The Right Age to Be Annie

Posted on January 9, 2014 by David Fick
ANNIE

Above: ANNIE in its original Broadway production

A debate I often see on message boards across the Internet deals with issues around casting and age. The casting of the orphans – and especially of the titular orphan – in Charles Strouse, Martin Charnin and Thomas Meehan’s Annie seems to be an issue that mothers and little girls who aspire to be gussied up in the trademark red dress take especially seriously.

Annie is meant to be 11 years old, but can a younger or older child play the part? What about a production where a 13 year old is told that she is too old, only to see the director cast a 15 year old in the role? Moms and daughters, the answer is easy: “age” and “looking too old” are two completely different things. You can be 15 and still look like an 11 year old; conversely, you can be 10 and look 14. So it’s quite plausible that an older actor may get cast as a younger character and vice-versa. Whether you have your heart set on hearing your daughter belt out “Tomorrow” or if you’re hoping to win the audience over with a heartfelt “Maybe”, remember that fact. In a traditional production of Annie, looking the part is as important as being able to carry it off.

And that’s show business.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

THE SATURDAY LIST: My Favourite ANNIE Songs

Posted on January 4, 2014 by David Fick

Nearly four decades ago, Charles Strouse, Martin Charnin and Thomas Meehan’s Annie opened on Broadway. Some love it; others hate it – but it is impossible to deny that the show has touched many a heart since its first performances in the 1970s. As such, I thought perhaps it might be fun to pay tribute the show, one that is also a great deal of fun to do, especially in the chorus (just because you’re so busy all the time) and – I’d imagine – if you are a kid. I was in the ensemble of a production of Annie in 1997 and I really enjoyed it. With a series of great numbers to get through, it’s great not to spend hours in the dressing room! I particularly loved performing “Hooverville”, “N.Y.C.” and the “Tomorrow” reprise in the cabinet scene. In that scene, I was an Honour Guard and all I had to do was hold a flag and belt out the tenor harmony. What fun.

Now let’s get on to the songs and today’s “Saturday List”

1. Favourite Song i.t.o. Lyrics

“I Don’t Need Anything But You”: While Annie does not really offer top-drawer sophistication in its lyrics, it is fun to see certain moments of wit appear here and there. While one may prefer other songs merely because of their content, this minor number in the second act always wins me over with its period references and character appropriate pairings of who needs whom to make them whole.

2. Favourite Song i.t.o. Tracks on the OBCR

“Easy Street”: This number is one of the best in the show anyway, but it is the way that Dorothy Loudon cuts loose toward the end of the song that makes it the most memorable track on the original cast recording.

3. Favourite Song i.t.o. Character Definition

“Little Girls”: This is one of those numbers that is always entertaining in the hands of a virtuoso performer (like Dorothy Loudon in the original production or Carol Burnett in the 1982 film), but which can be deceptively simple and is so easy to botch (as Kathy Bates did under the direction of Rob Marshall in the television production). Still, the song defines the character sharply, with a great nod to the period musically and some terrifically amusing images in the lyrics that really lend themselves to being staged. A runner up here is “Something Was Missing”, which depicts Daddy Warbucks in a way that is perhaps unexpected given the comic strip origins of the show, but which is all the more effective for that.

4. Favourite Song i.t.o. Marriage of Lyric to Music

“I Think I’m Gonna Like It Here”: This song captures in both its music and lyrics how exciting it must be for Annie to arrive in what must appear to be a completely exotic setting to her. It is little more than a light piece of diversion, but in the context of the show, it works like gangbusters. Plus there’s that final exclamation: “Welcome!”

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nM_-CFRBS8]

5. Favourite Song i.t.o. Music

“We’d Like to Thank You Herbert Hoover”: This is an interesting number, one that was cut from both the film and the TV movie, probably because it illustrates a context that can be depicted far more quickly through the visual resources that film has at its disposal. What makes it so interesting to me is how the music offers an almost Brechtian musical take on the Depression. It’s unique in the score in that regard and really outlines life in New York at the time in an engaging manner. The runner-up here, for me, is the more conventionally toe-tapping “You’re Never Fully Dressed Without a Smile”.

