What is this life but the beauty of improvisation?

For Christmas this past year I asked for and received the original cast recording of The Glorious Ones, a musical by Stephen Flaherty and Lynn Ahrens. These composers are best known for their popular hits Ragtime, Seussical, and Once on this Island, but they are also the composers of some gorgeous lesser known pieces like Dessa Rose, A Man of No Importance and, most recently, The Glorious Ones. I have fallen head over heels in love with this musical and would love to see it produced with my theatre company. I am just bummed out it took me so long to discover how wonderful it was.

I had heard of The Glorious Ones when it ran at Lincoln Center in 2007. Once the performance rights became available I took a look at it, but determined from reading the plot synopsis that it wouldn't have a broad enough appeal...that it would really only mean something to actors. Then for whatever reason I popped it on my amazon.com wishlist at Christmas time, and soon I had a new obsession.

Notable members of the original cast were Mark Kudisch as Flaminio Scala. Kudisch recently appeared on Broadway in 9 to 5 and was in, among other things, the successful 2004 revival of Assassins. Another cast member was Natalie Venetia Belcon, who rocketed to stardom as the put upon and hysterical Gary Coleman in Avenue Q. She takes a drastic turn here playing the voluptuous and sexy prostitute Columbina. I had the privilege of seeing both of these actors live (twice for each!) in Assassins and Avenue Q...both radiate charisma and were no doubt a fiery onstage couple.

The Glorious Ones is based on a novel by Francine Prose, and tells the story of a commedia dell'arte troupe from Italy in the 17th century. This art form depended upon certain types and utilized masks and improvisation to develop performances. This musical follows Flaminio Scala and his troupe of actors, all of whom fall into a certain type: the charismatic leading man, the sly harlequin, the quack "dottore", the old miser, the voluptuous leading lady, the devoted dwarf, and the elegant Moon Woman. The troupe endures (as does any theatre troupe to this day) a great deal of backstage drama involving unrequited love and perceived conspiracies. Early in the show the company travels to France, where they present an outlandishly perverse (but hilarious) performance and are promptly kicked out. While most of the actors are forgiving of Scala for making fools of them, they begin to wonder how things would work under new leadership. Scala typically plays the leading man, but is pushed aside by the troupe into playing the comedic role, considered secondary to the lead. He is replaced with a more youthful actor. Hurt and discouraged, the passionate Scala takes an extreme action. The show ends with him asking (I'm paraphrasing) "Did anyone notice I was here?" The answer, we conclude, is yes, for we are transported into the future as comedy developed: there are references to the three stooges, Lucille Ball, Charlie Chaplin, and more. Because of the work of Scala's troupe and others like it, the art form of comedy has flourished.

The show is filled with people whose lives revolve around the stage, but you don't have to be a theatre junkie to get it and love it. The concepts are simple: Loving something, loving someone, and wanting to be remembered. The beautiful ballad "I Was Here" pontificates on the latter idea. We want "to be known for what little we've done". "The Comedy of Love" is a tragi-comic duet between two members of the troupe who pine for those who do not love them in return. The lovely song "Opposite You" is a truly unique way for two people who love the stage to express their love for one another. These are concepts we can all relate to.

On the other side of the coin there is the hysterically lewd "Armanda's Tarantella", the play within a play in which a young woman from a convent travels to Italy and wishes to learn something new every day. She enlists four men to help her. They teach her to "dance a tarantella", "blow the piccolo", "ride the pony", "stuff the sausage".....you get the picture. (This is the play that gets them kicked out of the French court). Also a lot of fun is the fiesty duet "Making Love", sung between Scala and his mistress, Columbina.

But my favorite moment in the show is the song "Improvisation". Scala sings this to his downtrodden troupe after they are ousted from the French court. If I may, the wonderful lyrics:

I've gone without bread

Lived close to the bone

Got into deep water and sunk like a stone

But now and again I have risen and flown like a kite.

And God help the people who don't get the joke!

Who won't risk a failure, who won't go for broke!

I dare them to stand in our boots in the mud for one night.

For do what they do, or say what they say,

I'd rather be me at the end of the play.

For what is this life but the beauty of improvisation?

Scenes of amazement and constant surprise to us all!

We live each moment as if we were children discovering creation!

We rise or we fall but it's always glorious!

