Why Don't You Just Shoot Me in the Head?

Shakespeare loved the soliloquy. These days, most theatre people just refer to a soliloquy as an "interior monologue." It's just the character thinking out loud. Think of "To be or not to be" in Hamlet or that amazing opening monologue in Richard III. (I still think that play needs to be a rock musical.)

Opera turned the soliloquy into the aria. American musical comedy turned it into the "I Want" song -- like "My White Knight" in The Music Man, "There Are Worse Things I Could Do" in Grease, "Being Alive" in Company, or "The I Love You Song" in Spelling Bee. And at about the same time the musical comedy was first blossoming, Bertolt Brecht was in Germany working on surprisingly similar devices, including fourth-wall-ignoring monologues.

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson borrows from both these more recent traditions, old-school musical comedy and Brecht. The BBAJ song "The Great Compromise" is a prime example. It functions as a pure "I Want" song for Rachel, and in telling us what she wants, she also tells us who she is, what her relationship with Jackson has become, what she thinks of his politics, and lots more. But it also functions as a Brechtian, split-screen illustration of Jackson's fractured life. The song alternates between Rachel's lament and dialogue between a couple who met and fell in love at a Jackson rally, representing two opposing perceptions of Jackson. And they're light years apart. Rachel sees only the private Jackson and finds him selfish and immature. The couple sees only the public Jackson and they see him as essentially perfect. The last line of the dialogue inside the song is the woman in the couple concluding that "Jackson is love." And yet his wife is miserable and alone. Jackson creates love in the one case and destroys it in the other.

As I've written before, sometimes our heroes are assholes.

The centerpiece of the show is the driving "Rock Star," and like the rest of the score, it works on several levels at once. In the scene leading up to the song, Rachel gives Jackson an ultimatum -- if he runs for office again, they're through. And the last line before the music erupts is Van Buren's "So what're you gonna do?" It's time for a choice. A big one. But as any general knows, you have to assess the battlefield first.

A soloist appears who acts as Jackson's inner thoughts, as he works his way through his dilemma. From the point of view of the singer -- and Jackson -- all the previous Presidents tried to be rock stars, but they all failed. They just weren't up to it.
Washington crossed the Delaware river.
Washington acted like a rock star.
Washington made America deliver.
Washington tried to be a rock star.
But all the fame that he had won,
It wasn't really any fun,
And soon the people started turnin'.
Whoa, whoa, whoa...
That boy who couldn't tell a lie,
Two terms, and then he said goodbye,
And Georgie went back to Mt. Vernon.

Only Jackson can pull it off! Or so says Jackson. Not even Washington could do it. Of course, the truth is Jackson will also fail in many ways, just like the others, because it's an impossible job. But he can't see that. The chorus of this song is brilliantly conceived. Like the show's other songs, it never comes at its subject straight on, but instead from around a corner, through a different lens. Jackson's mind (and lyricist Michael Friedman's lyric) comes at the idea of the Presidency through self-righteous outrage -- outrage, you'll notice, over an offense not yet committed -- or is he still talking about the 1824 election that was stolen from him...?
Why don't you just shoot me in the head,
'Cause you know I'd be better off dead,
If there's really no place in America
For a celebrity of the first rank!

In other words, an America that wouldn't elect Jackson to the Presidency is an America not worth living in. Wow. We see here again that Jackson's ego is considerable, and that will be his tragic flaw. He can't see his own limitations and inadequacies. He has no self-awareness.

The first part of the song is Jackson's inner thoughts, but halfway through, when the soloist introduces Jackson, he is reborn -- "That's right, mothafuckas! Jackson's back!" He has made his decision. He will run again. (Rachel who?) He know he's better than all those other guys. The song transforms itself from interior monologue to stump speech, and in that transformation it moves the story forward, like any good theatre song should. This is the show's obligatory moment, the point toward which everything before it leads, and from which everything after it flows. If Jackson makes a different choice here, his life goes down a different path. Rachel might even live longer (at least in this version of the story). But his decision is based on a self-assessment that is not a serious one.

Now as the song continues, it's Jackson himself singing. He has found his voice and his confidence, he has put Rachel out of his mind, and he's ready to kick some Republican ass. But notice how shallow and simplistic his views of his predecessors are...
John Adams tried to be an American Idol,
Jefferson tried to be a rock star,
Madison tried to make the Presidency vital,
And James Monroe was a douchebag!
The story always ends the same,
It's hard to handle all that fame
If you don't really have it in ya.
Whoa, whoa, whoa...
There's no place in democracy
For your brand of aristocracy,
So take that shit back to Virginia
(Or Massachusetts, Biatch!)

Note that last dig at his incumbent opponent John Quincy Adams, who's from Massachusetts. Jackson might as well be holding a sign that says, "We are the 99%!"

And as he repeats the chorus several times, The People join him. It becomes not just Jackson's opinion, but The People's opinion as well, that the American Presidency should be able to accommodate a superstar. (It's hard to ignore parallels to Obama here.) But as they sing, we hear two melodies in counterpoint to the chorus. One is a variation on the earlier bridge:
You thought you were just a Founding Father,
But everyone wants you to be their father.

And the third counterpoint melody is also one we've already heard, but set to a new lyric:
But all that fame can take its toll,
The people force you into a role,
And soon the tables will be turnin'.

Yes they will...

These three melodies and lyrics bounce off each other, then finally, everyone comes together on a driving, climactic unison repeat of the chorus. The People are with him! This is not only great music and lyric writing, but it's great storytelling. The song starts inside Jackson's head, as pulsing, pounding rock, like a musical migraine in Jackson's brain, throbbing, almost exploding out of him. Then the song moves from the surrogate inner voice to Jackson's own voice, then to the voice of The People, alongside but also at odds with Jackson. This is complicated psychology, politics, and storytelling, all rolled into one seriously kickass rock song.

That's how good and how smart this show is.