6. Favourite Song i.t.o. Scene Structure

“NYC”: This is my favourite number in the show. I love how is builds from almost nothing – a thought – into the best production number in the show, a thrilling celebration of everything that makes New York a fantastic place to see. It’s a fantastic song in the “tribute to a famous city” genre and I think it is a travesty that the song was cut from the 1982 film version and was glad to see the song restored in the – where Andrea McArdle knocks the “Star to Be” solo out of the park, making my favourite part of the song more thrilling than ever before. (The Star-To-Be is a super cameo role – but it can be a torturous minute or so if the actress cast in the role can’t sell that solo vocally. I’ve heard that some productions like to cast the actress playing Lily as the Star-To-Be, but I’ve never seen it done that way.)

It’s certainly been fun revisiting this cute little show this weekend. Hope you enjoyed it as much as I did!

Posted in The Saturday List | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NEWSFLASH: Musicals in South Africa in 2013 – a Retrospective

Posted on January 1, 2014 by David Fick

JERSEY BOYS

Above: The South African cast of JERSEY BOYS

With the first day of 2014 upon us, it’s a good time to look back at the year behind us, as well to to look toward the year that is ahead of us. Over the past few days, BroadwayWorld South Africa has been running a series of retrospectives looking back at theatre in that country last year and one column has focused on musical theatre.

If you are interested, follow this link and read about the South African productions of Jersey Boys, The Rocky Horror Show, Sunset Boulevard, Starlight Express, West Side Story and Blood Brothers, as well as about a couple of original South African musicals that have debuted this year.

For opera lovers, there is also a look at the past opera season thrown in, and there is also a brief look at two cabarets that left an impression on audiences last year.

Enjoy!

Posted in Newsflash | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

TITANIC: the Broadway Musical vs the Blockbuster Movie

Posted on December 31, 2013 by David Fick
Martin Moran in TITANIC

Above: Martin Moran in TITANIC

In 1997, two different versions of the “Titanic” story were told in two different styles in two different mediums. The film offered Leonardio DiCaprio and Kate Winslet frolicking in a fictional love story set against the backdrop of the ill-fated ship of dreams, while the musical used the stories of the real life Titanic passengers as a basis for telling its Robert Altman-like version of the tale.

Some people criticise the musical version of Titanic for its approach, saying that that one becomes less invested in the multiple stories included into the narrative, as opposed to the approach that the film takes by focusing primarily on one couple and against the backdrop of the sinking of the ship. I don’t think that this is necessarily true, and it would be easiest to counter this criticism with the simplistic argument that Titanic walked off with the Tony Awards for Best Musical, Best Book of a Musical and Best Original Score (while also earning plaudits for its scenic design and orchestrations) in its debut season. Of course, we all know that the number of awards a show wins is not directly proportional to how good it is, even when – as in this case – the argument counts in the favour of a show one likes, so I’ll have to tackle things from a different angle.

The difference, as I see it, is that this kind of storytelling empowers the audience with a greater choice as to which stories they invest in. One is not coerced into investing in one particular character or couple’s story. I, for example, find the whole arc of Bride’s character very interesting and feel completely invested in what happens to him. For somebody else, that character may be Barrett or Kate or Alice Beane. It’s about shifting the way that one invests in the characters, rather than eliminating any kind of investment whatsoever.

