"Are musicals from the 20th century fit for the 21st?"

[distantcousin]

Apologies if already posted, or is in the wrong section, but this was posted in The Stage, following the UK Musical Theatre Conference 2024.... 


www.thestage.co.uk/features/are-musicals-from-the-20th-century-fit-for-the-21st

[BurlyBeaR]

Apr 23, 2024 8:07:01 GMT distantcousin said:

Apologies if already posted, or is in the wrong section, but this was posted in The Stage, following the UK Musical Theatre Conference 2024.... 


www.thestage.co.uk/features/are-musicals-from-the-20th-century-fit-for-the-21st

Paywall. Can you summarise the opinion please, and maybe tell us where you stand as the OP? 

[distantcousin]

"We must address the truth that some of our beloved musicals, monumental as they are, leave legacies totally outdated to our current ideologies."

This was the viewpoint of producer James Steel, when addressing the question: are classic musicals from the 20th century fit for purpose in the 21st?

It was raised at a panel at the UK Musical Theatre Conference 2024, held at the Royal Court in London on April 12.

Alongside Steel, the panel comprised producer Joanne Benjamin, writer, actor and songwriter Anoushka Lucas and critic Andrzej Lukowski.

Steel, who thinks musicals from the 20th century are not fit for purpose today, told delegates that classic musicals were a "product of their time, clashing with today’s values and sensibilities".

He said many older musicals were "tainted by racism and misogynistic" terms.

He admitted that, even the show he is currently producing – Ushers the Front of House Musical – had become "outdated" in the 10 years since it was first staged, and changes had been required for its latest run.

He said he was more interested in "new stories about today’s society" than reviving old shows.

"Plays and musicals speaking to modern concerns not only ensure the continued relevance of theatre, but foster ongoing dialogue and growth in our industries," he insisted.

He also said older musicals should be filmed and stored in archives, to allow people to use them as a source to "look back on", rather than being restaged.

Meanwhile, Benjamin, a producer at Trafalgar Entertainment, said she believed "new musicals and revivals can work in the same environment". Trafalgar Entertainment was behind the successful revival of Anything Goes at the Barbican Theatre, in 2021 and 2022.

"Many older musicals were revolutionary in their time and still hold relevance today, and many new musicals are written in a style that hark back to the past," she said.

She argued that audiences still want to see shows from the 20th century, and that they can be introduced to other, newer musicals through these musicals.

She also highlighted how recent revivals, including Oklahoma! and Cabaret, had been made "accessible to our modern audiences" by directors who have made alterations to the scripts.

Benjamin said writers creating musicals today should be able to look at the structure of older musicals and learn from them.

"If you are a musical theatre writer you can look at the work of Berlin, Novello, Sondheim and Porter, for [examples of a] great, structured art form. Looking at the past helps you structure your own musicals," she said.

The debate also heard from critic Lukowski, who began by referring to Stephen Daldry’s production of the JB Priestley play An Inspector Calls, first staged in 1992 and still being produced today.

"Nobody is allowed to do a new production – it killed or froze An Inspector Calls as a living work of art," he said, adding: "Is it reasonable a whole generation of directorial talent won’t get a crack of it?"

He added: "My point is, what is extraordinary for a play is alarmingly normal for a musical."

He said the current musical theatre landscape was "rooted" in a handful of long-running shows "barely changed since they were first staged decades ago", such as Les Misérables and Mamma Mia!.

"It is not a question of whether they are good, but a question of what the artistic implications are for some of our most successful works of theatre remaining all but unchanged for decades on end," he said.

He said musicals from the ‘Golden Era’ were often rolled out "nostalgically" but pointed to productions such as a revival of Carousel at Regent’s Park Open Air Theatre in 2021, which he said was "not nostalgic, new and vital" because of how it was reinterpreted.

"Shakespeare plays move with the times, they are not put on because we are in a constant grip of Elizabethan nostalgia," he added.

"Having a classic production 50 years ago or 30 years ago does not make a musical classic now, but I think the industry often acts like it does. In the right hands and right team, most decent musicals can be fit for purpose. It is the 20th century we need to move on from," he said.

Lucas, who starred in Daniel Fish’s update of the musical Oklahoma!, which originally opened at the Young Vic before moving to the West End, described humans as "complicated creatures", in an address in favour of restaging musicals from the 20th century today.

"We can like and dislike commenting at the same time and that makes them interesting and useful, not bad," she said, highlighting how she had enjoyed Anything Goes with Sutton Foster, even though it was "racially confused".

She said Oklahoma! director Fish had spoken about the need to make audiences sit for "long periods of time in discomfort".

"There are respectful ways and disrespectful ways to do this, but we must allow new directors and creators to re-interrogate these texts. There is so much good in them for artists and audiences to learn about structure, music and dance and storytelling. The entire point of art is to make us deal with how imperfect and confused we are and find beauty in it," she said.