We closed Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson Saturday night, but I can't stop thinking about it. I always miss our shows when we close them, but this one is different. It's such a unique piece of theatre, so aggressive, such fun, so powerful, and sitting here with two weeks till the election, it's so fucking timely.

And all the music is totally stuck in my brain. I can think of worse problems.

What a wild, wonderful ride it was. Thank you to everyone who came to share it with us.

Long Live the Rock Musical!
Scott

Populism, Yea, Yea!

Most people who see Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson don't consciously notice the incredible craft and skill in the show's writing. They see lots of wacky comedy, including some pretty sophomoric gross-out humor, they hear very raw language and driving rock and roll, and it doesn't even occur to them that this deceptively complex theatre piece is operating on a much deeper, more sophisticated level than it appears.

Though we don't recognize it in real time, the obscene language and the gross-out humor actually contribute to characterization, to getting at the socio-political zeitgeist of the Jacksonian Era, to the show's central metaphor, and to the show's rejection of Rodgers and Hammerstein that is the lifeblood of this amazing piece of neo musical comedy.

But nobody thinks about all that stuff while they're watching it. It's totally subliminal.

I've already blogged about how the character of Andrew Jackson is more a construct than a representation of the real guy, about how he is a metaphorical stand-in for America as a nation and as a people, about how Jackson and America and the show itself all share the same character arc, evolving from angsty 'tween to sober, self-aware adult, about how even the way the show is narrated has meaning both in the story and also in the context of the evolution of the art form. Yes, all that stuff is in this rowdy, crazy musical.

And more.

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson is a hybrid of the two new forms in the American musical theatre. On the one hand, it's a Neo Musical Comedy, using the tools of old-school musical comedy melded to the irony, moral ambiguity, and socio-political content of our current Age of Irony (which arguably started in the 60s but took over pop culture in the 90s). But it's also a Neo Rock Musical (and our next show Next to Normal is too), using the tools of the Rodgers and Hammerstein model but jettisoning R&H's ponderous mid-century morality for a more complex -- and more real -- look at human emotion and interaction.

(And on a side note, that's all politics is -- human emotion and interaction -- and that's why politics is inherently dramatic.)

One of those R&H tools that this show retains is the reprise. When our art form was still young, musicals used reprises (a repeat or approximate repeat of a song we've already heard) to remind the audience of the hit tune the producers wanted them to buy (recordings or sheet music) after they saw the show. Or sometimes a reprise gave the secondary leads another musical slot in Act II that they wouldn't otherwise get.

But Rodgers and Hammerstein changed that. Well, really Hammerstein changed that, most famously with Show Boat in 1927, but even more regularly and confidently in his shows with Rodgers. Since Hammerstein, reprises have been more functional and less decorative. In shows built on the R&H model, a reprise revisits an earlier moment, but in a new context, with (sometimes only subtextually) new meaning. A reprise refers back to the first hearing of the song, but it doesn't just repeat it. Either the lyric is different to fit the new circumstances, or the lyric is the same but it means something substantially different in this new context. Probably the clearest example is "Let Me Entertain You" in Gypsy, a song literally designed for its reprises. The first time we hear it, it's an intentionally bland kiddie song; later on, it becomes an ironic symbol of the maturing girls being trapped in their childish roles; and at the end it become Louise's strip number and the lyric takes on a much darker, more complex meaning about sex, objectification, power. This one seemingly simplistic song goes from kiddie number to sexual invitation. Bravo, Sondheim!

And Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson handles reprises with equal intelligence.

The show's aggressive opening number, "Populism, Yea Yea!," operates on so many levels, both sincere and ironically Brechtian at the same time. These characters think this inarticulate cheer means something, but the writers are also telling us at the same time that the characters are shallow and trivial, that they are to be dismissed. And that tells the audience a lot about how this show will operate. And it also immediately sets the debate for the evening -- is populism good or bad? Of course, the answer is it's both. And we see that it is both as we hear the song reprised throughout the show. It returns, really more as a leitmotif than a reprise, marking moments of populism throughout the story, as commentary, counterpoint, even as an acknowledgement of its own dark side when Rachel quotes it in "The Great Compromise." She's sees what's wrong with populism here, but Jackson still doesn't.

The whole score plays with the idea of a leitmotif/reprise. "I'm So That Guy" starts as a new song, but after only one verse, it bursts into counterpoint, with Jackson singing a reprise of "I'm Not That Guy" and the rest of the cast singing the first verse of "Populism, Yea, Yea!" And the counterpoint of these two songs subliminally suggests the immaturity and shallowness behind Jackson's confidence and ambition. While Jackson's vocal soars over the rest, they shift back and forth between the first verse of this number, and the chorus of "Populism, Yea, Yea!" It's a crazy, irrational, passionate mess. Just like Jackson's emotions. Content dictates form.

"Public Life" is another example of this same device. It begins as a new song, an emotional ballad for Jackson, as he mourns for his wife. But by the second verse, his focus is already moving from his wife to his People. Soon the People join him, reprising "I'm Not That Guy," the song Jackson sang the last time he was faced with a major life choice and started off on a new path. The chorus is his inner voice. Suddenly the song bursts into three-way contrapuntal life. On top, Jackson takes on a new melody, with a lyric about "change" that could have come out of an Obama speech. Half the ensemble continues with the reprise of "I'm Not That Guy," and the other half of the ensemble picks up a campaign ditty that we heard in the background of Rachel's "The Great Compromise."  This third lyric -- "Jackson's back! He's got it going on!" repeated over and over -- reminds us of the vapidity and mindlessness of populism in general and Jackson's followers in specific. There is no there there. Jackson may be the voice of the People, but the People aren't really paying attention. By the end of the song, Jackson is singing, "The path is clear and I've made my choice. I'm gonna listen to the people's voice," more empty words, as the rest of the cast returns to the chorus of "Populism, Yea, Yea!"

This number is a remarkable piece of writing. It moves us forward in the plot, it takes us through several different emotional states in Jackson, and it provides a funny but straight-faced, socio-political context for it all, which sets up the complex obstacles ahead for him in later scenes.

