There's a few things I don't understand in your post, Sweevil.
On Apr 18, 12:56=A0pm, Sweevil <stepheno...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> If you want your new musical to be taken seriously by critics and
> musical theatre mavens, the theatrical Zeitgeist =A0seems to forbid
open-
> hearted sentiment, romance, optimism, generosity of spirit, beauty,
> elegance, and tenderness. =A0The gentle liberal pieties of SOUTH PACIFIC
> devolved into the sledgehammer irony and sour victimization of shows
> like RENT, SIDE SHOW, and PARADE. =A0New musicals must be harsh and "in
> your face" to be taken seriously, like SPRING AWAKENING.
What did you find harsh or "in your face" about Spring Awakening?
Seriously.
=A0Why is it
> impossible to imagine critics praising a new show today as charming,
> beautiful, graceful, or witty?
>
Seems like just a couple of years ago when A Light in the Piazza,
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels and The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee
were praised using one or more of these terms. Are you suggesting
something's changed since that season?
> So even our most talented writers are drawn to small, dreary subjects
> like A CATERED AFFAIR, for fear of being called bourgeois or
> sentimental.
I'm most confused by this sentence. You're saying Bucchino and
Fierstein were drawn to A Catered Affair our of some fear of being
called bourgeois or sentimental? But is it not sentimental? You're
saying it's dreary, that much I get.
the idea that
> dour, sanctimonious agitprop is better and more "im****tant" than
> "mere" entertainment still has a stranglehold on our theatre and we
> have declining ticket sales to prove it.
No, ticket sales are higher than they've been in 40 years, if we're
talking about Broadway. Can you point to some examples of the dour
sanctimonious agitprop you're talking about?
>
>
=A0BATB is
> considered silly fluff by most critics and "serious" theatre
> aficionados, but I submit: how many preachy dreary "socially
> conscious" plays have made life better for a single person on this
> planet, as our silly show clearly did for this young woman last night?
>
The term that seems to apply is "escapist" and this particular lady
may have sought escape, rather than something that engaged her
intellect. Nothing wrong with either.
You seem to be describing a place where there's all these wildly-
praised shows, brimming with liberal bromides. Where would this be?
|