Titanic

Above: The original Broadway cast of TITANIC

The show is notable for its numerous characters, each based on actual people who were on the Titanic on the night that she sank, although some historical details have been manipulated for the sake of the drama. Peter Stone’s book skilfully interweaves their stories, striking a balance between the characters and making them all distinguishable from one another. Perhaps there is one exception, in the depiction of Charles Clarke and Caroline Neville, who are not developed well enough in either the book or the score. Like everyone else, they get little vignettes, but these seem less substantial than those given to other characters, and then suddenly Charles gets the most beautiful verse of “We’ll Meet Tomorrow” close to the end of the show. But have these characters earned this kind of payoff? I’m not convinced. Instead of coming fully into their own, they merely seem like the other second class couple – the one that isn’t “Edgar and Alice”.

The original cast who brought these characters to life included some of Broadway’s finest: Brian d’Arcy James, Michael Cerveris and Victoria Clark among them. My favourite? Martin Moran as Harold McBride. He really squeezed every inch out of his material to create the character and, if you listen to the cast recording, you can see how precisely he makes vocal choices that convey the spirit and emotional state of the person he’s representing. He also manages to find a build in his main number, “The Night was Alive”, without just letting rip towards the end and thereby destroying the foundational work he has put into his characterization. By the time it gets to the reprise “In Every Age” at the end of the show, you can hear the change caused by the experience of the ship’s destruction but this remains sharply within the scope of the character’s established pattern of expression. It’s sophisticated and subtle and it works phenomenally well.

Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio in TITANIC

Above: Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio in TITANIC

Titanic is a great show. A different kind of musical if compared to the standard Rodgers and Hammerstein musical play, to be sure, with its multiple narratives and multiple conflicts against a backdrop which unites all the characters. Expecting a grand narrative structure isn’t going to get you anywhere with Titanic: it’s not about a boat that sinks; it’s about how that boat sinking affects the people on board, how the boat was a microcosm of society at that time and what that means socially, economically and personally. All of these things are distilled into the characters and the vignettes in which they appear and this leaves one with two choices. One can either engage with what is on stage and take something away from the show or leave, disappointed that it wasn’t a traditionally structured piece of musical theatre like The King and I. But form follows content – as Stephen Sondheim puts it, content dictates form. To create a traditionally structured show based on the tale of the Titanic would mean contriving a plot as was done for the film and that was clearly not the kind of story that Maury Yeston and Peter Stone wanted to explore theatrically in relation to this subject matter.

That’s not to say that the approach taken by James Cameron in the film is invalid. While some might say that putting the fictional Jack and Rose front and centre, the film romanticises one of the great tragedies of the 20th century. I take the point, but I’m not sure I agree with it. I think it is up to people do to some thinking about the context of the story and make the connections for themselves. After all, James Cameron isn’t making a documentary; he’s telling a story that has the sinking of the Titanic as its backdrop, not reporting the event in itself.

The ship sinks in the film of TITANIC

Above: The ship sinks in the film of TITANIC

It’s the same kind of thing that South Pacific does, setting a love story against the backdrop of a real event. World War II was tragic, yet I wouldn’t say South Pacific romanticises it, not in the sense that it renders the War in an ideal light. Certainly we do see the devastating effects of the war – the death of Cable, for example – but we also see the devastating effects of the sinking of the Titanic, and to a far greater extent than we see the effect of the war in South Pacific: families that are separated, lives that are cut short and so on. I haven’t seen the film in years, but I still remember the Irish mother and her children who are doomed because they are trapped in their quarters, perhaps even more vividly than some of the effects sequences or the main love story.

So I think that, if you take the whole film into account, and remember that there is more to it than just the love story between Jack and Rose, the tragedy of the Titanic is clearly appreciable, even if it’s not the primary focus of the film itself.

Does that mean that the film should be adapted for the stage as a musical, with Rose belting “My Heart Will Go On” as high as she can? Not at all, and given the huge part that spectacle plays in the film, a stage production couldn’t be half as effective in that regard anyway. Sure, there is a sense that the characters in the film could break out into song, but that’s because Titanic is basically a melodrama and relies a great deal on the score to support and create emotional identification with what is happening in the film. But I do think that a musical based on the film would be a bit of a “why” musical.

