Personally, as much as I adore and prefer the original staging, the real problem I and others have with all this is part of a continual set of bizarre decisions by Cameron Mackintosh that have served only to degrade the show.
Classic musicals are "revamped" all the time and it has become common practice to adapt their various elements for economical reasons. For example, the Sweeney Todd revival took a fresh approach to how its orchestration would be delivered during a live performance. Some people loved it and called it clever, others hated it and called it a gimmick. In the end, it was a noble artistic effort that both showcased an art form usually relegated to a pit and provided live musical accompaniment economically without resorting to synths, Sinfonias, or midi machines. But most importantly, the integrity of the work was respected. They could've gone the sneaky Les Mis Broadway revival route and hired someone to write a completely new and completely boring new orchestration that resembled a bunch of soup cans being banged together. And if that's not enough, they could've had the nerve to market the new sound as a much-needed update to an orchestral score that, by then, had become iconic.
Now, Mackintosh has decided that audiences don't want to see a carbon copy of the well-known RSC production and has resorted to unnecessary extremes that have both deeply angered and saddened devoted fans of the piece. He has taken cheap shots at his own award-winning production, openly stating in the press that he thinks it's outdated and no longer usable. He's even bemoaned the fact it's so revered and iconic, saying one of the main objectives in the staging of the new production is to avoid conjuring up memories of the Nunn/Caird staging at all costs.
The passionless new orchestrations have done enough harm to the show, now he wants to actively avoid everything that helped make the staging of the show an overwhelming success. It's this strange attitude people have a problem with, that there needs to be change for the sake of change rather than a truly compelling artistic need for it. And suspicions have thus far proven correct because there has been an undeniable dip in the show's quality which is now so full bombast and staged so chaotically, it serves to distract one from what the show was always about, and ultimately, the reason for it's global success: the story.
Nunn and Caird achieved something rare in their original RSC presentation of Les Miserables--a show that both dazzled and moved audiences deeply. The set by John Napier encapsulated Hugo's tale from the world outside with its crude, prison-like, crumbling and towering set on all sides. Shrouded by darkness, the characters' stories played out with such freedom of movement, the revolve itself became an integral component in the story-telling. It did more than just spin the cast around or facilitate set changes. It was used to such an extent in telling the individual stories that when all the characters band together for the act one finale, face the audience, and defiantly march in unison against the direction of the revolve as one, one can't help but sit there in awe. It's a moment enhanced by technology, not made by it as the number as staged by Nunn and Caird would achieve the same impact performed on a street in broad sunlight.
The hard-working revolve will definitely be missed but I do wish for the new production success. While I will never forgive the sacking of John Cameron's beautiful, sincere orchestrations for the new bombastic, distracting ones, I thought I was about ready to accept this new staging...and then articles such as these come out of nowhere. It's just so very sad to see such a beautiful thing that has brought so much joy to my life cheapened by changes it didn't need in the first place and misguided motives.
Recreation of original John Cameron orchestration to "On My Own" by yours truly. Click player below to hear.