Lucas also said audiences should be trusted to be able to see shows and "sift through" what was and what was not acceptable.

"Should we stage racist, misogynistic, queer-phobic shows with no interrogation? No. But are people born in 2002 capable of sitting in an audience and dismantling misogyny from fantastically structured songs? Yes. I think we discredit audiences when we say they can’t hold the political complexities of old work," she said.

MY TAKE:

It is an interesting debate - initially it got my hackles up, mainly just because I think 20th century musicals are FAR better than anything that's been written in the 21st. But as I read on, I did think some good points were made on reinterpretations of theatrical works, by new generations. And I've never believed musicals should become museum pieces.

BUT I don't believe in b*stardising them to such a point, they disrespect the writers (even if they are dead) because they are so ludicrously removed from the original intent of the piece.

[theatrefan62]

I find it quite depressing, and shocking, that people can't comprehend when a piece of art is set or written and the historical context around that.

Why does everything need to be made relevant purely for a modern audience view of things.

Movies and shows from the 40s and 50s weren't exactly relevant to society in the 90s or 00s either.

People don't like or feel comfortable with certain themes in shows? Good, that's kind of the point. Using Carousel as an example, many domestic abuse victims today have the same view as Julie on their abusive partners. That's partly why they stay with them so long. It's not an outdated view at all.

Also, as long as modern art and culture being made today in things like music and gaming glamorises gang culture, sexual objectification of women, homophobia etc then I don't want to hear from people complaining about something from 50 years ago.

[aspieandy]

The cultural revolution must continue.

[danb]

Drives me nuts. Who’s to say that it wasn’t the done thing to knock your woman about a bit in 1909 Maine to disguise your own failings and insecurities? Or more to the point what can we learn from a demonstration of this behaviour today as part of that story?

But if it doesn’t fit somebody’s narrow prescriptive version of what they think society should be like today, without acknowledging the rest of history before, they show themself as rather dim. We know what’s right & wrong, thanks. It doesn’t stop horror films or thrillers being entertaining, or people watching boxing etc.

Just re-read this and it sounds harsher than the point I’m trying to make. It isn’t ok to knock anyone about…

[max]

Interesting that 'An Inspector Calls' gets mentioned. I remember being angry in 1992 when the NT announced they were going to stage that tired box set staple of Amateur drama companies. Then Daldry showed what he had, and I've rarely been more pleased to be wrong. Lukowski now cites the Daldry version as a set-in-aspic problem, preventing the play from moving on and being reinterpreted. May be true - though who's got a better idea for the play? Nobody, but perhaps it's time to try - that's if the estate of Priestley allow any other versions.

So I'm up for radical reinterpretations, and less 'fussed with' versions to which I can bring my own sense of the distance we've travelled in our culture. But we all have our limits, and I'll have mine (things or words I just don't want to see or hear).

I much preferred the recent 'Aspects Of Love' to Jamie Lloyd's effortful rescheming of 'Sunset Boulevard'. For some there were basic quality issues in some aspects of "Aspects" and there's no argument to put up against personal taste; but I did feel that in objecting to it others were wanting to demonstrate the sharpness of their current worldview. In some ways they got terrific value for money out of it, and the platform it gave them. Personally, I enjoyed my current worldview applied to manners and mores that either aren't so prevalent today, or we simply dare not speak of today - far more interesting than not seeing it at all because it's been shamed into not existing. Or, seeing something so safe it becomes 'lifestyle accessory theatre' and tbh that's the direction I see a lot of new Musical Theatre writing going (cast and audience all 'in the gang' cosy together, a bit smug).

[Jon]

A lot of musicals haven't aged well like Flower Drum Song for example but some shows don't lend themselves to reinvention.

[danb]

Apr 23, 2024 12:36:57 GMT Jon said:

A lot of musicals haven't aged well like Flower Drum Song for example but some shows don't lend themselves to reinvention.

But stuff like Chichesters ‘South Pacific’ dealt with its modernity problems by just telling the story clearly, and showing us all sides of the race issue (and by that frankly phenomenal cast acting the sh!t out of it).

[blamerobots]

Anything can be staged at anytime. A director is always dealing with their contemporary audience and making something for them and then. Think of the time period in which Daldry's Inspector was staged...

We run the risk of further making shows museum pieces if people are too afraid to re-interpret a work in a way that means something for an audience of today. Theatre sits in a unique box, it can still evolve unlike a film made back in the 50's, frozen in time. I think it's pretty regressive to just make a blanket statement like this, especially as a producer.

I agree with Daniel Fish in that audiences should really be trusted more to know what is wrong and right.