Debbie Reynolds as THE UNSINKABLE MOLLY BROWN

Above: Debbie Reynolds as THE UNSINKABLE MOLLY BROWN

That said, to play the devil’s advocate, I’m not sure that’s synonymous with the musical Titanic being the only adaptation based on the incident. After all, we already have The Unsinkable Molly Brown! And the point of creating another stage musical would be because of something that differentiates the two, for example using a fictional love story against a historical backdrop rather than a show where the historical backdrop itself is the focus. In film, there are several different versions of the Titanic tale, so why should an existing version be the only argument against another vastly different stage production?

Conversely, the existing musical has already set an incredibly high bar for certain set pieces of the story. Would a musical adaptation of the film be able to find its own voice, without sounding derivative? Can anyone imagine a better musical sequence than the one leading up to the impact with the iceberg than the one in the existing musical?

Yes, Titanic is a great show. In terms of Yeston’s work, only Nine competes with Titanic for top spot. Phantom is a triviality; Grand Hotel is an example of superb efficiency rather than transcendence; and Death Takes a Holiday just didn’t come together in the end. Would the movie make an equally great show? I’m not convinced, but the two contrasting narrative approaches taken by the respective vehicles are both valid approaches.

Posted in Commentary, Theatremaking | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dumbed Down Discourse: Challenges Facing Artists, Audiences and the Arts

Posted on December 31, 2013 by David Fick
Michael John LaChiusa

Above: Michael John LaChiusa

Something’s been bubbling under for a long time. And IT has starting to erupt. I think IT started brewing a long time ago, when I read Michael John LaChiusa’s brilliant column, “The Great Grey Way”. Comments like this one, from Stephen Sondheim also feed into it:

The dumbing down of the country reflects itself on Broadway. The shows get dumber, and the public gets used to them.

There were also Sondheim’s own comments around the recent revival of Porgy and Bess, which undermined not only the production itself, despite his protestations about his intentions being otherwise, but also to a certain extent his credibility. They did not represent logical, level-headed discourse on a topic that required debate, but were more like blog comments on a magnified scale.

Comments on social media platforms and news websites, of course, play a major role in IT. Random comments – often racist or sexist, violent in nature and hypocritical – are bad enough, but then there are ones that parade under the illusion of legitimacy, like when defensive producers defending their own projects as though critics are meant to be publicists. It’s amateur hour, folks – all of it.

Lara Foot Newton

Above: Lara Foot (Newton)

Also playing into IT in a big way was the poor, politically-motivated discourse on social media platforms around the Internet on the what has become known as “the rape question” in the Department of Education’s Dramatic Arts paper at the end of last year where nobody – neither the press nor the playwright (Lara Foot (Newton)) from whose play (Thsepang) the extract was taken or anyone who commented on any of the poorly written stories – bothered to think through the full picture before responding. The same lack of thought was evident in the responses to the responses, even those that came through official channels. The complexity of the issue was ignored in favour of emotional reactions and quick-fixes, with people serving their own agendas rather than dealing with the important issues.

Then there was the entire Carrie Underwood in The Sound of Music Live debacle.

What is IT? What is this thing that’s been troubling my mind? A practice of which even I am guilty, because to rise above IT would mean taking myself out of IT and the truth of the matter is that even if the discourse is poor, it will never be improved through the exclusion of a brain that desires complexity.

IT is the curse that all art forms face right now.

Carrie Underwood

Above: Carrie Underwood

We prioritise technological advancement over storytelling in the film industry, on television and in the theatre. We promote news about art instead of art itself. We make fancy marketing plans instead of making good theatre, film or television. We tell a story using gimmicks instead of telling the story. Where there used to be integrity, or at least a balance between integrity and the bottom line, there is now just a bottom line.

