Deep Down Inside

I write about musical theatre a lot. Aside from my history book and my book about Hair, all of my other books are collections of what I call "background and analysis essays." As far as I know, nobody really did this -- at least not for musical theatre -- before I started in the early 1990s. Stephen Banfield did a terrific book, examining famous musicals in term of musical construction, etc., but that's only one piece of what I do.

I deconstruct each show, take it apart and look at its pieces and how they function. I analyze the script and score in terms of music, rhyme, form, content, style, etc. I explore a show's history, historical context, source material, and so much more. Pretty much everything you'd need before starting work on a show. Some people tell me they love reading my essays before seeing a show they don't know; other people tell me they love reading my essays after seeing a show that's new to them. I endorse both practices. And tons of directors and actors tell me that my essays have helped them enormously in figuring out shows they're working on.

Since 1994, I've written background and analysis essays on sixty-four musicals, and I have several more essays under construction (on American Idiot, Atomic, Bonnie & Clyde, Heathers, and The Sweet Smell of Success.)

In my book From Assassins to West Side Story (1996), I analyze Assassins, Cabaret, Carousel, Company, Godspell, Gypsy, How to Succeed, Into the Woods, Jesus Christ Superstar, Les MisĂ©rables, Man of La Mancha, Merrily We Roll Along, My Fair Lady, Pippin, Sweeney Todd, and West Side Story.

In Deconstructing Harold Hill (1999), I analyze Ragtime, Camelot, Chicago, Passion, The Music Man, March of the Falsettos, Sunday in the Park with George, and The King and I.

In Rebels with Applause (2001), I analyze Hair, Rent, Oklahoma!, Pal Joey, Anyone Can Whistle, Floyd Collins, Jacques Brel, The Cradle Will Rock, Songs for a New World, and The Ballad of Little Mikey.

In Sex, Drugs, Rock & Roll, and Musicals (2011), I analyze The Wild Party, Grease, Hair, Jesus Christ Superstar, The Rocky Horror Show, The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas, I Love My Wife, Bat Boy, Hedwig and the Angry Inch, High Fidelity, as well as brief looks at The Capeman, bare, Taboo, Jersey Boys, Next to Normal, Edges, Spring Awakening, Passing Strange, Love Kills, Glory Days, Rooms, American Idiot, and Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson.

In Literally Anything Goes (2018), I analyze The Threepenny Opera, Anything Goes, The Nervous Set, The Fantasticks, Zorbá, Two Gentlemen of Verona, The Robber Bridegroom, Evita, Return To The Forbidden Planet, Kiss of the Spider Woman, A New Brain, Reefer Madness, Bukowsical, and the brilliant Love Kills.

And of course, in Let the Sun Shine In: The Genius of Hair (2003), I spend the entire book digging into one rich, complex, often under-appreciated masterpiece of alternative theatre.

The truth is that, over the last ten years or so, I write an essay on every show I direct, with only a couple exceptions. I sort of can't help myself. And really, having to put my thoughts and ideas into words helps me figure things out. Since I started this blog in 2007, I write about my research and analysis as I work on the shows, and then afterward, I form those posts into a coherent (I hope) single essay. Many of these essays then go into my next book.

But not all those essays make it into one of my books, mostly because my books can't be 600 pages long. Still, I write these essays in order to share what I learn; so now, for your convenience, here are the others. I hope they keep you happily occupied for hours.

Assassins (expanded from what's in my book)
bare
Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson
Cabaret  (expanded from what's in my book)
Celebration
Cry-Baby
Hands on a Hardbody
Next to Normal
Passing Strange
Urinetown

These days, I almost never write an essay on a show unless I'm working on it. Luckily, I routinely work on some of the most interesting musicals ever written. So my collection of essays features a wonderful variety of cool, fascinating musicals.

It is my life's goal to get people to take the musical theatre and its literature seriously, to get theatre artists to stop turning their brains off when they work on musicals, to get everyone to treat musical theatre with the same respect we give to the work of Shakespeare, Tennessee Williams, August Wilson, and Suzan-Lori Parks. There's nothing I love more than helping people, through my writing and my work onstage, to see new richness and complexity in great musicals, to understand the emotional and social power of the American musical theatre.

This is how I hope to achieve my goal -- through my essays, my blog posts, and my work. Join my crusade!

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

It is the Music of the People

Taking the pulse of our audiences and our community can be valuable. Doing an online survey through Survey Monkey certainly isn't "scientific" and you can't really control who's answering, but it still can offer us insights, some of them very valuable.

And since New Line is a nonprofit theatre, the public technically "owns" our company, so I thought we ought to share the results of our latest survey with you.

We did an online survey in 2015 about our company and our shows, and it was really illuminating, showing us where we were doing great and where we had some work to do. So now, two years later, we've checked back with our community. Here are the results.

1. What shows would you like to see New Line produce?
Dear Evan Hansen -- 50.00%
La Cage aux Folles -- 45.92%
Something Rotten -- 44.90%
Come From Away -- 41.84%
Nine -- 39.80%
Bright Star -- 26.53%
The Visit -- 26.53%
Be More Chill -- 21.43%
In Trousers -- 13.27%
Jasper in Deadland -- 10.20%
Naked Boys Singing -- 7.14%
Promenade -- 6.12%
No Way to Treat a Lady -- 4.08%

I guess we know our audiences and fans are tuned in to what's going on in our art form. Three of the top four vote-getters here are so new, they've not even available to us yet. But most of the shows on this list are also on our list to produce...

2. What shows would you like New Line to repeat?
Songs for a New World -- 50.00%
Bat Boy -- 38.37%
Urinetown -- 33.72%
A New Brain -- 37.21%
Hands on a Hardbody -- 29.07%
Night of the Living Dead -- 22.09%
Return to the Forbidden Planet -- 18.60%

We produced Songs for a New World in 1998, three years after its low-profile limited run off Broadway -- back when almost no one had heard of Jason Robert Brown! Now it's our top vote-getter for a return. I'd love to return to every show on this list.

3. Would you be interested in buying season tickets to New Line Theatre?
Yes -- 35.35%
No -- 21.21%
Not Sure -- 43.43%

We had a trial run late this summer with selling season tickets, and we did surprisingly well. So we'll do a full-out season ticket campaign in the spring and summer.

4. What's the main reason(s) you buy a theatre ticket?
The show being produced -- 89.90%
The producing theatre company -- 45.45%
The actors in the show -- 45.45%
Friends' opinions -- 24.24%
The director of the show -- 14.14%
Social Media posts, photos, videos, etc. -- 16.16%
Reviews -- 16.16%
The writers of the show -- 13.13%

This confirms what I thought -- it's all about the particular show. I'm convinced that a lot of people who see our shows wouldn't be able to tell you a week later the name of the producing company; they just know they liked (or didn't) the show. But I was surprised that the theatre company and the cast are important as people say they are.

5. If New Line offered Master Classes, would you be interested?
Yes -- 22.00%
No -- 34.00%
Depends on the classes -- 44.00%

We've been talking about this, so I was curious what people thought. I assume it would be all about the kind of classes we offered.

6. What kind of shows do you want to see New Line produce?
New approaches to famous shows -- 66.00%
Smart, socially conscious shows -- 60.00%
Edgy, subversive shows -- 56.00%
Brand new shows -- 44.00%
Older, lesser known shows -- 43.00%
Rock shows -- 30.00%

This was also a bit of a surprise to me, that "famous shows" got the most votes, though not far behind was New Line's bread and better, "smart, socially conscious shows" and "edgy, subversive shows." Less than half of our respondents care about "new shows," which surprised me. And less than a third want "rock shows," also a surprise.

7. So we can get an idea of how well we get our message out, tell us which of the following you think describes New Line Theatre?
Alternative -- 82.00%
Intelligent -- 45.00%
Established -- 39.00%
Political -- 37.00%
Predictable -- 10.00%
Offensive -- 10.00%
Mainstream -- 8.00%
Escapist -- 6.00%
Conventional -- 4.00%
Safe -- 4.00%

This was very nice to see. Our brand is "alternative," and 82% get that. I am amused by the 4% that say our company is "safe" -- our budget begs to differ.

8. How would you rate your overall experience with New Line, including parking, staff friendliness, concessions, seating, comfort, etc.
Outstanding -- 41.84%
Very good but could be better -- 36.73%
Average -- 17.35%
Not that great -- 3.06%
Terrible -- 1.02%

So more than 78% have a positive view of the New Line experience, and only 4% have a negative view. We certainly have room for improvement, but we're doing pretty great.

9. What do you think of our new space, The Marcelle Theater, in Grand Center?
Love it. -- 44.68%
It's nice but has its drawbacks. -- 42.55%
Don't like it. -- 12.77%

Again, more than 87% think the Marcelle is "nice" or better. Only one in eight have a bad view of our theatre.

10. How many New Line shows have you seen?
2-4 -- 31.31%
5-10 -- 29.29%
10-15 -- 15.15%
More than 15 -- 14.14%
Just One -- 10.10%

This is mostly to get an idea who's answering our survey -- die-hard fans or random people. It looks like the majority have seen a few New Line shows over the years, and a sizable minority have seen ten or more...

We got some comments as well. Two people think the seats at the Marcelle are uncomfortable; two others think they're extremely comfortable ("much more so than other companies," says one). On the question of what shows to produce, one person wrote, "Who has heard of most of these?" Lots of us. And though half of all respondents want us to do Dear Evan Hansen (and we will!), one person wrote, "Please do not do Dear Evan Hansen." Oh well, you can't please everybody. Other suggestions for shows to do include Sweet Charity (maybe), Grey Gardens (probably not), The Burnt Part Boys (love this show but probably not), Dogfight (maybe), The Light in the Piazza (maybe), Miss Saigon (probably not), Stop the World I Want to Get Off (unlikely, but you never know), and Natasha, Pierre and the Great Comet of 1812 (maybe). A couple people suggested shows we will never produce: Nunsense, Altar Boyz, Mamma Mia! And a couple suggested shows we've done, like Next to Normal, Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, and Falsettos.

Likewise, in terms of shows to repeat, a ton of people asked for Bat Boy, but one person said, "Not Bat Boy. Never again please." Altogether, people asked for TWENTY different shows to return, in addition to those I listed in the survey question. That's a really nice compliment from our fans, that so many different New Line shows are so special to different people. The most asked-for repeats in these comments are Hair, Rent, Heathers, and Bonnie & Clyde.

One person complained that parking is terrible -- even though we have a free, lighted parking lot right across the street, and free street parking. Not sure what they want. My favorite comment of all was, in all caps, "SO GRATEFUL FOR NEW LINE THEATRE."

It's always encouraging to be reminded that, even when certain shows don't sell well, even when our budget is precarious, even when running the company is way harder than I would prefer, people in our community still believe in what we're doing, still think our work is valuable to them, still think that our community needs what only New Line brings to it.

And they keep sending donations and they keep buying tickets. What we do matters to people. And that's everything.

Long Live the Musical! And New Line!
Scott

The Simple Joys of Maindenhood

One of the things that always bothers me is any production of Camelot in which Guenevere is played all sweet and virginal, or in other words, like Julie Andrews played her in the original production. The truth is that Guenevere can be a real bitch from time to time, and I think that's what's most interesting about her -- and what directors and actors miss most often. Without that, the story is far less interesting.

In many cases, original Broadway performances are reliable guides to what the writers wanted. But not always. And not in this case. Andrews had a great voice in her youth, and genuine stage presence, but she was never a very good or very nuanced actor.

Guenevere, as she is written by Alan Jay Lerner, is rebellious, immature (at least in Act I), horny, and blood-thirsty! Maybe she's just a product of her times, but she loves violence (see her song, "Then You May Take Me to the Fair"); and her immaturity and restlessness will lead to a lot of needless destruction.

Guenevere herself is Arthur's great tragic flaw.

Julie Andrews ruined the character with her bland, sexless original performance on Broadway, and more significantly, on the original cast recording. Vanessa Redgrave understood the character much more fully in her film performance, but she was such a mediocre singer, it's hard to get through her songs. Compare Andrews' and Redgrave's opposite approaches to "The Lusty Month of May." Redgrave (with the help of more languorous orchestrations) really enjoys the words lusty and depraved, and in her hands, it's a song about fucking. In Andrews' rendition, it's just polite double entendre.

In her first appearance in the show, Guenevere tells us in her "I Am" song that she is a trouble-maker. She wants men to fight over her. She wants them to kill each other over her. How can we be surprised when everything blows up in Act II?

Camelot's first two songs introduce two of our three leads, and both as complete neurotics, totally ill-equipped to be married. Of course their marriage will fail. We see in these two opening numbers that they are very immature. Then again, Arthur is only 25 and Guenevere only 17 when they meet.

A close look at the lyric of "Simple Joys of Maidenhood" tells us so much about Guenevere. Alan Jay Lerner has packed so much information into this song, all the while surprising us with punch line after punch line.

Guenevere starts the song by calling St. Genevieve, apparently her personal patron saint. But Guenevere has to remind the saint who she is; Guenevere doesn't pray a lot. Yet only a couple lines later, she's purporting to be so devout. Right off the bat, we see that she's a liar. She says she's always been a "lamb," but we'll soon see that's not true either. She lets her anger take over and she rages at St. Genevieve, complaining about the details of her current situation, and finally -- and hilariously -- threatening to find another saint to pray to.
St. Genevieve, St. Genevieve!
It's Guenevere!
Remember me?
St. Genevieve, St. Genevieve!
I'm over here
Beneath this tree...

You know how faithful and devout I am,
You must admit I've always been a lamb,
But Genevieve, St. Genevieve --
I won't obey you anymore.
You've gone a bit too far!
I won't be bid and bargained for
Like beads at a bazaar.
St. Genevieve, I've run away,
Eluded them and fled,
And from now on, I intend to pray
To someone else instead!

It is interesting to note Guenevere's 20th century objections to being medievally objectified. But then Guenevere decides maybe offense is a bad tack to take. If she wants rescue, she'd better be nicer to her patron saint...
Oh Genevieve, St. Genevieve,
Where were you when my youth was sold?
Dear Genevieve, sweet Genevieve,
Shan't I be young before I'm old?

So she goes on to catalog the "conventional, ordinary, garden variety joys of maidenhood" that she's been robbed of, that she wants restored to her. And what are those simple, ordinary perks of being a teenage girl? A knight committing suicide over her. Two knights battling over her and one of them being killed. A war being waged over her, and of course, the unstated but obvious death and bloodshed that accompanies war.

Here's what too many directors and actors inexplicably miss -- the word Simple in the title is ironic! Nothing she wants is simple, and all she will bring to Camelot is complexity and chaos. Because she herself is dangerously complex. Everything we need to know about her is in this first song of hers. Everything.

The absolute best perk of Ordinary Maidenhood she can imagine is not only men killing each other over her, but men killing their relatives over her.
Where are the simple joys of maidenhood?
Where are all those adoring, daring boys?
Where's the youth pining so for me
He leaps to death in woe for me?
Oh, where are a maiden's simple joys?

Shan't I have the normal life a maiden should?
Shall I never be rescued in the wood?
Shall two knights never tilt for me
And let their blood be spilt for me?
Oh, where are the simple joys of maidenhood?

Shall I not be on a pedestal,
Worshipped and competed for?
Not be carried off, or better still,
Cause a little war?

Where are the simple joys of maidenhood?
Are those dear gentle pleasures gone for good?
Shall a feud not begin for me?
Shall kith not kill their kin for me?
Oh, where are the trivial joys,
Harmless convivial joys,
Where are the simple joys of maidenhood?

That is fucked up.

By the end of the show, it will be tragically unsurprising that best friends Arthur and Lance will go to war against each other over Guenevere.

She has a freakish lust for violence and for bloodshed, in complete opposition to everything Arthur believes in. The central joke of the song is that all this extreme violence seems to Guenevere just the "trivial," "simple" fun of being a girl. She is actually insulted shortly afterward because Arthur won't rape her. But that lust for violence will come back to haunt her. She has no idea what she's asking for...

She sees war as romantic. She’s delighted when Arthur tells her war would have broken out if they had not married. But at the end of the show, her shallow wishes come true, with deadly results. In “Guenevere,” the chorus sings:
Guenevere, Guenevere,
In that dim, mournful year,
Saw the men she held most dear
Go to war for Guenevere.

She got her war. And it's destroyed everything Arthur built.

In addition to her bloodlust, Guenevere is also far more over-sexed than your average musical theatre ingenue. Too often directors and actors overlook her very sexual behavior. They've spent years hearing Julie Andrews' delicate, lady-like singing on the original cast album and they ignore the actual evidence in the script and score. They want to be reverent with her character because she's a queen and because ultimately she becomes a tragic figure, and perhaps also because they see Camelot as a "classic."

But even a cursory look at "The Lusty Month of May" shows the real Guenevere. The title of the song says it all. It's an explicit celebration of sex, of unbridled, wicked, improper, un-wholesome, shocking sexual acts. Guenevere thinks every girl wants her boyfriend to be a cad, that self-control is a bore, that going morally astray is blissful.
Tra la, it's May, the lusty Month of May!
That lovely month when everyone goes blissfully astray.
Tra la, it's here,
That shocking time of year,
When tons of wicked little thoughts merrily appear.

It's May, it's May, that gorgeous holiday,
When every maiden prays that her lad
Will be a cad
It's mad, it's gay, a libelous display!
Those dreary vows that everyone takes,
Everyone breaks,
Everyone makes
Divine mistakes,
The lusty month of May!

The fragrance she smells wafting through the air is the smell of sex, make no mistake, that "dear forbidden fruit." But what does this tell us? That Guenevere and Arthur are hopelessly mismatched. In the novel, White says "She had felt respect for [Arthur], with gratitude, kindness, love, and a sense of protection. She had felt more than this and you might say that she had felt everything but the passion of romance."

Guenevere just wants fun. No responsibility, no morality, no expectations. She's still an over-sexed -- and long repressed -- teenager.
It's May, the lusty month of May,
That darling month when everyone throws self-control away.
It's time to do
A wretched thing or two
And try to make each precious day one you'll always rue.

Her idea of a good time is to do something awful you'll regret. Wow.
It's May, it's May, the month of "Yes, you may;"
The time for every frivolous whim,
Proper or im-.
It's wild, it's gay, depraved in every way.
The birds and bees with all of their vast
Amorous past,
Gaze at the human race aghast!
The lusty month of May!

Guenevere is all about appetite. After this song, can we be surprised when she eventually has an affair? Can Arthur be surprised? Or does he just close his eyes to this problem? Arthur needs Guenevere before he can be the king he needs to be. It isn't until he meets her that he feels kingly, that he at last wants to be a king. She is his muse. But she's also a selfish bitch (at least in Act I).

Look at her initial comments to Lancelot when she first meets him. She's sarcastic and insulting. Is that proper behavior for the Queen of England to someone the King brings to court? And even though she knows how much Arthur thinks of Lancelot, she keeps criticizing Lance over and over. She doesn't even attempt to be kind to him, to try to understand him, to help him feel welcome. In a sense, she's performing for the knights and ladies around her, entertaining them with her thinly veiled jibes at Lance. But also, we can see she's attracted to him -- and acting like a lust-struck thirteen-year-old.

Later on, she helps build sentiment against Lance in the court by gossiping with the knights and ladies. She gives three knights her kerchief to carry against Lancelot in the jousts. And it's with this act that she tries to make her vicious childhood fantasies come true. At last she sees an opportunity for her dreams of knights fighting over her to come true. There will not only be battles; there may well be bloodshed. She knows Arthur will never deliver those fantasies. He thinks fighting is immoral unless it's to promote righteousness.

Not only is Arthur not the lover she had hoped for, he's also not the warrior she dreamed of. They are mismatched in every conceivable way.

Yet, when the jousts happen, when her fantasies are at last made reality, the result is tragedy. Lionel is killed by Lancelot. Finally, the death of which she dreamed has come to pass, and she suddenly realizes what she's done. She has indirectly killed a man, and not just any man, but a friend of hers, one of her favorite knights. And then the "obligatory moment," that moment in any story toward which everything before it leads and from which everything after it follows, the moment that the story cannot exist without. Lancelot steps forward, bends down, prays, and he brings Lionel back to life. We see for the first time that his claims of purity, his claims that he can perform miracles are actually true. When he rises, his eyes lock into Guenevere's, and we realize in an instant that they have fallen in love.

Perhaps Guenevere already found him physically attractive (in the novel, Lance is ugly, but in the musical, he's hot). But he's accomplished two things. First, he has saved her from her folly; he has brought back to life the knight her immature schemes had killed. Second, he has fought for her and he has won. He is the greatest knight in the court, probably in all Europe, and she sees now that he loves her, no doubt with the same passion with which he loves Arthur and the Table.

How can she resist? As Queen, she should resist, but she won't. And later we will see the difference between Lance and Arthur. Whereas Arthur's love for this Table outshines his love for Guenevere, Lance clearly loves Guenevere more (or at least as much).

Following her beautifully crafted arc, it's also interesting to hear how Guenevere's music gets more complex, both melodically and harmonically, over the course of the show, as she matures, as she becomes a more complex individual, and finds herself in progressively more complex situations. "Simple Joys of Maidenhood" is the song of a girl. "I Loved You Once in Silence" in Act II is the song of a woman.
I loved you once in silence,
And mis'ry was all I knew;
Trying so to keep my love from showing,
All the while not knowing
You loved me too.

Yes, loved me in lonesome silence,
Your heart filled with dark despair;
Thinking love would flame in you forever,
And I'd never, never
Know the flame was there.

Then one day we cast away our secret longing;
The raging tide
We held inside
Would hold no more.

The silence at last was broken;
We flung wide our prison door.
Ev'ry joyous word of love was spoken,
And now there's twice as much grief,
Twice the strain for us,
Twice the despair,
Twice the pain for us
As we had known before.

And after all had been said,
Here we are, my love,
Silent once more,
And not far, my love,
From where we were before.

In other words, be careful what you wish for. Especially if it entails harm to others. Guenevere has grown up now, but it's too late, and events are overtaking her.

Having directed the show myself for New Line in 1999, I'll admit that Camelot is a flawed show, to be sure, but still a very good one. There is so much more richness and nuance than most productions find. And as with most musicals, audiences find it very hard to distinguish between a bad show and a bad production of a good show.

As long as some directors (and way too many in NYC) think they can turn their brains off to direct a musical, we'll get bland and shallow productions of shows that deserve better (I'm lookin' at you Casey Nicholaw!). If directors and actors would just pay musicals the same respect they pay to Death of a Salesman and A Midsummer Night's Dream, maybe audiences would get more productions that do justice to the material, and they'd discover that even a show with flaws, like Camelot, can still be serious and powerful and truthful.

And that's all audiences want. Just tell them a story that tells the truth.

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

P.S. To check out my newest musical theatre books, click here.

P.P.S. To donate to New Line Theatre, click here