Everything I Know I Learned From Musicals

The 2012 Tony Nominations - My Take

I got a call yesterday from a producer at Marketplace on National Public Radio. She wanted to know what I thought about the impending Tony Award nominations, and specifically what I thought of the chances of Spider-Man getting a nod for Best Musical. As a reporter myself, I knew that there was a chance I might not make it on the program: reporters often interview more people than they need just to make sure they're covered when they sit down to write.

But I did, in fact, make it onto the program, albeit in severely edited form. There was about five seconds of me talking and another five of me laughing. It basically went like this:

"A year ago, if you’d told me that we were looking at the prospect of Spider-Man actually getting a nomination for Best Musical...[laughs]...I’m not exactly sure what I would have said. [laughs]"

Ah, but enough of my humble-brag. As it turns out, cooler heads prevailed and Spider-Man did not receive a nomination for Best Musical, although it did receive nods for its costumes and sets. When I was speaking with the NPR producer, I was very cynical and dismissive of the Tonys and the awards process in general, but I have to say that, looking at the nominations, which came out this morning, on the whole the list is a fairly accurate reflection of what was genuinely good this season. (As to whether the eventual winners will reflect the true quality of the season, I remain deeply cynical.)

Here are some of the nominations for musicals this year, along with my take on the nominees, the prospective winners, and the significant omissions. For the purposes of this post, I've haven't included every single category - for instance, I haven't listed the nominees for sound design, lighting design, and orchestrations. This is not because I think that these areas are unimportant, but because I don't have enough knowledge in these fields to comment meaningfully. And, unlike many other people in the theater realm, I'd rather not spout opinions in areas in which I have no authority. (OK, Neil?)

Best Musical
Leap of Faith
Newsies
Nice Work If You Can Get It
Once
Missing: Spider-Man, Ghost, Lysistrata Jones, Bonnie & Clyde
Deserves to Win: Once
Will Win: Newsies
My Take: The fourth slot here, which many people thought might have gone to Spider-Man, in fact went to Leap of Faith. Unfortunately, this was the only nod for this sadly underrated musical. I hope to publish my review sometime before the show closes, which unfortunately looks like it will be very soon.

Best Revival of a Musical
Evita
Follies
Porgy and Bess
Jesus Christ Superstar
Missing: Godspell, On a Clear Day You Can See Forever
Deserves to Win: Follies
Will Win: Follies. Evita and JCS got pretty mixed reviews, and Porgy & Bess has been controversial. So I'm thinking the Tony voters will play it safe and give it to Follies.
My Take: Godspell is the only musical production this season to receive absolutely no nominations in any category. I can't say this is surprising, as the show didn't fare well with the critics. The show does seem to be limping steadily along at the box office, and I can't imagine it has very high running costs, so prospects for the production may not be all that bleak.

Best Book of a Musical
Lysistrata Jones, Douglas Carter Beane
Newsies, Harvey Fierstein
Nice Work If You Can Get It, Joe DiPietro
Once, Enda Walsh
Missing: Leap of Faith, Ghost, Bonnie & Clyde, Spider-Man
Deserves to Win: Once
Will Win: Newsies. Once is beautiful, but not showy enough. Nice Work If You Can Get It is a laugh riot, thanks to DiPietro's fun and lively book. But I'm thinking this award will be part of a Newsies sweep.
My Take: Lysistrata Jones gets its one nomination here, and I suppose that makes sense. The show was definitely funny, even if the jokes were rather superficial and generic. I would have preferred Leap of Faith getting the nod here for its relatively complex characterizations and palpable human feeling.