Welcome to the dumbing down of the world! Let’s have Carrie Underwood in a Christmas special every year! Let’s pretend that the last time deconstructed fairy tales represented innovative storytelling wasn’t a decade ago! Let’s accept undiscerning criticism in journalism, because people have forgotten that journalists aren’t publicists and actually need to be experts in their field! Let’s replace transcendence with idle chatter! Let’s be NICE.

People might say this is less about storytelling than it is about my current views of the world. But the entire point is that storytelling is wrapped up in our current views of the world, and the way that society will see the world tomorrow!

You’re welcome to buy into the sellout, but I’m just not interested in it anymore. I don’t know how to engage in discourse that is characterised by ignorance anymore. Not politely, anyway. It is time to demand excellence, and time to deliver it. As best we can, and not only in the arts – but in every other aspect of our lives too. Do your job. Deliver on your promises. Be informed. And always seek out the bigger picture, and view it with the deepest perspective you can.

Posted in Commentary, Theatremaking, Theory and Practice | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

NEWSFLASH: Carly Rae Jepsen to Star in CINDERELLA on Broadway

Posted on December 30, 2013 by David Fick
Carly Rae Jepsen

Above: Carly Rae Jepsen

BroadwayWorld has just reported that Carly Rae Jepsen, the singer of the catchy pop hit “Call Me Maybe”, will take over the role of Ella in the current Broadway production of Cinderella, the new take on the classic Rodgers and Hammerstein television musical which features a book by Douglas Carter Bean.

Personally, I’m pretty excited about this news. I loved “Call Me Maybe” and also Jepsen’s collaboration with Owl City, “Good Time”. And it seems she has a musical theatre background too, with Jepsen saying that she has musical theater training in singing, dancing and acting.

Jepsen’s tweets over the past couple of hours have captured her excitement about being cast as Ella. One of the most recent features a shout-out to the current Ella, Laura Osnes:

Dear @LauraOsnes I think you are truly lovely. Big shoes to fill! It’s an honor to try on the Cindy shoes! Xoxox

Now I’m certain there will be a lot of backlash on the Internet, just as there was for Carrie Underwood when she was cast as Maria in The Sound of Music Live. But for better or worse, I’m in Jepsen’s corner on this one. I hope that she’ll be great, and I’ve got a feeling she will be. I’m looking forward to hearing her sing those wonderful Rodgers and Hammerstein tunes like “In My Own Little Corner”, “Ten Minutes Ago” and “A Lovely Night”.

Posted in Newsflash | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

High School Musicals, or “Is Show X Appropriate for My Students?”

Posted on December 29, 2013 by David Fick
RENT Article

Above: A newspaper article about a controversial high school production of RENT

This question of which shows are appropriate for high school productions is a popular one on musical theatre forums and in Facebook groups about musicals, and has even been the subject of a few stories that have captured the attention of the press and websites. There are many debates to be had about whether Legally Blonde, RENT or Gypsy is an appropriate choice for a high school play, about who should have the power to choose the production and about who should shoulder the responsibility when something goes wrong. Cutting across all of those arguments is one that supersedes them all, and it has to do with the reason why a musical is selected for production at a school.

The root of the problem is when high schools, the audiences who visit high school productions and critics of high school shows, whether in the form of local reporters, bloggers or community members, forget that the primary function of a school production is to educate. That goes for people who are directly involved in the life of the school too.

This is the reason why shows that are beyond a high school student’s abilities get produced, why we see young performers copying the performances of Broadway stars gesture for gesture and inflection for inflection and why people feel that a teenager tackling a complex role should embody that role in all its complexity when – barring the occasional exception – there is some aspect of almost every role that is beyond a high school student’s abilities.

This is also the reason why certain people view junior shows or school editions with snobbish disdain, when the motivation for these shows is to make particularly difficult shows accessible in particular production contexts. The primary purpose of high school productions is to educate the students who attend that high school.