This beautiful song touches me on a very personal level, particularly with the trials and tribulations I've experienced through my theatre company. Throughout the musical various characters are removed from the "types" that they normally play. They are separated from how they have always thought of themselves, from what they always expected to be. Many of us have experienced this feeling...."how did I end up here?"

More than a backstage commentary, The Glorious Ones shows us that even the smallest of contributions makes a difference. Whether you are performing on Broadway or doing community theatre, or, in layman's terms, running a multi million dollar corporation or owning a mom and pop store; whether you're what you thought you'd be or if life took you in a different direction than you had always planned, if you love what you're doing, it matters. A bit idealistic, perhaps, but hey, when the chips are down, I could use that.

Anne Frank, the musical?

It's true. There is a musical version of The Diary of Anne Frank. I have gotten some pretty priceless reactions when I've told people that my theatre will be doing this next year (one friend almost spit out his wine). But hold the skepticism if you will, and think about it. I did a post not long ago about odd topics for musicals. You can read it here. But the gist is that dark subject matter has made for some wonderful and even popular musicals...but when you look at the subject matter on its own it sounds odd.

The musical is called Yours, Anne. I absolutely adore the music from it. The show openly admits to being based on the famous play by Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, as well as on the diary itself. Recently I had a conversation with a professor at the center for Jewish Studies here in Madison, Wisconsin at the University of Wisconsin. She has written about Anne Frank and is quite passionate about the story. Her first question for me, about 60 seconds into the conversation, was "Is it sugary?" She went on to elaborate on the fact that she is often disappointed by adaptations of Anne's story because of the way she is portrayed...basically as an eternal optimist. She alerted me to the criticism the famous play (which was the basis for the movie adaptation) has received over the years: It takes the historical context mostly out and focuses on Anne as an inspirational character.

In case you aren't familiar with the details of the Anne Frank story: She was a German Jew living in the Netherlands at the time of the Nazi occupation. Her father owned a spice factory, but when the Nazis started seizing Jewish businesses, her father transferred ownership to an Austrian gentile friend. In 1942, when things were getting worse and more Jews were being deported, Otto Frank, Anne's father, arranged for the family to go into hiding. They went sooner than planned when Anne's sister Margot was summoned to a work camp. Their hiding place was behind her father's office building in what Anne called "The Secret Annex". They lived with another family, the Van Pels family (called the Van Daans in the diary and dramatic adaptations) and a dentist named Fritz Pfeffer (known in the diary as Mr. Dussel). While there, Anne kept a diary. The diary is remarkable because her transition from girl to young woman is extremely obvious, especially as she accepts the reality of what is going on in the outside world. First the issues at hand are those typical of a teenager: Worrying about physical appearance, boys, movie stars...but as she grows up she learns to analyze her surroundings and the people she lives with with a very unique precision. Her last diary entry was August 1, 1944. The Secret Annex occupants were arrested on August 4, 1944. All were sent to Auschwitz-Birkenau and then to various concentration camps around Europe. Anne died in the work camp Bergen-Belsen in April of 1945, a month before the camp was liberated. Of the occupants of the Secret Annex, only Otto Frank survived. He returned to find Anne's diary saved by a family friend, and had it published. It has since been translated into 67 languages and, next to the bible, is the most widely read non-fiction book in the world.

Any dramatic adaptation of the story should be a window to the historical context, and it must never be forgotten that Anne suffered a horrific fate, as did millions of others like her. To portray Anne Frank as an eternal optimist and an inspiring literary figure is incorrect. Through the years Anne Frank has become a commodity, and her story of a brief romantic affair with Peter Van Pels, one of her co-hiders, has become the selling point for the book and movie. The movie trailer paints it as a romance!

Goodrich and Hackett, who won countless awards when it debuted on Broadway, but drew criticism from some for it's sugar coating the story. Meyer Levin, an author of the time, maintained that his version of the Anne Frank story, which he had shopped to producers, was phased out in favor of making the story less "Jewish". Oddly enough, Otto Frank supported that idea, telling Levin he did want it to be "a Jewish play".

Yours, Anne incorporates some of the optimism found in other adaptations. However, the underlying musical quality sets the tone for a much darker storyline. With only spoken lines on the page it can be harder to convey impending doom. However, the haunting songs from Yours, Anne give a sense of the danger that awaits the residents of the Secret Annex. Good music heightens the story it is telling, and the music in Yours, Anne does just that: It adds another layer to an already stirring story.