The only true reprise in the show is "Crisis Averted," which bookends the first section of the Oval Office scene towards the end of the show, functioning both as commentary and as Jackson's inner voice. This song frames the biggest turning point in the story. It's a peppy little tune, more like They Might Be Giants than an emo band. In "Crisis Averted #1" it's all about optimism, immortality, invincibility. In this first version, they sing:
Crisis averted!
He's taking a stand
And the best part is
Everything he says is right.
I really think
That this will work.
We're young.
We'll live forever.
At least for one more night.
My luck will hold this time,
It always has before.
So I  think, I think it just might work.

Then the cheerleaders leave (more about that in a second), and in "Crisis Averted #2" it's all about the end, mortality, failure. This time they sing, still to the same peppy music:
Crisis averted!
I'm going alone
And the best part is
Everything I say is right.
Did you really think
That this would work?
You're fucked.
You won't live forever.
Your luck won't hold this time.
It won't be like before.
It's never, it's never gonna work.

The perky music accomplishes so much. First it tells us that even the narrators -- the band soloist and the other actors -- don't care what happens to our hero. We've gone from hero-worshipping narrator (the Storyteller) at the beginning, to the band soloist as narrator, to shallow girls (in "The Corrupt Bargain") and later random actors, as the most disinterested narrators of all. But these two songs also bracket the moment when the Good Times turn Bad. It's when Jackson's personal cheerleaders leave the Oval Office because "this isn't fun anymore" and "direct democracy directly applied is totes lame" that the tone changes.

Up till now, the cheerleaders in the Oval Office seem like a cheap running joke. But here we see they represent the public, the voters, us; and the relationship between them and Jackson takes on fascinating, much more complicated colors. When the cheerleaders turn on him, we have turned on him, just as American liberals did to some extent to Obama in 2010. And when Jackson loses the people, he loses everything. He feeds on them. (As I typed that last sentences, I got a great idea for a Zombie Jackson musical...) His whole persona is wrapped up in his populism, his status as the People's President, but can he still be the People's President when the people don't want him anymore? As the song says, "You're fucked." (Notice that the first version of "Crisis Averted" contains no obscenities, but the second version does.) Things are different now, these songs tell us. "It won't be like before."

This turning point (the cheerleaders leaving) is really important, but because it's subtle, these two matching songs underline it for us. Just the way Brecht liked it. And they're funny songs too. And that's great writing.

I expect no less from this brilliant piece of rock theatre. I fall more in love with it at every performance. There's truly nothing else like it.

Just three more shows!

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

The Corrupt Bargain

One of my recent blog entries was about how the authors of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson used obscene and vulgar language to create a theatrical parallel to the lawlessness and chaos of those times in our early history. But the show uses another parallel to the wild, untamed world of the frontier -- the show itself.

Just as the show matures along with Jackson and our young nation, it also fully embodies a rejection of rules and conventions that parallels a similar rejection of the rules of New England by Jackson and the frontiersmen. Stephen Sondheim famously believes that Content Dictates Form, that the story dictates the kind of storytelling. In almost every way, this show's creators, Alex Timbers and Michael Friedman, have created a show that is its story.

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson careens from style to style, from serious to wacky to darkly ironic, from introspection to ironic detachment, from the Marx Brothers to Brecht. It keeps us off balance. There are no conventional signposts to grab onto here. And that's part of the point.

One great example of this is the scene-song "The Corrupt Bargain." We get to Jackson's first real defeat and the show stops the story cold to explain the politics of what just happened. Brecht would love it. So would Sondheim. This song purposefully breaks every rule of musical theatre. It describes action instead of showing it. It offers commentary, but it's unreliable commentary. It's literally embodies the absurdity of the politics it describes in its mindless, comically pointless dance breaks. The song uses both direct narration to the audience and dialogue, but there's something wrong with these narrators, and as this reveals itself over the course of the song, it once again throws us off course. We can't trust the narrators?

Who is the narrator in this show, by the way? It starts out being the Storyteller, but once she's removed from the story, the bandleader takes over. But sometimes the actors narrate. There's no consistent voice to the story's narration and once again, that's a conscious choice. There is no objectivity in American politics, TImbers and Friedman are telling us. Everyone has a different perspective and that colors what they see and how they talk about it. And this lack of a consistent narrative voice is also subtextually a commentary on storytelling itself, on bias, on narrative agenda, and on our current struggle to talk about our world in a time when the two opposing sides of American society (liberal and conservative) can't even agree on what is objectively true and what is not.

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson fully and consciously embodies this moment when facts have become a matter of opinion, and the show plays around (a lot!) with how that affects the retelling of history.

And even within this one song, whose voice do these girls represent? They're not The People here, and they're not on Jackson's side or his opponents' side. But they're also not omniscient or objective like conventional narrators. On top of that, they're both shallow and bad historians. Every time the girls seem to be invoking the perspective of an historical figure for a little extra insight, they also short-circuit that reference at the same time. For example...
Alexis De Tocqueville says something in French
That none of us can translate...
. . .
James Madison said something prescient about this
But he was kind of a dick...
. . .
I'm sure Michel Foucault would have an opinion
But he hasn't been born yet...

You get the idea.

These girls are objective only in the sense that they don't much seem to give a shit about any of this. On the other hand, they sorta seem to agree with the Washington elitists. Just look at how they describe Jackson: "Do you really want America run by a man from Tennessee?" And even more potent, "Do you really want the American people running their own country?" -- that was a real debate at the time! Who is 'worthy" of voting rights? John Quincy Adams had written to a friend, “Depend upon it, Sir, it is dangerous to open so fruitful a source of controversy and altercation as would be opened by attempting to alter the qualifications of voters; there will be no end to it. New claims will arise; women will demand the vote; lads from twelve to twenty-one will think their rights not enough attended to, and every man who has not a farthing, will demand an equal voice with any other, in all acts of state.” What? Women and poor people VOTING???