So the question to be asked is: is there a context where a production of Next to Normal, Spring Awakening or whatever production is being considered will be a means to fulfilling the mandate of a school to provide an holistic learning experience for its students? And if the answer is no, or if the show’s content or demands will compromise that environment, then perhaps the selection of the show needs to be scrutinized more closely.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

THE SATURDAY LIST: My Favourite TITANIC Songs

Posted on December 28, 2013 by David Fick

TITANIC

Above: The playbill for the original Broadway production of TITANIC

People often ask what one’s favourite song from a show is. When it comes to Maury Yeston and Peter Stone’s Titanic, this is a really difficult topic because so much of the score is wonderful, so I’ll cheat a little and answer it this way…

1. Favourite Song i.t.o. Lyrics

“There She Is”: What I love about this lyric is how it manages to create an image of the ship through words. It’s more than just the choice of words though; it’s about the the choice of words with specific vowel and consonant sounds that help to establish not only the size of the ship but also the feeling of seeing it, without anyone actually seeing it at all. This short piece in the mammoth opening sequence is more effective than any of the establishing shots of the same ship in a certain film that premiered around the same time as this show….

2. Favourite Song i.t.o. Tracks on the OBCR

“Hymn/The Latest Rag:The build in this number is invigorating; the contrast between the hymn and the rag is so much fun; and the counterpoint in the later section of the rag is thrilling.

3. Favourite Song i.t.o. Character Definition

“The Proposal/The Night Was Alive”: While the former section further extends the character of Barret, the latter section draws such a vivid picture of Harold Bride that he becomes one of the most memorable characters in the show.

4. Favourite Song i.t.o. Marriage of Lyric to Music

“No Moon”: I think this song captures the contradictory restless-calm mood of the sequence in which it appears perfectly.

5. Favourite Song i.t.o. Music

“The Collision”: I love how such an understated piece of music communicates such a monumental moment in the narrative. The effect is chilling.

6. Favourite Song i.t.o. Scene Structure

The “To the Lifeboats” sequence from “Getting in the Lifeboat” through “We’ll Meet Tomorrow”: I love how this zooms in and out of the chorus and from character to character, bringing to the fore some of the musical themes from earlier in the show and ending in a unified anthem that makes everyone on the ship equal, at least in terms of the experience in the midst of which they are all caught.

That’s about as close as I am going to get to choosing a favourite song in this show! These days, I find myself returning to my cast album of the stage score -snippets of which you can hear in the playlist below – rather than the film. It’s a moving piece of musical theatre, from the opening sequence to the haunting contra-punctual duet mentioned above “The Proposal/The Night Was Alive”, from the exquisitely structured sequence at the end of the first act (where the ship hits the iceberg) to the chilling lifeboat sequence that climaxes with the stirring anthem, “We’ll Meet Tomorrow”. And any of these is many times better than “My Heart Will Go On”…

Posted in The Saturday List | Tagged , , | 6 Comments

Not the Very Model of a Gilbert and Sullivan Fan

Posted on December 27, 2013 by David Fick
THE PIRATES OF PENZANCE

Above: The Joe Papp production of THE PIRATES OF PENZANCE

I was browsing through the MTI catalogue on their website today and stumbled upon the licensing page for the Joe Papp/Public Theatre version of The Pirates of Penzance. This made me think once again about the much revered comic operas of Victorian-era librettist and composer W. S. Gilbert and Arthur Sullivan and about why they’ve never become favourites of mine.

Look, I’ll be the first to admit that I’m no Gilbert and Sullivan expert, but I find I can only manage their work in small doses. I appreciate the popular songs (“I’m Called Little Buttercup”, “Poor Wand’ring One”, “I am the Very Model of a Modern Major-General” and so on)as well as the big trios and other ensemble numbers of assorted sizes (like “Three Little Maids from School are We”, “Come, friends, who Plough the Sea” and “We Sail the Ocean Blue”). I understand the importance of their work in relationship to the development of musical theatre. I completely get the significance of Patience when it comes to the issue of gay representation in musical theatre. And I loved the “HMS Yakko”, the Animaniacs short that parodied the HMS Pinafore and The Pirates of Penzance.

