| Jereemy Gerard explains why THE VISIT just doesn't work | |
| Posted by: | StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| And he may be right... | |
| Link | http://www.deadline.com/2014/08/sam-rockwell-nina-arianda-chita-rivera-head-for-the-hills/#more-801962 |
| reply to this message | | |
| Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 07:21 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Jereemy Gerard explains why THE VISIT just doesn't work - StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| have they made her half-gypsy/half jewish in this production? durrenmatt didn't. this has got to be a mistake. why would anyone - especially a critic - misread that? a german playwright working with these themes? hard - very hard - to believe. i can't imagine this is correct. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | LegitOnce 10:59 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Half Jewish??? - enoch10 07:21 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| As I understand it, the detail of Claire's ethnicity was added for the musical version. There's nothing in the original play that says she's not Jewish or Rom or anything else in particular. Could it be possibly to justify the unlikely presence of a woman who looks like Chita Rivera in a small village in Switzerland? Or is there some not very subtle political point being made here, e.g., if Claire were as Nordic as everyone else in town, maybe they would have believed her? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 12:45 am EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - LegitOnce 10:59 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| if this has actually happened what a mind-boggling bad idea. well, i can't actually say that because i haven't seen it or the way it's been handled. if it was part of the incarnation i saw i missed it and i can't imagine that one slipping by. any way it's done it alters the piece thematically - regardless of how you approach it. it's always tricky talking about a change you haven't seen but if this is in fact now part of the musical and if makes it to nyc and there's a talk back - that's one talk back i'd be willing to attend. i'd love to know the rationale. >> There's nothing in the original play that says she's not Jewish or Rom or anything else in particular. sorry but when you're dealing with a writer born in 1921 writing in german about a german location and about, among other themes, collective guilt the "he never said she wasn't" argument comes off as too cavalier. if he had wanted her to be jewish/gypsy he'd have made her german/gypsy. it skews the piece. also, it changes her interaction with the pastor assuming that's still there. how have they introduced this ... addition? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | Glitter 12:30 am EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - LegitOnce 10:59 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| I think you're on to something there, LegitOnce. During "A Masque", the mayor and villagers sing "We all got rich" then whisper "...during World War 2". I've always taken that to be an indication that the villagers aren't wholesome and innocent as they believe themselves to be. As Kander and Ebb originally wrote it, a character made it more explicit, with a character singing: "as you said, she is a hebrew." It was re-written for the Goodman version as "jewess", and followed up with her "pretending to be a lady, but 50% a gypsy, %50 a jewess, %100 a bastard, and 200% a whore" | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 12:55 am EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - Glitter 12:30 am EDT 08/06/14 |
|
| |
| >> It was re-written for the Goodman version as "jewess", and followed up with her "pretending to be a lady, but 50% a gypsy, %50 a jewess, %100 a bastard, and 200% a whore" do you know if this is the way it is at WTF? also - do you be any chance know where in the goodman version this line comes from? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | Glitter 04:53 am EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - enoch10 12:55 am EDT 08/06/14 |
|
| |
| I'm not sure about WTF, but will report back when I see it next week! the jewess line was in the scene leading up the song "You Know Me", and then the next line are lyrics from the song. It was Matilda and a friend (the mayor's wife, I think?) gossiping about her arrival at the train station earlier. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | Glitter 05:01 am EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - Glitter 04:53 am EDT 08/06/14 |
|
| |
| hit send too quickly! the song was cut after Goodman, but for the Signature production and the NYC concert, there was a line about from another character about her being "half gypsy, half Jewish, 100% illegitimate", as well as Claire self-identifying as a Gypsy. Race in musicals is something I enjoy looking at....for Williamstown, they've cut a character who was previously portrayed as black (he was one of Claire's american lackeys). | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 01:31 pm EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - Glitter 05:01 am EDT 08/06/14 |
|
| |
| well, i had all kinds of (perfectly valid) arguments against this. the song "you know me"(?) is a bunch of women gossiping about her so they're unreliable. also, there is the interaction with the pastor (in the musical, the priest). the schoolmaster, the mayor, the priest are all structurally related and they all carry pretty much the same weight (with the mayor as the representative of the town having more gravitas) and they've all done her damage (granted, in the musical she mistakes the schoolmaster for his father or grandfather i can't remember which right now but it's the same idea.) in that part of the world at that time it is unlikely a young jewish girl would have had the kinds of interactions with a pastor or priest claire is responding to. none the less ... it is there. i can't believe i missed it but in the scene where claire speaks before the banquet i'm pretty sure she says her father was jewish and her mother was a gypsy. kander and ebb and/or mcnally added this. unless it is some other atrocity in the valency i've forgotten it isn't in any transition and i looked again in the german this morning and i don't think its' there. my german isn't great but it's good enough to find "der jude." besides, it would have jumped out at me the first time i ever read the play in a german literature in translation class about a hundred years ago. i've never seen the movie - is it in there? they're completely within their rights to make this interpretation and, lord knows, it's understandable. it's impossible to discuss post-war literature in german about collective guilt without wondering what role the holocaust plays. in THE VISIT it's always been there lurking in the background. personally, i think it's more effective that way but these are the kinds of choices people make when adapting a work and i'm not going to fault them for it. though i think durrenmatt would have balked. see above. i'm envious of you seeing it at WTF. i'd be kicking myself for not going but i would have had to give the tickets away even if i'd bought them. i was laid up with a sprain last week and i'm heading out of town this week. you seem familiar with the musical. i'd love to know what's been cut and what's been kept and what you think of the newest incarnation. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Half Jewish??? | |
| Posted by: | Glitter 04:45 pm EDT 08/06/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Half Jewish??? - enoch10 01:31 pm EDT 08/06/14 |
|
| |