Best Original Score
Bonnie & Clyde, Music: Frank Wildhorn Lyrics: Don Black
Newsies, Music: Alan Menken Lyrics: Jack Feldman
One Man, Two Guvnors, Music & Lyrics: Grant Olding
Peter and the Starcatcher, Music: Wayne Barker Lyrics: Rick Elice
Missing: Leap of Faith, Ghost, Spider-Man, Lysistrata Jones. (Nice Work If You Can Get It and Once were not eligible.)
Deserves to Win: Newsies
Will Win: Newsies
My Take: The fact that there are two straight plays nominated in this category is a deliberate slap in the face to the pop-music dilettantes responsible for the painfully lackluster scores to Ghost and Spider-Man. The Tony nominating committee is basically saying, "Be gone! And don't come back until you can learn how to write an integrated, dramatically purposeful musical-theater score." (Well, at least that's what I hope they're saying. At any rate, it's what I'm saying.) And with Bonnie & Clyde, the nomating committee is expressing its surprise that a Frank Wildhorn score was, well, almost good.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role in a Musical
Danny Burstein, Follies
Jeremy Jordan, Newsies
Steve Kazee, Once
Norm Lewis, Porgy and Bess
Ron Raines, Follies
Missing: Matthew Broderick, Nice Work If You Can Get It; Raul Esparza, Leap of Faith
Deserves to Win: Danny Burstein
Will Win: A toss-up between Jeremy Jordan and Steve Kazee, but I'm going with Kazee.
My Take: Seeing Ron Raines here is a bit of a surprise. Most people seemed to think that slot would go to Raul Esparza, who was going to finally win a Tony this year, and yet he wasn't even nominated. That's what happens when the industry gets a hair across its ass about your show.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role in a Musical
Jan Maxwell, Follies
Audra McDonald, Porgy and Bess
Cristin Milioti, Once
Kelli O’Hara, Nice Work If You Can Get It
Laura Osnes, Bonnie & Clyde
Missing: Bernadette Peters, Follies; Elena Roger, Evita
Deserves to Win: Jan Maxwell
Will Win: I'm thinking it's Tony number five for Audra. But Cristin Milioti is winning lots of hearts, so I think this category is a real toss-up.
My Take: Bernadette Peters has won twice before, and this year she's getting a special Tony for blah blah blah. But, still, it's a bit of a surprise not to see her nominated for Follies. I mean, Laura Osnes was terrific in Bonnie & Clyde, but we're talking Bernadette Frickin' Peters here, folks.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Featured Role in a Musical
Phillip Boykin, Porgy and Bess
Michael Cerveris, Evita
David Alan Grier, Porgy and Bess
Michael McGrath, Nice Work If You Can Get It
Josh Young, Jesus Christ Superstar
Missing: Patrick Page, Spider-Man; Bryce Pinkham, Ghost; David Turner, On a Clear Day You Can See Forever
Deserves to Win: McGrath is quite the scene stealer in Nice Work If You Can Get It, so I'm throwing my weight behind him.
Will Win: This could genuinely be anybody, but if I had to choose, I'd say Phillip Boykin. Crown is a very showy, memorable role.
My Take: The Featured categories are where we tend to see surprises, so I'd say any of these men have a shot, except for Cerveris. He's won before, and people aren't fond of the production.

Best Performance by an Actress in a Featured Role in a Musical
Elizabeth A. Davis, Once
Jayne Houdyshell, Follies
Judy Kaye, Nice Work If You Can Get It
Jessie Mueller, On A Clear Day You Can See Forever
Da’Vine Joy Randolph, Ghost
Missing: Jessica Phillips, Leap of Faith; Melissa Van Der Schyff, Bonnie & Clyde
Deserves to Win: Jessie Mueller, in one of the most sensational breakout performances I've ever seen.
Will Win: Judy Kaye is an absolute hoot in Nice Work If You Can Get It, but Houdyshell was pretty kick-ass belting out "Broadway Baby." I'll say Judy Kaye wins, but only because the show is still running and Tony voters have short memories. And because there's no nominee from Newsies.
My Take: When I saw the name Elizabeth A. Davis, I had to check online to remember which part she played. (She's the slutty Czech sister.) So, I'm thinking she's not going to win. I'm really hoping that it's not Randolph, with all due respect. She's perfectly fine in the role, but the whole "sassy black woman" shtick has gotten a bit old.

Best Scenic Design of a Musical
Bob Crowley, Once
Rob Howell and Jon Driscoll, Ghost
Tobin Ost and Sven Ortel, Newsies
George Tsypin, Spider-Man Turn Off The Dark
Missing: Nice Work If You Can Get It, Leap of Faith, Porgy & Bess
Deserves to Win: Once, because it's subtle.
Will Win: Newsies, because it's a hit. It also represents a huge change for Disney: a modular set that doesn't overshadow the action, but rather serves it in an effectively theatrical fashion.
My Take: I am begging...begging...the Tony voters not to reward the pointless extravagance of Spider-Man, nor the mind-numbing, headache-inducing spectacle of Ghost. These shows represent everything that's wrong with modern musical theater: style over substance, spectacle over human drama.