But put on a cast recording or DVD of one of the complete shows and I’ll struggle to get through it. I can’t even sit through the cast album of The Hot Mikado without becoming restless. And despite several opportunities to see amateur productions of a few of the shows, I’ve not managed to gather together enough motivation to buy a ticket and get myself there. Perhaps I need to force myself to do so when the next one comes along.

In the meantime, it might be a good idea to go and find the video recording of the Joe Papp version of The Pirates of Penzance in all its bastardised glory and see if I can find a way into the Gilbert and Sullican oeuvre that way. Most of what I’ve read about this version of the show is positive, with an appreciation for its broader, more musical theatre style of comedy, adapted orchestrations, key changes and interpolations. After all, I think it is the style against which I’m grating.

If I do, perhaps I’ll post my reactions as things go along. Properly getting to grips with Gilbert and Sullivan seems like a noble resolution for 2014. Maybe it will prove to be ‘idle chatter of a transcendental kind’.

Posted in Commentary | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

TITANIC vs RAGTIME…

Posted on December 24, 2013 by David Fick
Titanic

Above: The original Broadway cast of TITANIC

Maury Yeston and Peter Stone’s Titanic features one of the best musical theatre scores of the 1990s – but so does Terrence McNally, Lynn Ahrens and Stephen Flaherty’s Ragtime. Off the top of my head, I’d find it difficult to compare the two right now, merely because I haven’t spend an comparable amounts of time listening to both scores recently, so my ear is likely to favour Titanic because that’s the show I’ve listened to most, most recently. It’s also tough for me to look at the two musicals objectively, because I know that I have a personal preference for Titanic, because of its subject matter. But let’s try and get past that for now and see what’s cracking beneath the surface.

Both shows represent the best work of each respective creative team. The two shows are brilliantly evocative of period music and Ragtime has just as many musical highlights as Titanic: moving ballads like “Your Daddy’s Son” in the former and “In Every Age” in the latter; stirring character driven moments (“Coalhouse’s Soliloquy” and and “The Proposal/The Night was Alive”; a touching marriage of music and lyrics in songs (“New Music” and the “Autumn”/”No Moon” sequence); and at least one evocative love song each in “Sarah Brown Eyes” and “Still”.

RAGTIME

Above: Audra McDonald in the original cast of RAGTIME

At the same time, neither score is absolutely perfect in every way. Both have flaws, different kinds of flaws to be sure, but they’re there all the same. So I’m not sure that either edges out the other in the final analysis when it comes to the scores alone, but – if it were on the table – I’d happily agree that both of them have scores that are better than that of Parade, which is set during a similar time period in history and shares some musical vocabulary with Titanic and Ragtime. (Isn’t it interesting to note the overlapping timelines of these three prominent musical theatre scores from the 1990s, along with Assassins and Floyd Collins? I think that this kind of overlap is a natural phenomenon in musical theatre. Something about a particular show really appears to resonate with an audience and then a run of shows that are set in similar time periods appears. In the 1940s, there was a yen for “historic” Americana-styled musicals, like Oklahoma!, Carousel, Annie Get Your Gun, Bloomer Girl and so on. From the end of the 1970s into the 1980s, there began a run of musicals set in 19th Century Europe with their roots in operetta, like Sweeney Todd, Les Miserables and The Phantom of the Opera. In the 1990s, things converged around this turn of the century setting.)

Ultimately, I’d say Titanic and Ragtime probably on par with one another, although their styles and intentions are so divergent that it does become complicated to look at the two side by side, despite some of the similarities between the two. Still, such a comparison might make for interesting reading….

Posted in Commentary, Theatremaking | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment