When re-thinking a show like 1776, based on real events and people, there are two important things to keep in mind: (1) how much respect is owed to the people depicted, and (2) how much respect is owed to the original creators of the piece.
Our so-called founding fathers were deeply flawed. One of the best moments in this production is Jefferson listening to congress read his Declaration of Independence (i.e., Declaration of Freedom!) while his slave dresses him. It's quiet, quick, and hard-hitting--and doesn't mess with the original show. It's also relatively subtle in a production in which subtlety is rare.
Do Peter Stone (book) and Sherman Edwards deserve to have their work respected? Absolutely. The only legitimate reason to maybe mess with their show would be to make it better. This production doesn't, though at least--as said above--it doesn't completely destroy it.
The all-non-cis-male cast is fine as a concept. (There are many weak performances in the show, but that is due to bad acting and direction rather than gender.) The different sexual identities change the emphases and meaning by definition. For example, that gender is a performance is made vivid through women performing masculinity. So, okay, fine. The nontraditional casting is fine.
It's nearly everything else that's the problem. The direction (Jeffrey L. Page and Diane Paulus) is ham-fisted and frenetic. Every moment is underlined and mimed and exaggerated and overdone. Some scenes come across as though a bunch of kids are putting on a show and making all the mistakes kids make: indicating, emoting, telegraphing.
One example: the solo song "Mama Look Sharp" depicts the horrors of war quietly and subtlely--and breaks the audience's heart. In this production, the song is blared, and the entire cast is on stage, pulling focus. The decision to have one performer play the "Mama" of the song by rending her clothing and tearing her hair, sobbing, pulls even more focus, and makes the audience feel less rather than more. (Well, it makes the audience feel less grief, but more embarrassment.)
Simply put, Page and Paulus did not respect the material, evincing a serious lack of judgment on their parts. If they wanted a musical with which to judge the founding fathers harshly and reframe the revolution, they should have written one.
Wendy Caster
No comments:
Post a Comment