The Ongoing Wicked Discussion Thread

[jacob]

Mar 13, 2022 19:38:17 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

Mar 13, 2022 18:52:14 GMT jacob said:

One can dream

For those of us who don’t want to watch an 80 minute video could you summarise it for us please? 

mainly discusses the difference in relationship between both Glinda and Elphaba, however also criticises the show in a few other ways (all to which I agree with)

- Glinda’s ability to see Elphaba’s beauty past her own standards compared to Fiyero who’s “looking at things another way.” Glinda loves Elphaba for who she is and their bond is so much more advanced

- Elphaba sings “hands touch, eyes meet” in INTG which apparently applies to her falling in love with Fiyero yet not in the same sense that this is what happens when M. Morrible pairs them as roommates .. the two touch hands

- from author of the Wicked novel, Gregory Maguire: "The musical [...] stepped even more steeply back from the hint of romantic attraction between the leads… with the effect, some feel, of heightening the possibility of what remains unsaid!

- 2019 Pride Wicked merch , T-shirt with text “Friend of Elphaba “ ..

[robertb213]

That's....a reach.

[BurlyBeaR]

And then some. It’s nice that people are talking about it though isn’t it… 🙂

[fiyerorocher]

I definitely agree there's queer subtext to Wicked that goes woefully un-mined. Would be nice to up the pitifully small number of queer female characters in musicals, as well...

[inthenose]

Mar 13, 2022 21:59:29 GMT BurlyBeaR said:

And then some. It’s nice that people are talking about it though isn’t it… 🙂

Agree. I think it's nice that people can choose to interpret a show however they like. It doesn't matter if it's true or not, everyone has their own agendas to push and that is what makes life interesting.

I personally interpret Legally Blonde to be a scathing and searing indictment of the legal system, delivered with post-modern panache. Elle (who is gay) is actually in love with a tree. It's all there in the subtext.

[jacob]

cheers for the lovely replies, only just think speculating and having alternate analyses makes it just a little more engaging for myself and many others

[fiyerorocher]

Ah yes, because someone reading queer subtext into something should *definitely* be referred to as 'pushing an agenda', like it's the early 2000s and this is a far right religious group??? No one is pushing an agenda, they're just seeing different meaning in a piece of theatre because of the experiences they've had. That is how consuming and enjoying media works.

It's also worth noting that the interpretation of Wicked of having queer subtext is something the show does seem to be aware of. E.g:

Considering it's based off a piece of media renowned for being read for its queer subtext, it would be odd for them not to be aware.

[Deleted]

I don't think it's anything to do with any agenda or otherwise, I just think the basis of the analysis is so far-fetched. There isn't always a need to turn a story about friendship between two women into something more, especially when that story is to me so obviously what the musical is saying (see e.g. all the lyrics to For Good).

Reading unarticulated (by either words or choreography) subtext into things like that line from Fiyero doesnt further anything - he is reacting to how Elphaba sees herself, nothing more.

As Maguire said, the musical diverges significantly from the book, including in relation to any potential sub-text. They aren't even really the same story, they just use the same characters. So to project one on the other actually ends up only taking away from both their individual merits. They are two different stories.

And I wouldn't read anything deeper into the Pride support either - every show does the same, as they should.

People are entitled to interpret shows how they wish, but people are equally entitled to say they find certain interpretations completely implausible in the context of the specific show. There shouldn't be any exemption from that just because of what the interpretation is.

[fiyerorocher]

One can, however, think someone's interpretation is implausible without belittling it using language typically used by people seeking to vilify the queer community.

And yes, while supporting Pride is not unique to Wicked, their choice to depict their two female leads together in rainbow face paint at a pride parade feels slightly different than posting a rainbow flag and calling it a day (as many/most other shows do). They're certainly aware that some people see queer themes in the show. You don't have to see those themes yourself, but many people do and that's far from outlandish. No one is saying Elphaba and Glinda *are* canonically gay in the show, only that there is queer subtext. Personally I'd love them to have written it with queer female leads. I can count the shows that have lesbian characters on one hand.

[robertb213]

I'm all for more lesbian leads in shows, fantastic, go and write some, but finding a queer subtext in an obviously platonic friendship does feel a bit of a stretch. I've seen it 10 times, 11th this coming weekend, and I'm gay, and I've never once thought there was any subtext between Elphaba and Galinda. If it's based on the 'why Miss Elphaba, you're beautiful' line then it's a bit flimsy.

The musical is a celebration of strong women and female friendship, cemented by "For Good", and that should be brilliant enough without finding need to make it something else. Interpret it how you like I guess, but for me there is literally zero subtext that I can see.

What's next, Marius and Enjolras opening a Bed & Breakfast together somewhere in Paris, just because they pat each other on the back occasionally? 🤣

[fiyerorocher]

You're entitled to your opinion. That does not make the opinion of others wrong. I've seen Wicked just as many times, and I can see the subtext throughout. Isn't it nice that we can appreciate the same show in different ways without trying to mock people on the internet for having a different but equally valid opinion!

[robertb213]

Can you give us some examples of the subtext that you see, maybe that would help us see it in the way you're seeing it?

[WireHangers]

I’m surprised that anyone who’s read the book wouldn’t think there was queer subtext between the two main characters. Especially since virtually every character is queer in one way or another.

[danb]

Since when did we totally change the meaning, and therefore the story, just because we want to see things a certain way? We can write stories, and we can write slash fan fiction for our own amusement. But it isn’t fact and we can’t just manipulate the story and find meaning when it isn’t there, or because that is what we want it to be. (In the musical).