Best Costume Design of a Musical
Gregg Barnes, Follies
ESosa, Porgy and Bess
Eiko Ishioka, Spider-Man Turn Off The Dark
Martin Pakledinaz, Nice Work If You Can Get It
Missing: Once, Newsies
Deserves to Win: Follies
Will Win: Either Follies or Nice Work If You Can Get It. They're both period shows with lost of flash and flare. And Spider-Man is frickin' Spider-Man.
My Take: I'm really hoping that it's not Porgy & Bess. The costumes for that production were beautiful. Too beautiful. The indigent inhabitants of Catfish Row present quite a stunning array of crisply pressed pastels as they venture off to picnic on Kittiwah Island. I was left to wonder where these people would get all those beautiful clothes. And color-coordinated clothes at that.

Best Choreography
Rob Ashford, Evita
Christopher Gattelli, Newsies
Steven Hoggett, Once
Kathleen Marshall, Nice Work If You Can Get It
Missing: It's a real shame Dan Knechtges wasn't nominated for Lysistrata Jones. The way he staged the basketball games was idiomatic without being literal and a genuine pleasure to watch. And the guys actually looked masculine. That's quite a feat.
Deserves to Win: Nice Work If You Can Get It
Will Win: Newsies
My Take: I genuinely enjoyed Newsies, but I found the dancing a bit overly strenuous and self-satisfied. The dances seemed to comprise and endless parade of showboating maneuvers on the part of these admittedly talented young men: acrobatics, high leaps, quadruple pirouettes. As my students say, there was tons of "kick your face." But how is this any different from the vocal pyrotechnics of "American Idol," or, for that matter, the self-aggrandizing word-smithing of lyricist Lorenz Hart? It showcases the skill of the performer or the wit of the creator, and doesn't serve the story. Give me Kathleen Marshall's visually appealing but dramatically purposeful dance from Nice Work If You Can Get It any day.

Best Direction of a Musical
Jeff Calhoun, Newsies
Kathleen Marshall, Nice Work If You Can Get It
Diane Paulus, Porgy and Bess
John Tiffany, Once
Missing: Des McAnuff, Jesus Christ Superstar; Matthew Warchus, Ghost; Michael Grandage, Evita
Deserves to Win: John Tiffany, Once
Will Win: Jeff Calhoun, Newsies
My Take: Broadway dearly loves a hit, and when it gets one, it tends to shower that show with praise and accolades, whether the show deserves it or not. Newsies is an unqualified smash, and not only will it very likely win Best Musical, it will probably win in a number of additional categories from sheer momentum. John Tiffany deserves recognition for shepherding the subtle characterizations and low-key but deeply affecting production that is Once. But I'm thinking Calhoun is going to win here.

Tony Nominations by Production:
Once - 11
Porgy and Bess - 10
Nice Work If You Can Get It - 10
Follies - 8
Newsies - 8
Evita - 3
Ghost - 3
Bonnie & Clyde - 2
Jesus Christ Superstar - 2
Spider-Man Turn Off The Dark - 2
Lysistrata Jones - 1
On a Clear Day You Can See Forever - 1
Godspell - 0

The Scottsboro Boys Targeted by Protesters

What is "ignorance"? Calling someone "ignorant" has taken on a decidedly pejorative connotation, but in the strictest sense, "ignorance" simply means "lack of knowledge."

So I mean no disrespect when I call the protestors who picketed outside last Saturday's matinee performance of The Scottsboro Boys ignorant. The 30 or so protesters were from an organization called The Freedom Party, and from their Web site, I get the sense that this is a well-meaning group of people.

But I also get the sense, as is so often the case when a group protests a particular work, that few if any of these people had actually seen the show. And that, if true, technically makes them ignorant.

Why were these people protesting? Well, essentially they object to the show's use of minstrelsy and blackface to illuminate its tragic subject matter. Here's their case in their own words:

"This racist play has reduced the tragedy of the Scottsboro Boys case to a Step n Fetchit comedic, minstrel exhibition...It is this type of attack on our culture and history which makes the Freedom Party absolutely necessary."

I suppose it's possible that at least one person involved had actually seen the show, but if someone had, then that person would have had a chance to read the program notes, which include the following statement from the authors:

"The Scottsboro Boys uses the free-for-all atmosphere of the minstrel show to provide a fitting backdrop for the racially charged media and legal circuses that surrounded the real Scottsboro Boys trials."

There's no question that the idea of using a patently offensive device to tell what is ultimately an empowering story is a controversial prospect. According to a recent article in the New York Times, the actors themselves have had challenges with the subject matter as well as the show's presentation style.

But does that give these people the right to call patrons of the show "racists"? Because that's what some of them were doing last Saturday. I know, because a large group of my students from the Boston Conservatory were in attendance at this particular performance of The Scottsboro Boys. And they filmed portions of the protest and posted the footage on Facebook.

The irony, of course, is that these students were attending the show precisely because they are *not* racists. Many of them were seeing the show at my urging or based on my review. A further irony is that a number of students told me that they were even more captivated by the show because of the protest, which only served to emphasize the importance of the show's message and the incredible power of its artistic execution.

The Scottsboro brouhaha reminded me of when, a few years back, the Boston Conservatory put on a production of Show Boat. Because I teach musical-theater history, I was thrilled that students would have the opportunity to experience this seminal show firsthand. I cover Show Boat in great detail, and make a point of addressing how it was the first show to treat African Americans as three-dimensional, sympathetic people.

In fact, librettist Oscar Hammerstein makes black people the symbolic backbone of the show, most notably by giving Joe, the black stevedore, the show's central anthem, "Old Man River." What's more, one of the major plots of the show centers around the tragedy of how racism destroys the career and life of Julie LaVerne, the mulatto leading lady of the show boat before a jealous suitor reveals her interracial marriage (which was illegal in Mississippi at the time) to the local sheriff.

In addition, I devote a good portion of the first half of my course to the evolution of the portrayal of African Americans in musical theater, from unfortunate stereotypes (Shuffle Along), to sympathetic social commentary (As Thousands Cheer), to stark heart-rending tragedy (Lost in the Stars). So, I was rather taken aback when students protested the fact that we were doing the show, because of the supposedly negative portrayal of African Americans in the show. These were all students who had taken my course, which really had me scratching my head. Had they simply not been paying attention? Had they ever actually seen the entire show? Because anyone who sees Show Boat and thinks that the show is somehow condescending or disrespectful to blacks simply didn't understand the show.

Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but an informed opinion holds a lot more sway, at least when it comes to the artistic and social value of a certain work. In all honesty, I hope the good folks at The Freedom Party continue to protest The Scottsboro Boys. In the long run, it can only raise the profile of a magnificent show that deserves to be seen.

Next to Normal Wins Pulitzer Prize (Ahem...)

OK, so I know that many of you have been waiting for me to weigh in on Next to Normal winning the Pulitzer Prize. Frankly, I was stunned, but not for the reasons that most people in the theatrical community were similarly stunned. I've been pretty vocal in my criticism of the show, primarily in my review of the Off-Broadway production at the Second Stage Theater, but also in my review of the much-revised Broadway production at the Booth Theater. 

My criticisms of Next to Normal were initially based on the quality of the show as well as its ostensible anti-psychiatry message. Between the show's Off Broadway and Broadway stints, the show's artistic execution has vastly improved, and the apparent message has been toned down considerably. But more on that later.

Coincidentally, the day of the Pulitzer announcement, I had been talking in my musical-theater history class about how no musical that has ever won the Pulitzer has genuinely deserved it. (The eight musicals that have won the award are Of Thee I Sing, South Pacific, Fiorello, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying, A Chorus Line, Sunday in the Park With George, Rent, and now Next to Normal.) I don't necessarily agree with that statement, but I often use it as a provocative proposition to start a discussion about awards and their relative worth. (For the record, I think that, if any of these musicals genuinely deserved the Pulitzer, it was Sunday in the Park With George.)

After N2N won the Pulitzer, there was a lot of moaning and hand-wringing about the selection process, and how the Pulitzer board members chose to ignore the recommendations of the nominating jury. Well, according to the Pulitzer rules, they're perfectly free to do, so that part didn't really bother me. I figure the board is free to choose as it sees fit. I did have to raise my eyebrows at the revelation that a significant number of the Pulitzer voters had seen Next to Normal the night before the voting. Why is that a problem? Well, N2N is a heart-wrenching show, and it strikes me that the voters may have been responding on a knee-jerk, emotional basis rather than from a considered, analytical viewpoint.

In contrast to the Pulitzer voters, I wanted to take my time in formulating my response to the Next to Normal win, which is why I've waited this long to post about the topic. In short, I don't think the show deserved the award, but that view is not based on the inherent quality of the show. I think it's a very well-crafted show, with a strong score and an affecting story.

No, my objection remains with the show's romanticizing mental illness (witness the song "I Miss the Mountains") and its implicit rejection of psychiatry. The show's main female character, portrayed very affectingly by Tony-Award winner Alice Ripley, suffers from bipolar disorder, and throughout the course of the show undergoes a number of treatment modalities, including talk therapy, drug therapy, and ECT (electroconvulsive therapy). At the end of the show, she rejects all of the above and decides to go it alone. I took great exception to this apparent repudiation of psychiatry, and said so in very strong terms in my initial review. Librettist/lyricist Brian Yorkey contacted me in a series of vitriolic emails, which at first I did not respond to. When his tone became more measured and collegial, I answered back, and he and I engaged in a productive dialog about his right to craft a show that says whatever he wants it to.

Now, is the show condoning Diana's actions or merely portraying them? Yorkey has never specified to me. Are people free to reject all forms of therapeutic intervention? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with it, or stay silent about it. In my experience, there are far too many people who eschew treatment for mental illness based on the archaic and dangerous notion that they should be able to just pull themselves up by the bootstraps. Psychiatric disorders are genuine medical conditions, not imaginary constructs. A diabetic cannot through force of will regulate his own insulin levels. Likewise, the power of positive thinking isn't going to help someone with bipolar disorder regulate the amounts of serotonin and dopamine that are available in her synapses.

Is it possible for a show to be worthy of a Pulitzer Prize yet still espouse a viewpoint that I find questionable at best, dangerous at worst? Well, that's free speech for ya. At the very least, Next to Normal provides the opportunity to create some dialog about the topic of mental illness. And, again, it's a very strong show artistically, and one that audiences seem to have genuinely responded to, based on the fact that the Broadway production, defying all odds and predictions, recently recouped its $4-million investment. And the show will launch its national tour in November. I encourage all my readers to see the show, whether on Broadway or on tour, and decide for themselves. All I ask is that you view the show with both an open mind and a skeptical eye.

Should Bloggers Review Previews?

My esteemed blogging colleague Esther at Gratuitous Violins has an insightful post today about bloggers reviewing shows before opening night. Her post is in response to an article in on British news site The Guardian about British producer Michael Condron. At the end of the article, Condron rails against theater bloggers:

His single flash of anger is aimed at the bloggers who, in defiance of theatrical convention that comment is embargoed until press night, review a play during its previews. "It's almost invariably reactionary responses. They're the modern equivalent of the lot that used to boo the plays in the 50s and 60s. I think they're ghastly.

Here's an irony: Codron actually misuses the word "reactionary," under the false supposition that it means "in reaction to." In fact, it means "opposing political or social change." And that is, in fact, what Codron himself is doing. Well, tu quoque, Mr. Codron.

You're fighting a losing battle, dude. ("It's a new world, Golde. A new world...") The moldy Old Guard simply don't understand the new media. They rail against change, anything that doesn't fit in with their fixed ideas about how theater should operate, and in the process they fail to take advantage of potential marketing opportunities. One of the reasons that Next to Normal recently turned a profit is that the marketing team was very savvy about social media, Twitter in particular, upon which it has amassed more than one million followers. That's right, one million. How many Twitter followers did you manage to scrape up for Losing Louie, Mr. Codron?

When I get press tickets, I abide by embargoes. It's only fair. But when I pay for my ticket, I'll say what I want, where I want, when I want. And no reactionary septuagenarian is going to stop me.