| I'm looking forward to seeing and will report back later that same night with an absurd level of attention to detail, don't worry ;) I liked a lot at Goodman, fell deep in love with it at Signature, and the NYC benefit solidified it in my top 5 musicals...so I'm chomping at the bit to see what it's like now! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| I see Jeremy has violated Strunk and White's stern dictum | |
| Posted by: | buskins 02:32 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Jereemy Gerard explains why THE VISIT just doesn't work - StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| "Do not affect a breezy manner." | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Sorry...Jeremy | |
| Posted by: | StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Jereemy Gerard explains why THE VISIT just doesn't work - StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| . | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Sorry, do not Agee either | |
| Posted by: | actor103 02:20 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Sorry...Jeremy - StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| Mawkish Love story???? Wow, one of the things that I love MOST about the show is how NON mawkish the love story is. They manage to represent their love in a really grand way without resorting to cheap sentiment, suggesting that love is even more powerful and also potentially more destructive than greed. If I am reading it correctly, It also seems that he does not get why Anton has to die??? The woman's life is one of barren loneliness. All she has is her money and the power and influence that money can buy. So she uses that to claim for herself the one thing she felt she was always owed and earned. Justice in her love. He has to die because it is the only way she can truly have him for eternity. She has given up on life. She is sealing the deal for the hereafter. That is my take on it. Sure there are others. Yeah, I know...a little heady but it works for me in a big way as I am sure those who have read my posts clearly know by now. At least he acknowledges that he is commenting on the first preview. Though, I think that is pretty disrespectful to all the artists involved for a journalist to comment on a first public performance. Regardless if he is only referencing the material itself. Having seen it twice, the impact when I saw the show on Saturday was worlds apart from the impact on Thursday. Just a much more fully realized and nuanced interpretation. It totally made a different , more complex kind of sense. At any rate, I will not be surprised if I am in the minority on this show. Not perfect but I think it is still pretty damn brilliant. I know that I am going on AGAIN about how much I love for this show. Please forgive me. I know...enough is enough. Will try and shut up about it. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| "mawkish" | |
| Posted by: | buskins 02:35 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Sorry, do not Agee either - actor103 02:20 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| People have really got to stop using that word. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "mawkish" no ... "meh" | |
| Posted by: | bruceb 04:05 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | "mawkish" - buskins 02:35 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| People have to stop using "meh" when describing what they felt about an entire show. I don't think "meh" substitutes as a fuller description of a show. YES - IT IS A WORD IN THE DICTIONARY | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "mawkish" | |
| Posted by: | MikeR 02:45 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | "mawkish" - buskins 02:35 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| Why? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "mawkish" | |
| Posted by: | buskins 06:21 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "mawkish" - MikeR 02:45 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| There are certain terms like "mawkish" and "mordant" and "gimlet-eyed" that nobody uses in American English anymore (if they ever did) except in criticism. It's like they're handed down from one generation of critics to another. I realize people are working on a deadline and sometimes you have to reach for a cliche when you don't have time to think, but it's especially glaring in this context where he uses a lame term to describe something lame. I don't know anyone who says "meh." I do own a "meh" t-shirt though that I got on sale from icanhascheezburger.com and whenever I wear it people ask me what "meh" is. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "mawkish" | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 09:31 am EDT 08/07/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "mawkish" - buskins 06:21 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| I think you are confounding verbal American English with the written word (and of course you are still wrong in these three cases). | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: "mawkish" | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 03:55 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | re: "mawkish" - MikeR 02:45 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| How's this: "People have really got to stop using that word incorrectly." | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Sorry...Jeremy | |
| Posted by: | bwaydiva1 01:06 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | Sorry...Jeremy - StageLover 10:28 am EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| Now I didn't see Fool For Love so I can't speak with the voice of knowledge here but everything I've read said the production is ready for Broadway. (I want Nina Arianda and Sam Rockwell together on Broadway-I can't imagine a more electric pairing. They are both really energetic, charismatic actors. I could only imagine the heat they burned on that stage.) I say MTC could pick it up for their spring selection and pair it with another one act. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Sorry...Jeremy | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 07:17 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Sorry...Jeremy - bwaydiva1 01:06 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| >> I want Nina Arianda and Sam Rockwell together on Broadway-I can't imagine a more electric pairing. agreeance. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Sorry...Jeremy | |
| Posted by: | JereNYC (JereNYC@aol.com) 02:14 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Sorry...Jeremy - bwaydiva1 01:06 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| It's quite possible that with more preparation and rehearsal, Arianda and Rockwell might very well find the chemistry that Gerard feels that they presently lack. Like most summer stock theatres, rehearsal time at WTF is short and runs are even shorter. Another 3 weeks in a rehearsal studio and a few previews may be all they need to get the play firing on all cylinders. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Sorry...Jeremy | |
| Posted by: | robert_j 02:24 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
| In reply to: | re: Sorry...Jeremy - JereNYC 02:14 pm EDT 08/05/14 |
|
| |
| I agree with this. But I also think the reviewer is being a bit picky here. Yes, I guess the two could have had more chemistry, now that I think about it, but it did not stand out as a problem. And it could well be that the chemistry will get stronger over a longer run. I also don't think that Fool for Love needs to be paired with another play. Yes, it is a bit short, but not unusually so, especially since 90 minute running times are so common these days. I felt like I got my money's worth. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2014 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 0.188959 seconds.