Poll
Thu, 12 July 2001, 01:38 pmWalter Plinge44 posts in thread
Poll
Thu, 12 July 2001, 01:38 pmI have a couple of queries regarding the current poll. Firstly, it asks us to vote for our favourite "broadway" musical. By saying "broadway" I assume that means that angled strip in NYC around which most of the NY theatres are. So, does that mean we are being asked "Which of the current musicals on Broadway now (or recently) do you prefer?"? If so, I don't get it because there ain't too many of us here in godzown what get to go to too many "broadway" musicals. The voter base would be very small.
If the question should have been a more general "Which of these is your favourite musical?", why is there not somewhere for Leah and me to vote "None"?
If the question should have been a more general "Which of these is your favourite musical?", why is there not somewhere for Leah and me to vote "None"?
RE: Musical Bashers.
Mon, 16 July 2001, 02:08 pmCary wrote:
-------------------------------
OK. But it doesn't escape the fact that most musicals are trite in content, superficial in structure and emotionally artificial. Let me ask you this... What is theatre acting? Real life emotions in an artificial situation, perhaps? OK... so what is musical theatre acting then? Artificial emotions in an artificial situation perhaps?
....
You've got a fairly fundamental problem with your argument there Cary, doesn't the above mean that Opera too must be "artifical emotions in an artificial situation"? Doesn't that make it as bad as musicals? And after having seen "After Aida" I must say that the words of the songs in Opera (gee, I'm a philistine) are just as silly if not more so than those in musicals. Why is it a more valid art-form, again?
As for your rebuttal Toby, here goes. I fear reverse snobbery. People refuse to go and see Shakespeare because it's too hard. The kids won't try becasue of the highbrow reputation. So we have to package it as a Hollywood block buster, which suceeds while, as you yourself said, REAL Shakespeare (like the Twelth Night) sinks without a trace. Are we, in the name of re-inventing things and repackaging them to keep them alive, slowly killing the real thing? Give people a substitute that's easier to swallow and they won't bother with the original.
Or, if we decied we must cater to what we think kids tastes are (did we ask them?), why do we bother with theatre at all? We just need Juliet repackaged as a hotpant wearing, large bosomed, plait and gun toting archeologist and park them in front of "R&J for PS2". Or we lie down and give in to TV. Some ideas are worth preserving in their pure form and striving to get people to make that tiny amount of effort it takes to get the kids, or anyone else, to use their brains a bit and take on a challenge for a huge reward; beautiful language, real pure emotion and timeless stories. I don't beleive that if a child says "It's too hard" the first thing you should do is try to make it easy.
While updates, simplifications, and reinterpretations have their place, the problem is what they REplace.
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···