Threaded Order Chronological Order
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: wmgrad1976 08:00 am EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: Query about Shipoopi - lordofspeech 09:39 pm EST 02/11/22 | |
|
|
|
| No dewy young miss who keeps resisting All the time she keeps insisting I'm surprised the PC police over there at the new Music Man didn't try to scrub that Sadder But Wiser Girl lyric. |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Last Edit: Singapore/Fling 01:39 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 01:36 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - wmgrad1976 08:00 am EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| Those lyrics might make some a bit uncomfortable at a quick scan, but the story being told in the context can be played that this young woman is driving the relationship. It does get a bit into “no means yes” territory, but even with that read, Hill doesn’t say that he then violates this young woman, he just moves on to someone else. So her consent is respected. The Shipoopi lyrics are far less ambiguous: “Well, a woman who'll kiss on the very first date Is usually a hussy And a woman who'll kiss on the second time out Is anything but fussy But a woman who'll wait till the third time around Head in the clouds, feet on the ground She's the girl you're glad you found She's your shipoopi … Squeeze her once, when she isn't lookin' If you get a squeeze back, that's fancy cookin'” And this celebration of slut shaming and non-consensual touching is the Act Two rousing comedy group number! The new lyrics might not be the best answer, but the song as written is toxic, and there’s no way it could be done that way on Broadway in 2022. The question for y’all is: do you want to see The Music Man with slight changes or do you not want to see The Music Man? |
|
| reply to this message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: keikekaze 06:55 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - Singapore/Fling 01:36 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| The new lyrics might not be the best answer, but the song as written is toxic, and there’s no way it could be done that way on Broadway in 2022. The question for y’all is: do you want to see The Music Man with slight changes or do you not want to see The Music Man? I want to see a revival of a show that has held up for more than 60 years because it's a good show be performed exactly the way its author wrote it and exactly as that author meant it to be. (In fact, I insist on it, and if I "can't" see it on Broadway, then screw Broadway and I'll go see it somewhere else.) That "Shipoopi" lyric that upsets you so is "toxic" because Willson damned well meant it to be what you mean by "toxic," and most people even in 1957 knew damned well that it was "toxic" (although nobody in 1957 would have used that word in that sense). They knew it was "wrong"--but the character who sings it doesn't know it, and that's the comic point. He is merely stating what he thinks--correctly or not--"the Rules" were in Iowa in 1912. And one of the many things I particularly like about that comic lyric is the rhyming juxtaposition of the very blunt "hussy" with the suddenly prissy and indirect "anything but fussy." Art is full of complications, implications, and nuances that, rather suddenly, seem to have become quite beyond the grasp of a lot of people in the 21st century. If it's really true (though I know it isn't) that The Music Man as written "can't" be done on Broadway in 2022, then there's something terminally wrong with Broadway. Namely, that it's going the way of mid-18th century English drama, when they bowdlerized all the tragedy and all the drama out of Shakespeare, along with the "toxic" words. Or, in four words, it's dying of censorship. The question for y'all is, do you want Broadway to be the crucible of a living art form (one that celebrates its best works by performing them respectfully even in revival), or do you want it to be a frozen and fossilized theme park, where nothing can ever possibly happen that would upset the smallest child? (Even though we all really know that very little ever happens that truly upsets small children.) Art is supposed to upset you. The theater is an art. If you don't ever want to be upset, go live in Disneyland. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 11:36 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - keikekaze 06:55 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| But Broadway isn’t really a space for art, and it hasn’t been for most of my adult lifetime. Art generally runs for two or three months at most, and it rarely gets away with charging premium prices. I’m all for at that unsettles and provokes - I can’t wait for “A Strange Loop” - but that is not what most folks are paying for when they plop down $700 to see Hugh and Sutton. At these prices, art is hard to come by. If you want to see art, you gotta go Off-Broadway or further afield. Every so often, something from those ranks manages to make it to Broadway (though not always with its guts intact), but Broadway doesn’t exist to be a crucible for art. I’m sorry to be the one to break that to you. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: Chatty2007 11:06 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - keikekaze 06:55 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| Go live in Disneyland? Disneyland is art. Who do you think designed the rides, who built them and painted them, and the costumes that employees wear? Who wrote the music you hear, created the special effects, filmed the video that's used? A lot of Disneyland is based on movies – movies that are made by writers, composers, animators, actors, designers, etc. etc. In other words, artists! I think what you mean was something more like "go live in an empty field" if you're trying to convey an empty place that has no art. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: Chromolume 07:38 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - keikekaze 06:55 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| ...and most people even in 1957 knew damned well that it was "toxic" (although nobody in 1957 would have used that word in that sense). They knew it was "wrong"--but the character who sings it doesn't know it, and that's the comic point. He is merely stating what he thinks--correctly or not--"the Rules" were in Iowa in 1912. And one of the many things I particularly like about that comic lyric is the rhyming juxtaposition of the very blunt "hussy" with the suddenly prissy and indirect "anything but fussy." Frankly, I think even you are way overanalyzing the song. The way I've always heard the song, it's exactly that - just a diegetic song - that we have to surmise has probably been around for a good while before July 4, 1912. Marcellus is merely the one leading it, he's not making it up, or "stating what he thinks" about "1912 Iowa rules." Much like we're supposed to understand that "Lida Rose" and "It's You" and "Sincere" are old songs that everyone in 1912 would have known, and that all of a sudden the School Board can't resist harmonizing on. (Willson was quite smart to juxtapose those made-up songs he wrote with real ones like the Minuet In G and Rustles of Spring and Columbia, The Gem Of The Ocean to give it all a real-life context.) Also - in that same regard, "Shipoopi" is and always was a bawdy song. It was meant to be that in the context of 1912 let alone in 1957 or 2022. For the youngsters who are mostly the ones dancing, it's a chance to challenge their elders -- just as in the myriad of current (and hysterically funny) Youtube videos that show teens playing "WAP" for their parents. And for the older characters singing the song, it s an equal chance to let it all out and be a little naughty too. If it worked that way in Willson's sorta-fictionalized 1912 River City, it should still have a similar level of shock value in 2022. And that's why changing the lyrics was just a stupid thing to do. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: keikekaze 10:51 pm EST 02/13/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - Chromolume 07:38 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| Frankly, I think even you are way overanalyzing the song. For that matter, so do I! ; ) And I had forgotten that "Shipoopi" is really a diegetic song rather than a book song for Marcellus. My bad--but it makes the attempt to bowdlerize it just that much more ridiculous. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 10:29 pm EST 02/13/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - Chromolume 07:38 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| But what is the bawdiness and sense of shocking fun that this song about avoiding girls who are “easy” but also making sure to sneak a secret squeeze is meant to convey? “WAP” is a song about female empowerment through radical sexual ownership. “Shipoopi” is really the complete opposite, a song about shaming women who put out while placing the onus for physical exploration on the man who acts without consent. A new lyric more in line with “WAP” might have fulfilled this original purpose to be bawdy without importing the misogyny of 1957 (an era not known for its respect of female autonomy and empowerment) for us to all tap our feet to. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Great post, Chromolume! | |
| Posted by: Guillaume 05:26 pm EST 02/13/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - Chromolume 07:38 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| totally agree! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi | |
| Posted by: garyd 10:09 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - Chromolume 07:38 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| Of course it is a bawdy song. It is a fun song. I seriously doubt Tommy Djilas would suggest Marcellus sing it if it were not. I also seriously doubt he would suggest Marcellus sing this revised nonsense. (then again, it has a good beat and you can dance to it:) ) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Query about Shipoopi - Like a new 1930s film Production Code for GOOBOs | |
| Last Edit: PlayWiz 11:26 am EST 02/15/22 | |
| Posted by: PlayWiz 11:16 am EST 02/15/22 | |
| In reply to: re: Query about Shipoopi - garyd 10:09 pm EST 02/12/22 | |
|
|
|
| They might as well censor the "I was drunk last night, dear Mother", that little Tootie sings in the movie "Meet Me In St. Louis" for similar reasons. "Shipoopi" is meant to be bawdy, fun and suggestive. Another case of the new production being afraid of the GOOBOs (those getting off on being offended). Almost like a new updated Production Code from 1930s movies is somehow censoring classic works. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.031105 seconds.