Adams would have been right at home with the GOP's 2012 campaign of voter suppression. Notice how the conservatives talk about the American people in this song, satirically but powerfully putting 2012 audiences in mind of Romney's infamous "47%" comments, even though those comments had not been made yet when the show was written.
Adams: The people are stupid.
Clay: They can all go rot.
Calhoun: They're lame.
Adams: They suck.

Inside all this silliness, satire, dancing, and jokes, the song actually paints for us a very accurate and accessible picture of how Adams, Clay, Calhoun, et al. literally stole the 1824 election from Jackson. By the end of the song, we really do understand the infamous Corrupt Bargain. And for modern-day liberals, it's hard not to see a parallel to the controversial Bush v. Gore decision by the Supreme Court in 2000.

Like the rest of the show, this song delivers on plot, satire, entertainment, and contemporary political commentary. It contains the three elements of good art -- Poetry, Popcorn, and Politics, or in other words, artistry, entertainment, and substance. The song is incredibly well-constructed and deceptively subtle in its agenda. Like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, this song (and the whole show) is both hilarious and serious at the same time (though I think the original production short-changed the serious side). Brecht would have been very proud.

We have only one week left of our run and I continue to find amazing buried treasure in this script and score, incredible craft and skill and intelligence. Like many of the shows we produce, this is one that no doubt will be given lots of shallow productions by people who don't realize all the wonderful things hidden inside this rowdy, vulgar, outrageous show.

I'm already working on my next book, an exploration of the New American Musical in this new millenium, and there will be a chapter on Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson so people can see what's so genuinely brilliant about this under-rated, freakishly original, and surprisingly powerful work. It has been a real privilege exploring it and sharing it with our audiences. It's been such fun to read the rave reviews that each found different treasures in our show. For people who thinks musicals are all old-fashioned and trivial and simplistic, this powerful piece of rock theatre will disabuse of them of that ridiculous notion.

This is a show about important, consequential things, about America, about our politics and how we choose to live together in this experiment we call American democracy, about the dark side of populism (Sarah Palin, anyone?), about the complexity of morality and the impossible choices our leaders face every day.

In short, like almost every show New Line Theatre produces, this is a show about the real world and about us. And that's what makes thrilling, potent theatre.

It's been an amazing ride. Thank you, Alex Timbers and Michael Friedman.

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

Bloody and Cursed

Some people might find it hard to believe, but the vast majority of musicals New Line produces have the word fuck in them. You wouldn't think there'd be that many musicals that use that word, but there are. You wouldn't think that because most people hear the word musical and think old-fashioned musical. Which they probably hate. Ask an average person on the street to name a musical and I bet you get a Rodgers and Hammerstein title before you get something written in the last ten years. But almost all the really interesting new shows have very adult language.

Because that's how people talk.

Musicals we've done that use the word fuck include High Fidelity, Passing Strange, bare, Hair, Kiss of the Spider Woman, Hedwig and the Angry Inch, Grease, Assassins, Sunday in the Park with George, Rocky Horror, Best Little Whorehouse, A New Brain, and others. As far as I know, the New Line record is the fifty-two fucks in Johnny Appleweed.

But Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson might provide Appleweed with some competition. Certainly, BBAJ is one of the most vulgar shows we've done. (And true to form, we're doing the even more vulgar Bukowsical in June.) Jackson throws around fucks with complete abandon. When I first saw the show, I really didn't register that -- I hardly notice what we call "adult language" in shows anymore, because it's both common now and realistic. It never stands out in my ear. Imagine how silly the characters in Rent would sound if they never cursed. They'd seem phony to us. We expect our storytelling to reflect our world.

One review of our production of BBAJ said that the obscene language revealed lazy writing. I disagree. Now having worked on the show for a while, and having seen it with audiences, I've been thinking about the language even more. And I realize it's a very strong and -- surprisingly enough -- very subtle narrative device that accomplishes two important jobs.

First, as I've written about before, in BBAJ the character of Jackson matures as America matures -- and as the show itself "matures," from sketch comedy to adult drama. And the language is part of that. Jackson curses all the time because he fancies himself a rebel. He doesn't follow rules. His language is an act of aggression. He assaults people -- including the audience -- with his words. When he first enters at the beginning of the show, he interacts briefly with the audience and engages in what can only be called (fake) sexual harassment. It seems like a naughty "throw-away" moment, but it's actually an important establishment of the tone and agenda of the evening. Jackson uses his language to bludgeon and to flamboyantly reject the "polite society" he associates with New England and John Quincy Adams, and also to wage an assault on those "higher classes" and their more "refined sensibilities." (Forgive all the ironic quotes.) Jackson is a frontiersman and there are no rules on the frontier. A prime example of all this is his first campaign speech in the show, as music starts underneath:
Uh-huh. That's right. Underscore, motherfuckers. That means it's our time. Time for the real people of this nation -- you and me -- time for us to take this fucker back. We're gonna walk right up to President Momoe's house and we're going to show him that the name Ol' Hickory doesn't only pertain to the length and girth of my penis. No, it also pertains to the inflexible and unyielding brand of populism that we're gonna shove four-and-a-half inches up his ass!

Language as a weapon. Even the title of the music that accompanies this speech is obscene -- "Underscore, Motherfuckers."  The audience doesn't know that, but it tells the actors and musicians something. In this retelling of his life story, Jackson is Johnny Strabler, Jim Stark, Danny Zuko, Wade "Cry-Baby" Walker, the tough guy with the emotional boy inside, rejecting the world that's already rejected him. And all that gets expressed in Jackson's obscenities.

The other reason for the language is about time and place. David Milch, the creator of the brilliant HBO series Deadwood talks in one of the DVD commentaries about why he used such pervasive obscenity in his dialogue, and his answer is purely artistic. He wanted his audience to feel the lawlessness and wildness of that time and place. Most of us could never imagine a world like that, with no laws, no authority, no social compact, no rules beyond survival. So Milch decided to use extreme, "lawless" language to get at that danger and chaos. The joke among Deadwood lovers is that the complex, poetic dialogue often sounds like Shakespeare wrote it, and every other word is cocksucker or motherfucker. (And now that I think about it, if Shakespeare was writing today, he'd probably use those words too. He loved his dirty jokes and obscene insults.) Milch admits that many of the curse words he used in Deadwood weren't even invented until later, but they're not there for historical authenticity; the words are there for the sense of that world that we can feel viscerally no other way.

The same is true of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson. The obscene language creates a world of verbal and moral anarchy -- which underlines and connects subliminally with Jackson's own lack of a moral code, his massacre of Native Americans and his other immoral -- amoral? -- acts. It gives us a sense of what the Washington establishment thought of this vulgar frontiersman invading their insular, tightly controlled little world. He horrified them, just as he (comically) horrifies us when he says he'll fill us with "popula-jism."

As Van Buren would say, Yuck.

There are shows that use obscenities gratuitously (Silence!, The Book of Mormon), but Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson isn't one of them.

But maybe we should take a step back here. I mean, why not use curse words? People use these words. I use these words. Why shouldn't characters in our storytelling use these words? One reason so many of the shows we produce contain the word fuck is that we do a lot of fairly new shows, and younger writers are no longer afraid to use that word in a musical, if it's organic to the character and situation.

So yes, I guess I'm saying that the obscene language is there in BBAJ for a reason and also that we need to relax about it. After all, they're just fucking words.

Our production of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson is going incredibly well, we're getting great audiences, and so far we've had ten rave reviews! Come join us for this amazing, smart, fearless piece of modern musical theatre. Two weeks left!

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

Underscore, Motherfuckers

Sometimes there are things about a show I don't discover until we put it in front of an audience.

When we did Hair the first time, none of us truly understood it, me included, until the audience provided the final missing piece. Then it all made sense.

We opened Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson Friday night, and what a great opening it was! We had a big, rowdy, smart audience, and the cast and band were all at the peak of their powers, just absolutely on fucking fire. We also had live Tweeters for the first time, and that turned out really cool -- you can read their tweets here. Everybody seemed to love the show. It is a wild ride, that's for sure, and that was even more obvious to me, watching with audiences for the first time.

And seeing our production in its finished form, I saw something about the show I hadn't seen before, even when I saw it in New York.

I've written on this blog before about how the character of Andrew Jackson in this show (as distinct from the actual guy) goes from rowdy, vulgar, angsty teenager to darker, more self-aware adult. In that process he stands in for America as a country, crossing over from national childhood through adolescence. But now I can see that the show itself does the same thing.

The evening starts off with some off-color sex jokes (from a  2012 perspective, we might even say Jackson sexually harrasses the audience), followed by lots of angsty whining in the first song, then a silly and shallow version of Jackson's early biography. The show itself is juvenile here.

But the evening ends with the complexity of real world consequences short-circuiting Jackson's swagger and ambition, followed by an assessment of Jackson's atrocities against Native Americans, even going so far as to call him "an American Hitler." By this point, the show is about the weight and weariness of being an adult, about the consequences of a (collective?) life lived recklessly. In the last thirty minutes, the show becomes serious, adult storytelling. And then in the final moments of the show, as the last great irony in an evening chock full of ironies, the band strikes up a driving punk version of Jackson's real-life campaign song, "The Hunters of Kentucky," letting its shallow, folk storytelling bang up uncomfortably against the very sophisticated, nuanced story and the moral ambiguity we've just been left with. But where it's placed in the show, as a kind of epilogue, "The Hunters of Kentucky" also makes a final, subliminal point about the nature of storytelling itself, its construction, its bias, its agenda, its place in the culture, and by turning this folk song into a driving punk anthem, Friedman and Timbers marry the two storytelling forms and reinforce one last time the double time-frame of the show.

The audience leaves feeling "up" from the rowdy rock music but also conflicted about all the darkness they've just seen play out. It also reminds us, perhaps subconsciously, that Jackson's greatest triumph was made by his younger, cockier self, long before he was President, long before he had to settle The Indian Question and argue with Congress about tariffs.

After all, it's easy to be a bully. It's hard to be President.

Even the length of the scenes increases as the show unfolds, progressively taking more and more time to go deeper, to explore contradiction, self-delusion, complexity. Bookwriter Alex Timbers and songwriter Michael Friedman drop hints all through the show about the central theme of maturing -- backstage at the political rally when Jackson asks why he can't live both the lives he wants, Rachel answers, "Because you're an adult." It's the first time we come up this explicitly against Jackson's tragic flaw. Emotional teenager Jackson is not equipped for the problems and complexity of the real world, and this moment foreshadows his unraveling later on in the Oval Office. (I can't help but see George W. Bush in this aspect of the character.)

The Bloody Bloody score also "grows up" in this same way. It starts with the wild, heavy, driving emo rock of "Populism, Yea, Yea!" a lyric consciously swimming in angsty shallowness, with a chorus that really contains only one word until the last line:
Populism, Yea, Yea!
Populism, Yea, Yea!
Populism, Yea, Yea!
Populism, Yea, Yea!
This is the age of Jackson.

This lyric tells us almost nothing, other than just nakedly announcing one of the show's themes. But it also tells us a lot. It tells us about the point of view of the show, its tone, its humor, its political satire. It presents us with an ironic swipe at the often mindless over-simplicity of American politics; and it sets up the double-time-period device, as it tells us this is the Jacksonian Era but set to driving rock and roll. In a (probably intentional) break from conventional musical theatre rules, this opening number doesn't do all the plot and character setup that most openings do, in shows like High Fidelity, Bat Boy, Company, Assassins, Jesus Christ Superstar, Songs for a New World...  Instead it defiantly refuses to do those things on the surface, while sort of doing some of them anyway subtextually and musically.

And really, one could argue that America is the main character of this story as much as Jackson is, so maybe this opening song does some important character work after all. And if you really want to dig down deep, 19th century America isn't the character we're talking about here -- this is a show about America in 2012. Which is why rock and roll is the musical language.

And the verse of "Populism, Yea, Yea!" returns later in the show as counterpoint, now standing in as a metaphor for Jackson's emotional state.

As the score progresses, it moves from rowdy to nuanced. "Rock Star," halfway through the show, is the last fully rock number. (One might argue that "The Saddest Song" is pretty driving rock and roll, but it's also essentially a waltz -- that's really interesting, melding the two periods musically, but it does make the song less than fully rock and roll.) The next two songs, "The Great Compromise" and "Public Life" start smaller and quieter,  and then are taken over by rock and roll by their ends, as the score goes through a musical transformation. After that, the last four songs in the show (not counting the epilogue) abandon the rock beat. And they also begin to have more ambiguous endings, leading the audience less certainly toward applause -- and since applause is often an emotional release, keeping the audience from applauding builds tension. Both "Crisis Averted #1" and "Crisis Averted #2" end very abruptly, without a musical "button" on the end, which cues applause. "The Saddest Song" doesn't end at all -- it stops mid-phrase and segues directly into the last big dialogue scene between Jackson and Black Fox. It's a brilliant move because it takes us directly from inside Jackson's chaotic emotions straight into the powerful dramatic tension of his final one-on-one negotiation. And likewise, "Second Nature" does not resolve itself harmonically at the end of the song, making it sound like it doesn't finish -- and maybe that's part of the message of its lyric. Our "taking" continues...

The turning point for the entire show is when Jackson's resident cheerleaders leave the Oval Office, saying, "This isn't fun anymore." Exactly. One cheerleader says, "Direct Democracy directly applied is like totes lame." (She doesn't know it but she's said something really smart there.) The Cheerleaders represent The People, who now turn on Jackson -- and they're all he really had. And that's followed by the second of the two versions of "Crisis Averted." The first is peppy and optimistic, but this second one is cynical and defeatist. The show has turned from Marx Brothers to Brecht. Likewise, the character of Black Fox turns from punchline to formidable opponent.

We have a rare luxury here at New Line Theatre. We've never, in twenty-two seasons, chosen a show for commercial appeal. We produce only the most exciting, most original, most well-crafted works the art form has to offer, and we've developed an audience over the years who want to see that. As I learned many years ago, audiences don't like only what they know; they like what's good. None of us working at New Line make very good money, but we get to do really amazing work.

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson may not have done all that well financially on Broadway, but I believe it's one of the genuinely great works of this new Golden Age. Timbers and Friedman are at the top of their games, and I can't wait to see what they each do next. Our art form has never been more vigorous or more alive than it is right now. The nonprofit musical theatre wave of the 1990s and the creation of the internet have democratized the musical theatre. Just as Jackson wrested away power from the political elite, today we have wrested away power of the musical theatre from New York commercial producers. And all of us together across the country and around the world are moving the art form forward every day.

It's so exciting to be part of that.

Come see Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson -- details on our website. As Faulkner (and Judy Newmark) said, "The past is never dead. It's not even past."

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

P.S. Yes, there is actually an instrumental number in the show called "Underscore, Motherfuckers," over which Jackson says to the audience, "Uh-huh. That's right. Underscore, motherfuckers." You gotta love a musical like that.

My Pain Transformed Into Art

I'm at that place again.

We open in a week. And when we produce our weirder shows (which is a lot of them), this is always the part that's hardest on me -- although it's easier than it used to be. It's a bit nervous-making never being able to see our end product until a couple days before everybody sees our end product, but I have made peace with this process and I survive this period now better than I used to, maybe because almost every show we produce now gets a slew of rave reviews. I guess it's easier to be zen-like when your batting average is as good as ours. We know the process we've developed over the last twenty-one years really works, no matter what kind of show we do.

We don't have most of the pressures of commercial theatre, so our work is often pretty different from the work done in commercial theatres -- we call ourselves an alternative musical theatre company for a reason. We enjoy a pretty leisurely rehearsal schedule and we allow ourselves to discover the work as we make it. Which means we're never chained to any preconceptions before we start about how the show will turn out. This time, with Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, we've made the journey, done our best, the show opens Friday, and all we know for sure is, as Buckaroo Banzai says, "Wherever you go, there you are."

Of course, I do have some sense of what we've made. When we did Bat Boy, Urinetown, High Fidelity, Cry-Baby, Spelling Bee, Return to the Forbidden Planet, our productions were all more serious than the originals. They were still very funny shows, but we also found these serious, intense, sometimes beautiful moments in amongst the zaniness, that upped the emotional quotient and involved the audience more deeply. We didn't set out to do that; it just happened as we discovered these rich, complex shows and followed their stories where they led us. The same thing has happened with Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson. (Someone taught me years ago what's most interesting is to find what's funny in a sad moment or what's sad in a funny moment.) But when we come at a show from a different angle, that also means we don't have a model to follow. When someone produces a show exactly like its original production (as lots of regional theatres routinely do, especially when there's a video available), there's no mystery about the end product.

But where's the fun in re-doing someone else's work?

We New Liners go off on our own road. We take the words and music and we approach them as if no one has ever produced the show before. Okay, that's not 100% true -- sometimes, having seen the original productions is helpful for me in terms of understanding what the writers intended. But we don't use someone else's staging or design or character interpretation as a starting place. We use the words and music.

In terms of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, our production is going to be less about the arch, "hipster Brechtian" style of the original and more about story. Part of the point of the show in New York was its disdain for Broadway rules about language, storytelling devices, etc. But since New Line shows regularly break most of the rules that BBAJ breaks, we can't rely on the show's original shock value. It takes a lot more than breaking the fourth wall and saying fuck to shock a New Line audience. And I'm not sure shock should be the central agenda of this incredibly intelligent piece of theatre anyway.

As a director I am less interested in devices and effects, and more interested in storytelling. I think Timbers wrote a brilliant script, but when he directed it, he chose to focus more on its anarchy and alienation, and we're focusing more on the powerful contradictions at its center and its insightful resonance for an audience swimming in the politics of 2012. In other words, we're focusing more on the storytelling because that's how we humans make sense of our world and our world could really use some sense-making these days...

I think our audience will feel more for Jackson than they did in the original. I loved Alex Timbers' direction in New York, but we all know there's never only one right answer. (I saw Rent in 1996 right after it moved to Broadway and again last fall off Broadway-- two completely different productions and they were both absolutely amazing.) As much as I love Brecht, Timbers' production was more of an assault on the audience than ours will be. Don't get me wrong, our audience will still be assaulted with the gleeful vulgarity and profanity of the show, but I think our production makes that vulgarity and profanity more intrinsic to the storytelling, more a part of the character and the times, instead of a part of the presentation style. The Broadway production's Jackson was vulgar and offensive more as a meta-theatrical Brechtian device (and believe me, I do love meta-theatrical Brechtian devices!), while our Jackson is vulgar and offensive because he's immature, desperate to entertain, desperate to seem cool and rebellious. Timbers was trying to make provocative theatre; we're trying to tell a provocative story.

The off Broadway and Broadway productions of BBAJ used a highly artificial performance style as a Brechtian alienation device, but musicals have their own built-in alienation device -- the music! There is no "reality" to get lost in when you're watching a musical because a band keeps playing and people keep bursting into song. So BBAJ in New York had a double-layer of alienation operating and it put off their audience. What the creative team didn't understand is that the same thing that gives musical theatre an inherent Brechtian tint is also what subverts Brecht's intent. Brecht wanted audiences to think instead of feel, but music is an abstract language and so it conveys emotion better than spoken words can. Music reminds us of the artificiality and it allows us to tap into deep, universal, human emotions. And most rock musicals double-down on that alienation effect by using most (sometimes, all) of their songs as commentary, stepping outside the reality of the story. Like Brecht and Sondheim, the neo rock musical frequently rejects the fourth wall entirely.

All of this to say that you don't need the intentionally phony acting disguised as hipster Brechtianism. Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson works perfectly without it.

And we're about to prove it.

One of the hardest things about a show like this is that most of the actors play multiple characters. It's also what's most fun about performing it. But on Broadway, the characters were much more types and devices than real people. I think that's a valid choice but I also think this writing is strong enough to support much more serious and authentic acting (as it was with the other shows I've mentioned), even inside this wacky, outrageous style. Our agenda never starts with getting laughs; we always start from character and story, and if we've chosen a good show (and we always do), the laughs will take care of themselves. And that approach is more interesting for the actors too. A good actor loves living inside a full character in a fully imagined world. Give him nothing more than a cardboard cutout and gags to play and he has less fun.

A lot of the actors in the show play a dozen or more characters. Some characters only have a line or two. Some have a monologue then disappear. And I've added to the burden by insisting that every character sound, look, and move differently (though those differences can be subtle ones). On top of that, the cultural and political context of the action is both the early 19th century and today. The actors have to blend all that together and come up with characters that make sense, that serve the scene and the show, and that feel honest and authentic to an audience. Plus, in most of the scenes, they also have to be funny.

That's a really hard job.

It's hard in any show, but with most characters in most shows, there's a lot of information (though sometimes hidden) in the script and score that you can use to understand this particular character and this particular world. But with wild ensemble shows like Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, there's often very little info. In this case, we can find lots of historical information, but these characters are often like their real world counterpoints only in essence, in spirit, not always in concrete detail. So historical research is helpful, but it can be a bit treacherous. Timbers' script is about emotional and moral authenticity, not always historical truth. But remember, Shakespeare changed lots of historical facts in his history plays.

Still, the more we learn about the real times and this version of those times, the more our actors are finding reality in even the smaller characters. Sometimes an obvious detail like an accent or a hat makes it easier. But more than anything, it's been work and experimentation.

As it is with many of our shows, I'm not exactly sure what the end product is going to be, because we've gone off on a road parallel to the original. But I do know the road we're on is a good road that will get us to our destination -- clear, entertaining, emotional storytelling. And I've finally learned not to worry about the destination. My job is to put us on the right road and keep us moving forward -- neither of which is an easy job. But when I do that, the end product is always really interesting and really entertaining and really thought-provoking. And besides, if I can imagine it all in my head ahead of time, it wouldn't be much of an adventure or much of a collaboration, would it? The actors and designers bring as much to this as I do.

This cast is great, they've all found this show's special style and tone -- very much an artistic tightrope -- and we've had the luxury of working with both piano and guitar for a couple weeks already, so we'll be adding only drums and bass this coming week as we approach opening night. We got a glimpse of Amy's incredibly cool costumes when we took our PR pictures, Scott's playground of a set is almost finished, and we'll get a look at Ken's lights this Saturday.

Most of my administrative/producer work is done now. I get to be just an artist this week.

Things are going really great. And my brain is really tired. But I still love my job.

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

Shoot the Storyteller in the Neck

For a while now, I've been thinking and writing about the New American Musical and its two dominant sub-genres, the Neo Musical Comedy and the Neo Rock Musical, both coming to prominence around the mid-1990s. This season at New Line we're working on two Neo Musical Comedies and one Neo Rock Musical. Although Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson is actually a prime example of both.

Each time I get to work on one of these neo musical comedies (like Cry-Baby, Bat Boy, Spelling Bee, Reefer Madness, Urinetown), I get to study this new form even better. And here I am again, with one of the coolest, most aggressive of the bunch, every bit as funny and as intense as Bat Boy and Urinetown. It's got the politics, the wackiness, the darkness, the thick, thick irony. It's a weird cross between George M. Cohan on the one hand, and Tommy and Jesus Christ Superstar on the other.

The more I work on these shows, the more I have to re-examine my preconceptions about the history and evolution of our art form. I sort of unconsciously started that work when I wrote my history book, Strike Up the Band: A New History of Musical Theatre, and got even closer in my last book, Sex, Drugs, Rock & Roll, and Musicals. But after doing Cry-Baby last spring and now working on BBAJ, these ideas are really swimming around in my head a lot.

