I never said that FOLLIES isn't brilliant -- I think it's one of the the greatest musicals ever written. But the book is flawed -- I'm sorry there's no arguing that. If it were as perfect as you suggest and weren't flawed then why would Sondheim, Prince, Goldman, and later after Goldman's death, Goldman's widow Bobbi have actively participated in working on extensive, wholesale rewrites of the book on at least two separate occasions? If the original 1971 version really was exactly the "vision" they were going for as you claim, then why on earth do they keep changing and rewriting it and making it less morose and cliched with each major revival?
The fact is that Bennett never liked the book at all and Prince and Sondheim themselves ahve expressed various reservations about it over the years (which is why Sondheim has participated in the rewrites).
From "Harold Prince and The American Musical Theatre" --
"Yet despite the theatrical archness and the sting of much of the dialogue, the sophisticated cynical veneer that Prince and Sondheim were drawn by, Goldman's book ultimately can't carry the show. Too often the characters, who 'sing more naturalistically than they speak,' as Sondheim says, define themselves in flat bathetic terms ..... As a character study FOLLIES is more often platitudinous than penetrating......."
The overall show in performance can be extraordinary -- despite a book which has always been a muddle and has defied repeated attempts at fixing by the original creative team.
"What a story........ everything but the bloodhounds snappin' at her rear end." -- Birdie
[http://margochanning.broadwayworld.com/]
"The Devil Be Hittin' Me" -- Whitney
Updated On: 9/14/05 at 12:08 AM