[sleepflower]

I did English lit at uni and I'm obviously a theatre fan so I've spent many hours chewing over literature and its themes, but this view that something existing is an endorsement is just so simplistic. Someone reading Lolita doesn't mean they are attracted to children. Just because I read Titus Andronicus doesn't mean I condone cannibalism. Just because there is domestic violence in Carousel doesn't mean we shouldn't have it on stage. Life is full of unpleasant things, we can't have art that doesn't reflect it.

I'd also agree that 20th century musicals are better. Without long runners like Les Mis and Phantom, the West End would not be bringing in nearly enough money.

[Fleance]

I was in a production of Carousel in grade school in New York City, several decades ago. The cast included 10 and 11-year olds. It was a courageous choice for kids, dealing as it does with spousal abuse, theft, murder, class consciousness, death, and mourning. At least one line was changed for the show. In our production, Arminy sang: "The clock just ticks your life away, there's no relief in site. It's cooking and scrubbing and sewing all day, and the same thing's every night."

It wasn't until years later that I learned the actual lyric is "And God knows what all night."

Listening to the show today, it's obvious that the lyrics are of another age. Just listen to "June Is Bustin' Out All Over," or "What's the Use of Wond'rin'." But it's such a great show. And it taught us New York City kids what a clambake was, and what vittles are. And about the insular New England community portrayed in the show, the good and the bad.

[BVM]

Apr 23, 2024 12:25:11 GMT max said:

Interesting that 'An Inspector Calls' gets mentioned. I remember being angry in 1992 when the NT announced they were going to stage that tired box set staple of Amateur drama companies. Then Daldry showed what he had, and I've rarely been more pleased to be wrong. Lukowski now cites the Daldry version as a set-in-aspic problem, preventing the play from moving on and being reinterpreted. May be true - though who's got a better idea for the play? Nobody, but perhaps it's time to try - that's if the estate of Priestley allow any other versions.

So I'm up for radical reinterpretations, and less 'fussed with' versions to which I can bring my own sense of the distance we've travelled in our culture. But we all have our limits, and I'll have mine (things or words I just don't want to see or hear).

I much preferred the recent 'Aspects Of Love' to Jamie Lloyd's effortful rescheming of 'Sunset Boulevard'. For some there were basic quality issues in some aspects of "Aspects" and there's no argument to put up against personal taste; but I did feel that in objecting to it others were wanting to demonstrate the sharpness of their current worldview. In some ways they got terrific value for money out of it, and the platform it gave them. Personally, I enjoyed my current worldview applied to manners and mores that either aren't so prevalent today, or we simply dare not speak of today - far more interesting than not seeing it at all because it's been shamed into not existing. Or, seeing something so safe it becomes 'lifestyle accessory theatre' and tbh that's the direction I see a lot of new Musical Theatre writing going (cast and audience all 'in the gang' cosy together, a bit smug).

I really do agree with this sentiment. And certainly the disapprovers got huge mileage out of telling everyone how inappropriate it all was.

I think Aspects of Love really is an interesting and engaging story. The slight problem with last years version is it kind of trod a line of trying to please everyone and not succeeding. The fans of the original felt no need for it to be watered down. The mob decrying it still got the fabled "ick" anyway. I personally think they should have had the guts to stage it as written. As observed, audiences are intelligent enough (in the main) to draw their own conclusions. The Hope Mill version was sensational and it's a shame it couldn't have a bigger orchestra.

(There is a separate conversation to be had on how musicals now feel the need to appease influencers for ticket sales).

Anyway, either way, it is to my taste quite the most sublime and an absolute masterclass in the construction of a sung through musical. 21st century light pop song - dialogue - light pop song - dialogue could never.....

And I echo the points above that 20th century musicals were (so far) just better written.

Miss Saigon another one that constantly comes up as problematic. I am certainly aware of this and never sure if I should feel guilty for how much I like it. Musically it is an absolute masterpiece. Easily my favourite score of all time after Starlight Express. (Which IS a musical that gets updated, for better or worse, for every generation!)

[oxfordsimon]

I only saw An Inspector Calls last year or perhaps the year before. And it felt very dated and far from radical.

In one way that shows how influential it has been. But it now seems to exist as a cosy piece of nostalgia and as something for teenagers to study.

Given how the rights have been restricted, no one has had the opportunity to revisit the piece. Priestley died 40 years ago and so there are three more decades before people can do what they like with his plays without having to negotiate with agents and rights holders.

It would be good for the rights to be released so that other creative minds can see how they can work with the text.

Few directors will have probably given it much thought because of the dominance of Daldry. But if they knew that new productions could be permitted, they may well start to bring fresh thinking to it.

Now the rights for Priestley are nowhere near as tightly controlled as those for Beckett. He died in 1989 and so we have even longer to wait for artistic freedom to come to his great works.

[bobbievanhusen]

Apr 23, 2024 19:41:54 GMT BVM said:

And certainly the disapprovers got huge mileage out of telling everyone how inappropriate it all was.

*Cough* MJT....