A few weeks ago I started reading RAZZLE DAZZLE by Michael Riedel, which covers interesting periods during the 'cowboy days' of Broadway pre 1963. On page 5 I found a major inaccuracy about the number of shows that opened in the 1962-63 - "There ad only been seventeen new shows in the 1962-1963 season, Many of them flops". I knew immediately that this could not be right - and a quick fact check confirmed this. 55 plays and musicals opened in the 1962-1963. 35 were out and out flops.
That means 36% weren't flops. Hmmm. The average of shows that recoup or otherwise succeed hovers between 25% and 35% every year since WW2.
And the previous season 1961-1962 saw 58 openings, including mega hits like A FUNNY THING HAPPENED, A THOUSAND CLOWNS, TAKE HER SHES MINE, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUSINESS, MILK & HONEY, and Pinter's THE CARETAKER. So why was Broadway dying? We were in the midst of the last 6 or 7 years of the Golden Age.
Many things have distracted me since, and I'm only on page 24 now.
Sam Shubert arrives in NYC in 1900. Mr Riedel writes "With more than fifty productions opening every year in theatres stretching from Union Square to Longacre Square, New York was the engine of the AMerican Theatre."
Does Simon & Schuster not employ fact checkers for non-fiction books? I'm available.
Lets take 3 seasons around when Sam Shubert arrived in New York.
In the 1899-1900 season, 160 productions opened on Broadway, including the original production of WIlliam Gilette's SHERLOCK HOLMES. Well, yes, that's more than 50.
In the 1900-1901 Season,132 productions opened. Again. SUre, more than 50.
In the 1901-1902 Season, 122 productions opened.
In a book about Broadway history, how are we meant to believe all of the (terrific) stories that Riedel recounts, if simple facts that can be checked online in 5 minutes are incorrect?
|