As I've discussed before, its all in the execution. The libretto of Yours, Anne leaves room for the actress playing the title role to go either way with the character. I will direct our theatre company's production, and it is my hope to help our actress make Anne into a fully realized and flawed individual, much like she really was. I do believe that the music captures the mood very effectively, and truly embodies Anne's remarkable personality. I look forward to making this show one that can reach everyone but also one that does not discount the historical context.

Heart and Music

I know my MANY followers (Hi Mom!) are thrilled that I'm writing on this blog again. Finishing up the season with my theatre company has made me busy and a bit exhausted of musical theatre. My recent decision to take a new direction in my life and think about everything differently got me thinking about a wonderful unsung musical that I've been a fan of since it came out. It is appropriately (for my current mindset anyway) titled A New Brain.

A New Brain premiered in 1998 at the Mitzi E. Newhouse Theater at Lincoln Center. (For those who don't know, Lincoln Center theatre has two spaces: A larger "upstairs" theatre and the very intimate blackbox downstairs.) Directed by Graciela Danielle, the show boasted the talents of Malcolm Gets (a wonderful stage actor but also familiar from his film and TV work), Mary Testa, Penny Fuller, and a young and undiscovered Kristen Chenoweth (Tony winner for You're a Good Man Charlie Brown, who is now a nationally known recording artist and film and TV star-you may have seen her in Bewitched or on Pushing Daisies). The peppy and inspiring score is by William Finn, the composer of the popular and Tony winning The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee.

The story is quite autobiographical. Many of Finn's shows have been drawn from his life experience, but A New Brain was the first to really tell Finn's story. The main character and personification of Finn is Gordon Schwinn, a writer for a children's TV show. He is increasingly frustrated and feels creatively stifled by his boss, Mr. Bungee (played by Chip Zien, famous for Into the Woods). During a lunch with his friend Rhoda, Gordon passes out and is immediately taken to the hospital where he is diagnosed with a deadly brain condition called arteriovenous malformation. If this disease doesn't kill him, he might never be fully functional again, and therefore may not ever get to realize his most beautiful songs, which would be trapped forever in his useless brain.

As Gordon goes through the process of coping with his loved ones and contemplating his fate, the action alternates between reality and halucinations, during which he pours out songs so he can get them on paper before its too late.

Luckily, this one has a happy ending: Gordon recovers completely and rediscovers his creative energies and the beautiful things in his life. Sounds sappy, but really its not. Finn handles it with the awkward humor that tends to make his work so poignant.

A New Brain is the unsung musical for a less musically inclined audience. The songs are "hummable" in the best way possible: They are catchy and memorable but the musical patterns and melodies used in them are very unusual. Finn's lyrics are often silly and odd, but also in a fun and appropriate way. When a waitress takes Gordon's order at a restaurant early on, she sings "First the fish of the day, calimari! Which isn't a fish, but lives in the sea, as set in a dish, it happens to be the fish of the day...okay..." A sassy nurse sings "I am the nice nurse. If I can help you please let me help you, 'cause the others won't help you...those bitches!" Perhaps the best wacky moment comes in a montage of songs Gordo experiences during his surgery, where Rhoda, as a ventriloquist dummy, sings "Whenever I dream I dream pornographically explicit..." and the silly male nurse sings "I'm eating myself up alive." The oddities go on and on but they are what make A New Brain such a scrambled delight and a clever mirror for the chaos occurring in Gordo's brain.

Even more wonderful are the perfect amount of interspersed touching songs. "Sailing" is a stunning duet between Gordo and his lover Roger; the heartbreaking "Just Go" is Gordo telling Roger to leave and forget it, "I can't even walk across the room unassisted." and Roger responding with his insistence that he'll stay. Gordo's mother sings a beautiful song called "The Music Still Plays On," which is Gordon imagining how she'll be when he's gone.

Colleges often perform A New Brain, usually with student groups. The show is daunting to cast properly and so a fully student production can potentially miss much of what makes the show work. Gordo should be at least in his late thirties, disillusioned with his job and reflecting on his dreams. Mimi, his mother, needs a worldly sophistication and an understanding of what it means to be a parent. These problems are not unique to casting shows but the idea of age and life experience really are necessary here (as they are in a show I DON'T like, Sondheim's Merrily We Roll Along-also often performed by students. ) The male nurse is often the most difficult to cast, as ideally he needs to be large, flaming, and able to carry the phenomenal eleven o'clock number (the song that comes towards the end of the show that is meant to renergize the audience for the finale.) So a student cast has the potential for problems. On the other hand with a number like "Heart and Music", the show's main theme, it is hard not to give your audience goosebumps through the pure love of art that is exuded.

I would love to see more productions of A New Brain with casts who can realize its full potential. I recommend this one to anyone who likes to laugh and cry at the same time. The cast recording is available. A fun fact about it: Christopher Invar, the original title role in Floyd Collins, played Roger, but the recording features Norm Lewis (whom I have raved about for his "like buttah" voice in this blog) as Roger. So give A New Brain a listen...it's an emotional rollercoaster ride with a fantastic payoff.

Warts and all

Upon reading comments made by reviewers on my theatre's production of Floyd Collins and other productions of the same show, including the original New York production at Playwright's Horizons, I got to thinking about musicals that have a lot of flaws.

When musicals we haven't grown up on or maybe even heard of are produced, often we are quick to find the flaws with the writing and blame the show's lack of commercial success on them. By "we" I mean those who aren't musical theatre geeks..just those who pay to be entertained and educated.

Floyd Collins has it's share of problems with the book and the pacing. However, consistent critical negativity towards the show makes me wonder why the writing is not more often examined in the older musicals we have grown to love and that are guaranteed to pack houses no matter where they are done.

A few examples:

• Oklahoma!, by the infamous Rodgers and Hammerstein, is perhaps one of the most often performed musicals in the genre. A few years ago it saw a surge in performances by summer stock and amateur companies nationwide...it was the cool new old show to do. Running approximately 3 hours, the show is plagued with superficial characters who don't have much at stake. The most interesting and complex character, Jud Fry, is painted as a villain, killed at the end, and no one is made to pay for his death mostly because nobody liked him. Jud has been treated like dirt his entire life (in one song the romantic lead actually tries, in all seriousness, to convince him to kill himself), and while not a nice guy and definitely a bit crazy (he attempts to kill the romantic lead over a girl), it would have been fun to explore why he was the way he was. There is a beautiful and haunting song entitled "Lonely Room" that is often cut from the show, where Jud laments his lonely state in his little shed behind a farmhouse. The song is often cut because we almost feel sorry for Jud when we hear it. Then who will the villain be? Many will say Oklahoma is celebrated for its innovation: Agnes DeMille's dream ballet was revolutionary. Still, the show is problematic. Newer shows with very innovative ideas (for example, in Violet, the plot centers around a main character with a disfiguring scar. Other characters onstage are terrified and go so far as to scream when they see her face. The scar is not done with makeup. The audience never sees it) are not given the credit they deserve for their new ideas that are risky and end up working brilliantly. Another example lies in the echoes used in Floyd Collins as part of the music to reflect Collins in the cave. This brilliant innovation is rarely mentioned in reviews or acknowledged by audiences. If Oklahoma was written today we'd find it tedious, dull, and shallow.
• Another musical that brings people out in droves is My Fair Lady. Talk about a show that drags. For three hours we are subjected to lengthy songs in which the characters pontificate, celebrate or complain ("Why Can't a Woman Be More Like A Man", "Just You Wait", "With a Little Bit of Luck", "Without You" etc.) rather than songs that move the action forward (with the exception of "The Rain In Spain", where Eliza finally speaks with her new accent for the first time). But we care for these characters, mostly because we spend so much time with Eliza Doolittle, Henry Higgins, and Colonel Pickering...and because we are holding out for the realization of romantic feelings between Henry and Eliza-even though they aren't really realized.
• The Sound of Music onstage is perhaps one of the most tedious musicals out there. My theatre company did it before we went to doing lesser known pieces, and we chopped a good forty-five minutes off of it, still ending up with a 3 hour show. The Nazi threat and Captain Von Trapp's dangerous stance against it are hardly addressed, with the authors focusing instead to focus on the cute little kids. Critics hated this one, advising diabetics in particular to stay away from the saccharine musical. But people still flocked, and it is performed in approximately 500 venues each year. When done in its original form VERY few of the songs do anything to move the action forward. My company paid the extra fee to replace some of the original songs with ones from the movie. But people love this one. LOVE it. When played correctly and with depth there is a sweetness to it...but it takes quite a bit of work to extract.
• Damn Yankees has a great deal of problems. I love it, but the second act has so many scenes in it that unless you have a fancy rotating stage with everything on tracks you are in for some lengthy and frequent scene changes. The ending also makes little sense, with there never really being an explanation for why Joe Hardy didn't have to release his soul to the devil, except that he has realized how much he loves his wife. But it's full of rousing production numbers and hysterical lines.
• One that hits close to home for me, as I was in the National touring company: Cats. Nothing happens in this musical. In 2.5 hours nothing happens. There is no through line, very few distinguished characters, and it makes no damn sense. If that is not a reason to lombast a musical I don't know what is. But Cats really is now and forever. For whatever reason, people dressed as kitties prancing about in unitards is enough to keep the crowds coming...over and over and over, many of them dressed up. Yeesh.

These shows were successful in their time because they were what people wanted to see. The problem is that 60 + years later, with new musicals coming out constantly, they are still what people want to see. We have not allowed our ideas about what musical theatre should be to change.

Have we come to expect more? Do we forgive these older shows their flaws because musical theatre was even newer when they came out? If we've come to expect more, why do we continue to want only to see these flawed musicals that are nonetheless tried and true?

No show is perfect-a few come close in my book, but musical theatre is such a new art form, with so many different skills crammed into it, that we haven't quite figured out the formula. The above examples present reasons why these beloved musicals are treasured in spite of their flaws...so why are flaws used to quickly dismiss new works?

In only a century of existence many different styles have been attempted in musical theatre. And we must recognize that the newer musicals, the ones that we are skeptical of now, are the ones that will someday be remembered as classics. They are the ones that will someday be forgiven for their flaws. But if we do nothing but look back, what will happen to this quickly developing art form? I don't have the answer to this. But I do know that focusing on flaws in these newer musicals because we are skeptical of what we have to offer is not the answer to helping the art form move forward, especially because we are so forgiving of the major flaws in musicals that have made a significant mark.

Take a chance on something you haven't heard of. It won't be perfect. But guess what? It can still be worth it.

Rock crosses over

The phenomenon of rock musicals is not a new one. With Hair in 1968, Broadway music became mainstream again. When Broadway and vaudeville originated, they were the source for popular music. The stage was where the tunes you knew and loved came from. As the decades progressed and with the birth of rock and roll, this decreased. Then it all came full circle and the creators of Hair took the style of music that had become popular and put it back onstage. The rock musicals that have been born since are countless: Jesus Christ Superstar, Rent, and Godspell among them. However, unlike Hair, these shows had scores written by composers who specialized in musical theatre.

In 1993 Pete Townshend of The Who brought his famous rock opera Tommy to the stage at last. Tommy had an odd journey-it began as a concept album (as did Jesus Christ Superstar) and was then made into a film starring The Who's Roger Daltrey in the title role along with appearances by Tina Turner, Eric Clapton, Ann-Margaret, and Jack Nicholson, as well as Townshend and John Entwistle. Tommy was finally developed for the stage in the early 90s and was a smashing success. The adaptation of the score incorporated a Broadway sensibility to the raw rock style, adding a larger orchestra and trained singers with edgy voices, as opposed to straight up rock singers...but the rock authenticity of Townshend's style remained-he was NOT a musical theatre composer writing in the rock style. Putting the story and its characters onstage, combined with the dramatic use of songs like "Sensation", "Acid Queen", and "Pinball Wizard" made audiences flock to the theatre. Tommy tells the story of a young boy who witnesses the murder of his mother's lover by his father and is instantly traumatized, becoming deaf, dumb and blind. His childhood is traumatic, as he is molested by his uncle Ernie and tortured by his Cousin Kevin, unable to speak out or defend himself. For whatever reason, Tommy is able to play pinball like no other and becomes a sensation across the world. When Tommy is cured of his ailment he becomes wrapped up in the superficiality of celebrity, which eventually backfires and causes Tommy to re-establish his relationship with his family, who has been there for him in good times and bad, famous or not. In the musical version, young Tommy and adult Tommy interact, and adult Tommy narrates, taking only the audience into his mind as those around him struggle to communicate with him.

Now Townshend has announced (in one sentence on his blog) that he will write a new musical. Sources investigated and found that the musical is called Floss and is about a suffering baby boomer marriage. The songs from the show will be the basis for The Who's new album, which will be released in 2010, and a concert production of the full scale musical will be launched in 2011. Apparently talks are already out there for a Broadway production, but that's a long way off, especially considering the thing isn't even done.

Townshend explains the musical as such:
"The collected music and sound for Floss convey the story of a married couple whose relationship gets into difficulty. Walter, a straight-cut pub rock musician, is able to retire when one of his songs becomes the TV anthem of a big car company. He becomes a house-husband while his wife Floss devotes herself to a riding stables and stud. When he tries to return to music after a fifteen year hiatus, he finds that what he hears and what he composes evoke the ecologically rooted, apocalyptic mindset of his generation. Shaken by this and torn by personal difficulties, he and Floss become estranged. A series of dramatic events in a hospital emergency ward bring them both to their senses."

This raises a couple of questions for me. First of all, will Floss have nearly the same kind of following as Tommy? How many of Tommy's Broadway fans just went because they love The Who, and how many were people who weren't necessarily huge "Who" fans but had heard and enjoyed the music? Will people go to Floss just because its The Who? Keep in mind that the musical version of Tommy had 24 years preceding it, those years containing a hit album and a major motion picture. "Floss" will have had only one year to reach the mainstream before it is attempted onstage. And even if it does sell, how will it work artistically? The thing that makes me wonder, and want more information on the plot of Floss, is that Tommy was epic in style...it was an Amazing Journey that matched the Who's nonstop fast paced music. A story about a marriage in trouble is much more, for lack of a better word, normal. When you have a musical that explores the relationship between two people, the music tends to be much more intimate and introspective. Can Townshend adapt to that? People have come to expect epic spectacle from The Who thanks to Tommy.

To play devil's advocate with myself, Tommy does have very human elements to it as Tommy reconciles with his family and as they struggle to deal with his problems. Townshend demonstrates his ability to tug at heart strings in songs like "See Me, Feel Me" and "Listening To You". Still, in Tommy those songs are interspersed with whirlwind music, not to mention a plot that cannot be paralelled. Nothing like Tommy had ever been seen or heard (no pun intented...or was it?) The whole marriage in trouble thing has been done. And done. And done.

Time will tell. In the mean time the original Tommy album as well as the cast recording of Broadway's The Who's Tommy are both worth checking out. The songs are addictive-it is easy to see why it has developed such a following. I predict that Floss will be unable to match its predecessor, but time will tell.

Carrie-You're the Flop!

I had to get to this one sooner or later.

In 2005 I felt very privileged to attend a colossal flop of a Broadway show entitled "In My Life". This was written, directed, produced, and everything else-ed by Joe Brooks, Oscar winning composer of "You Light Up My Life" and was, perhaps, one of the most entertaining evenings of theatre I've ever spent. But in that very special way...where something transcends being bad and becomes so bad its good. Seriously, people were GIVING away tickets to this thing (How do you think I got them?) and it got some horrible reviews. Which is understandable. Whether it be the roller skating angels, the young musician wannabe hero with tourettes shouting obscenities, or the lemons that descended from the sky at the end, this one was a classic clunker that will go down in history.

Musical flops can be determined by a lot of things. Artistic merit sometimes has little to do with it and you get into the field of the business of shows. According to author Peter Filichia, who recently announced that he would write a book on big hits and flops in Broadway history, defines a flop through four categories: The expectations for it (think Frank Loesser of Guys and Dolls and his flop Greenwillow), the critical reception (my post about Glory Days discussed a show getting lambasted by the media after its one night run), length of run (Bring Back Birdie, the sequel to...well you can probably figure it out...ran only 4 performances) and the big one: How much money was lost.

There is one musical that is considered the ultimate in flops. The ultimate in disasters. This show failed in every category above: Expectations were high (The composers of Fame, a Tony winning actress and choreographer, a bestselling author for source material), critics hated it, it closed in five performances and it lost around $7 million. And it has developed the ultimate of cult followings. Because the music is believed by many to be great. (I find there is a lot of unmotivated belting, but nonetheless there are several haunting melodies)

Musical theatre geeks now know that I'm talking about Carrie. Yes, THAT Carrie. The one based on Stephen King's 1970s novel about a tormented high school girl with telekenetic powers. The 1979 film made stars out of Sissy Spacek and John Travolta. The musical version was developed by Michael Gore (music), Dean Pitchford (Lyrics) and Lawrence D. Cohen (book). The team was responsible for "Fame". They then teamed up with the Royal Shakespeare Company. Fame + RSC=CONFUSED.

The show inspired the wonderful book "Not Since Carrie", which details the disaster of this show. A few highlights of the train wreck include a book very difficult to follow, an assault on eyes and ears with special effects to make up for said bad book, the fact that the high school kids were played by overworked thirty year old actors, and the insanity of the music (at the time audiences weren't as accustomed to mega belting, which Carrie was full of)...but it is hard for me to sum up his account here. It sounds like a "You had to be there" situation to really understand. Below is a link to one account of the show that I found.

What's crazy about Carrie is that it just may have lasted longer in a different time. Many accounts of the show criticize it for it's blaring belting songs, which have become a staple of musical theatre today (Wicked, Aida, Side Show, Rent). In addition, perhaps we enjoy the music now because it is a throwback to an era that is now considered vintage. The 80s pop flavor is predominant but there are some beautifully written melodies that cause us to feel for the troubled teen and haunt us.

Still, no show can survive on belting alone. The costumes and scenery were nightmarish, and the choreography resembles an 80s dance video. Instead of focusing on the terrifying relationship between Carrie and her peers, the focus went to being ridiculous and garish. It used spectacle to mask poor character development and weak plot. Still, it certainly had an effect on audiences: It left many cheering, many booing, and many with their jaws on the floor at the utter ridiculousness in front of their eyes. People didn't know what to think...which is another unique factor.

In my previous post I talked about weird ideas for musicals that ended up working. I honestly think Carrie might have worked too in the right hands. Some of the music is rather like Debbie Gibson on acid...perhaps a stronger connection stylistically would have made a difference. Betty Buckley, of Cats fame, played Carrie's psycho religious mother, and Linzi Haitley, an 18 year old British newbie, played Carrie. When the two sang together the melodies reflected their angst filled relationship. Then all of a sudden the audience was transported into a fast forwarded Cyndi Lauper music video. One of the things that made the film version of Carrie so terrifying was the darkness that existed in the minds of these girls who seemed so normal. The idea then comes to the surface: The questions of inner and outer beauty and how good and evil take on many forms. But in the musical the creators stuck to what was easy: Girls jumping around in unitards and dancing frantically. The show is also criticized for its special effects being, well, unaffecting. Again though, these days who knows what they might be able to pull off? Some say the scene of Carrie destroying her entire high school couldn't have been done onstage-others say this production just did it wrong.

In the reviews of this show we hear that this was a terrible idea for a musical. I disagree. If we can write musicals about demon barbers, trapped men in caves, child killers, and manic depression we can have a musical about a telekentic teenager. It's all in the execution.

The rights to produce Carrie are not available, though there have been several productions, including one at Stagedoor Manor, a theatre camp for teenagers. The production was not sanctioned by the creators, who attended and expressed their disdain, but nonetheless allowed it to continue. There are revisions of the script and music online at the links below. Perhaps we will be seeing this thing remounted more often, and I wouldn't be surprised if audiences in certain areas flocked to it--if for no other reason than for a morbid fascination.


A TV review of the Broadway production
Several TV reviews

Carrie unofficial fan site

Carrie official site

An account from someone who was there

Ken Mandelbaum's "Not Since Carrie"

Buried alive: The musical

Actually it's called Floyd Collins. But essentially that tag line sums it up. Or it could be called "Media Circus" the musical (hey, someone should write that. I want a credit though). My theatre company begins rehearsals for this musical next week. It will perform Sept. 12 and 19 at 7:30pm and Sept. 13 and 20 at 2:00pm at the River Arts Center in Prairie du Sac, WI.

Floyd Collins premiered off-Broadway at Playwrights' Horizons in NYC. (I've mentioned it before-home to the beginnings of some phenomenal works of theatre). It was written by Adam Guettel, who later won a Tony for best score for The Light in the Piazza, and Tina Landau, a Steppenwolf company member. Floyd Collins is a true story about a man who became trapped in a cave in 1925 and started a media frenzy as his friends and family fought to get him out. The story itself is rather complex but fascinating, so I'll send you here to read about it in detail if you wish. What I want to discuss is what an innovative piece this show is.

Lets start with the subject matter. Here we have an event that, while very well known at the time, has been nearly forgotten. To top it off, we have the fact that the event is pretty morbid and dark...a guy getting trapped in a cave? My theatre has wanted to do this show for many years and I've spent those years enduring very skeptical gazes from people who I explain the show to. I also get a lot of "Oh, sounds like a happy family story!" We'll get to that in a moment because in fact it IS a family story, if not happy...but I find it interesting that people get wierded out about the subject matter even though musical theatre has been attacking wacky ideas for years: A barber kills his customers and his girlfriend bakes them into pies?(Sweeney Todd-1979) Two New York gangs are rivals to the point of rape and death? (West Side Story: 1957)Several people await torture and possible execution in a basement during the Spanish inquisition (Man of La Mancha: 1965)? I wouldn't call these happy family fare either, but since they've established themselves as classics we let it slide. Then we have the newer stuff: A soldier in Vietnam falls in love with a young prostitute and leaves her behind at the fall of Saigon. (Miss Saigon, 1989). A man steals a loaf of bread, serves 19 years and then spends decades outrunning the authorities for breaking parole. (Les Miserables, 1985)A scarred phantom terrorizes the Paris Opera House. (If I have to tell you which one I'm talking about here, abandon all hope...but I will tell you it debuted 1986.) Look at these subject matters separate from the titles and see what your first response would be if someone told you they wrote a musical about them.

Musical theatre knows no bounds these days-just in this blog I've talked about musicals dealing with murder, prostitution, statutory rape, Siamese twins, robbery, the devil, and psychotic, sadistic Roman emperors. So now we get to one about a guy who gets trapped in a cave.

Floyd Collins works on many levels, not the least of which is its ability to tug at heart strings by bringing a rich life to Floyd's family and the people who cared about his entrapment. To make the show work we spend as much time with those affected by the tragedy as we do with the victim. Also, the story attracted a phenomenal amount of attention because of the humanizing of the man who was trapped by a young reporter named Skeets Miller. Miller is a prominent character in the story and he serves as sort of our Emcee (Cabaret) or Balladeer (Assassins)...he is our link to the action while also a part of it. This perfectly symbolizes the role he played in the actual tragedy. While other members of the media exaggerated the story like crazy, Miller kept it real and kept the story coming straight from the horse's mouth.

Then there is the beautiful score. Guettel has taken the style of the era, a folksy, bluegrass sound, and infused it with a musical theatre style. Folk music is much about telling stories (A folk song called "The Death of Floyd Collins" has been recorded about a zillion times)and so Guettel and Landau use this device as part of their means of communication. It is simply brilliant. Then of course you have the phenomenal use of the echoes Floyd encounters in the cave...when he finds the spot he believes opens up into a large cavern, he begins to yodel, and a phenomenal cacophany of echoes begins. One of my favorites is "Is That Remarkable?", a song markedly different in style from the rest of the score because it depicts three silly reporters exaggerating Floyd's story. The song features incredibly intricate harmonies and a vaudeville-like style that plays up the ridiculousness of claims made by the press at the time (such as that the rock that trapped Floyd weighed 7 tons, when in reality it was only 27 pounds). While it's a great song, it is also genuinely funny, proving that Guettel and Landau understand that their audiences need the comic relief.

I could go on and on until your eyes bleed so I'll stop now. If you're in the Madison area, and I may shamelessly plug my theatre for a moment, I suggest you come and see this musical. It is a true gem of the musical theatre genre and the opportunities to see it will remain few and far between because of the complexity of the score, the difficulty of casting it, and the fact that just not enough people know about it.

Music Theatre of Madison: Tickets to Floyd Collins

Roger Brucker, expert on Floyd Collins (who will appear in Madison for the show)

A tripod fansite on the musical

Scott Miller's interesting essay on the musical (see my post from May on Randy Newman's Faust for more about Scott)