[fiyerorocher]

I think the notion of subtext being underlying may have slightly passed you by. You don't need to manipulate the story to see queer subtext in it. Many people do. You do not. That is fine. Those who do are allowed to watch and enjoy the show and form their own thoughts all the same.

It is truly baffling that so many people cannot comprehend that not everyone watches a show with the same frame of mind they do.

[danb]

How incredibly patronising…I understand subtext. It’s a bit like ‘nuance’ and ‘allegory’ in the list of words reviewers use to sound clever when they are lost for something interesting to say.

“No Deborah, they’re not stranded on the island they just live there.

No, nobody is forcing them to open a taverna, she really wants to.

No Deborah I don’t think they’re meant to represent the three shepherds & the women the three wise men. They’re her mates and they’re the three blokes she sh@gged that could be the father! “ 🙄

I understand exactly what you say YOU see when you watch it but that is an interpretation based on your life experiences and what you’d like it to be, not a reflection of the piece as written.

[shady23]

Mar 14, 2022 19:05:51 GMT WireHangers said:

I’m surprised that anyone who’s read the book wouldn’t think there was queer subtext between the two main characters. Especially since virtually every character is queer in one way or another.

The books were such hard going I am surprised anyone managed to read very much at all into them.

[robertb213]

Subtext is a hidden meaning, alluded to by actual dialogue, behaviour, body language or interaction within the text itself. Where are you seeing these allusions? I'm trying to see it from your side but so far your case is that there is a queer subtext simply because you say you can see one. Great, but that's not subtext, that's just interpretation. What specifically makes it queer to you?

[theatreian]

I too am gay and have seen Wicked many times, never have a see a gay connection to the lead characters. It just seems a friendship to me.

[richey]

I recently re-read the novel after seeing the show again and I didn't pick up on any subtext. All I got from it was how much it differed from the musical- there's little in common between the two except character and place names and two of those characters don't last as long as they do in the show, both meeting grisly ends.

[fiyerorocher]

Forgive me if I take men, gay or otherwise, telling me they don't see lesbian subtext with a pinch of salt. Unfortunately I don't have the time, nor the inclination to write you a thesis on the queer subtext of Wicked - although it would be a great subject. To me it's quite clear and I wouldn't want to condescend to you by pointing out what I feel is rather obvious subtext in Elphaba's narrative, in the manipulation of different literary tropes, the staging of different numbers, etc. You may not see it, but I am far from the only one who does - I think someone posted you a whole video a couple of pages back. Perhaps give that a watch if you're in search of examples (although I haven't seen it so I can't make any promises of its quality). Once again: people take different things from the same show. That is a good thing. The original Wizard of Oz film became a cultural touchstone for many queer people, but to most people who watch it, nothing like that comes across. Different experiences inform different readings( or, in this case, 'watchings'). No one is saying Elphaba and Glinda *are* queer, no one is saying that Elphaba and Glinda are *intended* to be queer (although the show has leaned into the notion on more than one occasion, probably because they know it'll get engagement on social media). People are only saying there is the potential to read queer subtext into their story, which hurts no one and is not a view point that can possibly be wrong because it's an opinion, so I'm really not sure why anyone feels the need to be defensive of not even hypothetically queering the show.

[inthenose]

Mar 15, 2022 10:05:01 GMT fiyerorocher said:

Forgive me if I take men, gay or otherwise, telling me they don't see lesbian subtext with a pinch of salt.
Unfortunately I don't have the time, nor the inclination to write you a thesis on the queer subtext of Wicked - although it would be a great subject. To me it's quite clear and I wouldn't want to condescend to you by pointing out what I feel is rather obvious subtext in Elphaba's narrative, in the manipulation of different literary tropes, the staging of different numbers, etc. You may not see it, but I am far from the only one who does - I think someone posted you a whole video a couple of pages back. Perhaps give that a watch if you're in search of examples (although I haven't seen it so I can't make any promises of its quality). Once again: people take different things from the same show. That is a good thing. The original Wizard of Oz film became a cultural touchstone for many queer people, but to most people who watch it, nothing like that comes across. Different experiences inform different readings( or, in this case, 'watchings'). No one is saying Elphaba and Glinda *are* queer, "no one is saying that Elphaba and Glinda are *intended* to be queer (although the show has leaned into the notion on more than one occasion, probably because they know it'll get engagement on social media). People are only saying there is the potential to read queer subtext into their story", which hurts no one and is not a view point that can possibly be wrong because it's an opinion, so I'm really not sure why anyone feels the need to be defensive of not even hypothetically queering the show.

I am confused what you mean by this. What does gender have to do with clinical analysis of the work? If you could elaborate or rephrase, that would be appreciated as I would hate for your comment to be taken as sexist or homophobic. Thanks!

[fiyerorocher]

Really not sure how it could be taken in either way. Considering we're having a discussion about female same-sex attraction subtext, those most predisposed to see potential for the reading of the work as queer in this way are likely to be gay women.

[robertb213]

fiyerorocher So you want us to understand your argument but you're not willing to actually explain it. We're trying but you're not giving us anything to work with.

[fiyerorocher]

Again, I really don't have the time to write you an essay. I'm not actually asking you to understand anything, only to accept that it's a view people validly hold. Whether you hold it as well doesn't really make much of a difference to me. There's a lot of a sense of 'well I don't see it, so it doesn't exist', which is not how these things work. Stopping at 'well I don't see it' is just fine.