original incarnation, was exciting, vibrant, new, and a portrait of New York gay life in the late 70s.

It would now be a rather quaint period piece. Even if an actor with Fierstein's unique persona, passion, and larger than life qualities could be found (which I kind of doubt), the utterly contemporary urgency of the original would be impossible to match, leaving us with an experience more like the relatively bloodless film (which is the version most people know, having no idea of the wild theatricality of the original).

Of course, to those who never saw the original, none of this would matter. And I imagine those of us who did see it will be in the VAST minority.

Updated On: 11/30/11 at 01:35 PM

Here's my question - instead of idly musing on reviving plays that were great moments in their own time, why don't we insist on new plays NOW that would be THIS TIME'S Torch Song Trilogy? That is - live; don't revive.

It's funny, I don't think of any of the humor as being "shocking," even when it was brand new. I think there were punch lines that were surprising ("Oh my Godddddd!") but I always felt Harvey's goal was to reflect the original audience's life back to them, and then when it moved uptown to show the new audience their similarity to gay men. The only pop culture equivalent of such characters today are Cam and Mitchell on Modern Family.

I thought the same thing about the Normal Heart revival, newintown. I vehemently disagree with Kramer's central theme in that play, (did then, do now) but that production was a revelation. Fortunately, revivals often reveal nuances previous productions did not. And thank goodness Shakespeare gets revived once in a while.

As for the Merman quote, which Harvey tells, I believe he asked her what she thought when she came backstage to visit after telling her what an inspiration he had been to her and then she said something to the effect of, "I thought it was a piece of **** but everybody around me was crying their eyes out so what the **** do I know?"

---

I guess when I mention a Torch Song for our time, I'm musing on the kind of play that touches the public and their nerves in such as way as to be wildly of its time - along the lines of Angels In America.

As good as Sons of the Prophet may be (and I haven't seen it yet), I haven't heard anything that indicates it's going to be that kind of succes fou.

Discussing revivals of plays will always involve this kind of disagreement - there will be those who see revivals as pale imitations of a vital original vs. those who want to see the same things over and over.

As a cultural touchstone, no...Sons of the Prophet is not in the same league as Torch Song. But as a work of art? Yes. Absolutely. And I say that without hesitation. It's beautiful.

And you're all very kind to think of me for Arnold. I'm sure there is a small regional theatre somewhere that might let me audition for it before I age into Norma Desmond.

I've been praying for this for a while.

---