Most musical theatre historians date "serious" musical theatre (whatever that might mean) back to Show Boat in 1927, or some maybe only as far back as Oklahoma! in 1943. But I've been realizing lately that the Rodgers and Hammerstein era wasn't really when the art form found its footing. That goes back further than we usually pay attention. I think the show that really starts the story of the modern American musical is Little Johnny Jones in 1904, writer-composer-director-choreographer-star George M. Cohan's first big hit. There were a few other shows that had used the label musical comedy before Cohan, but Little Johnny Jones was the first show that really was what we now know as musical comedy.

And for me, there is great freedom in realizing that our art form didn't take original root in the ponderous morality of Rodgers and Hammerstein, but instead in Cohan's musical comedy, rowdy, high-energy, streetwise, slyly satiric, both smart and smartass, and strangely enough, both romantic and cynical – in other, words, very American. It's freedom that comes from the knowledge that the only fundamental rule of musical theatre is that there are no fundamental rules – look at Lysistrata Jones, Cry-Baby, Bat Boy, and Spelling Bee. Today's neo musical comedy takes Cohan's model largely intact, but with the accumulations of its evolution, the political self-awareness of the 1960s, the Sexual Revolution of the 1970s, the New Irony of the 1990s, and the Culture Wars of the 2000s.

For years, musical theatre artists have studied Oklhaoma! and Carousel. But maybe they should be studying George M. Cohan and Little Johnny Jones. That's where we find the roots of Cry-Baby, Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, High Fidelity, and many of the shows being written today. In a sense, Rodgers and Hammerstein's "American operettas" were a detour (though certainly one we learned a lot from), away from the artistically pure Americanism of Cohan. Rogers and Hammerstein musicals evolved (through Kern and Hammerstein's Show Boat) out of European operetta; but the musical comedy was a new American art form, one not based on European forms. Only since the mid-1990s have we returned decisively to this innately American form, but with the changes that allow it to speak to our new zeitgeist.

And really, Cohan's times were a lot like our own. As the last century began, America was a country in transition – exactly as it is now. In 1902, the United Mine Workers began a five-month strike that President Roosevelt ended by giving in to their demands, just as issues of collective bargaining are today being debated in Wisconsin, Ohio, Chicago, and elsewhere. That same year, Roosevelt instituted anti-trust proceedings against many giants of American industry, just as today President Obama and Congress have been trying to put some restraints on the financial industry that tanked our economy. And immigration to the United States reached record levels at the time, in parallel to the illegal immigrant issue in America today. In 1903, J.P. Morgan made $40 million in a single stock deal, mirroring the One Percenters today who literally make billions of dollars a year. That was just a year before Cohan's Little Johnny Jones debuted, elevating the Common Man to the leading role, rather than the counts and princes of operetta. Just as Andrew Jackson democratized our political process, Cohan democratized the musical theatre.

And just as America was ready in 1900 for the blossoming of the new populist art form of musical comedy – a genuinely, entirely American art form – so too today our cynical, crazy world demands the pointed irony of the neo musical comedy, to satirize and reveal the complicated, chaotic times in which we live.

Many have called Cohan the man who invented musical comedy and I would agree. Cohan wrote, composed, directed, choreographed, and starred in almost all his shows. The astonishing part is that he was pretty good at all those jobs. His first musical comedy, based on a shorter vaudeville sketch he had done with his performing family, was called The Governor’s Son, opening in 1901. The show didn’t do very well, but Cohan learned valuable lessons from this first attempt, and within a few short years, he would be the king of musical comedy, as well as its father.

Historian Cecil Smith described Cohan as “the apostle of breeziness, of up-to-dateness, of Broadway brashness and slang. Speed, directness, and ‘ginger’ were the chief ingredients of his musical plays.” You might say the same things about Keythe Farley, co-writer and original director of Bat Boy, or about Alex Timbers, writer and original director of BBAJ and director of Peter and the Starcatcher and the recent Pee Wee Herman On Broadway. One of Cohan's famous directions to his cast before the curtain of a Cohan musical was, “Speed! Speed! And lots of it! Above all, speed!” Sounds a lot like Bat Boy, Urinetown, Cry-Baby, and Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, doesn't it? Cohan gave the musical comedy its tempo, its attitude, its fierceness, its sheer, aggressive American-ness. Years later, playwright Alert Innaurato said of these shows, “Theatre must be a paradox to succeed, and this was ferocious fluff, deadly uproarious political theatre that was also tons of fun.”

You could describe Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson exactly the same way.

In every way, Cohan turned commercial theatre on its ear. But soon enough, his brand of muscular, brash, rough-and-tumble American musical caught on. Critic Brooks Atkinson has said that Cohan’s songs were “sublimations of the mood of their day. They said what millions of people would have said if they had Cohan’s talent.” Critic Alan Dale in The Telegraph described Cohan’s Little Nellie Kelly this way: “Everything and everybody jigged, and contorted, and twisted, and cavorted, and pirouetted, and tripped it, and trotted, and raced, and rushed, and rampaged, and rioted, and footed it, and embonpointed it, and made a general dancing rough-house.” Once again, sounds like BBAJ. Oscar Hammerstein II would later say, “Never was a plant more indigenous to a particular part of the earth than was George M. Cohan to the United States of his day. The whole nation was confident of its superiority, its moral virtue, its happy isolation from the intrigues of the old country, from which many of our fathers and grandfathers had migrated.” Musical theatre historian Gerald Bordman called Cohan “America’s first musical comedy genius.”

Cohan continued after his first show with Running for Office (1903), Little Johnny Jones (1904) – his first hit which debuted the songs, “Give My Regards to Broadway” and “Yankee Doodle Dandy” – Forty-Five Minutes from Broadway (1906), George Washington, Jr. (1906), The Honeymooners (1907, a re-working of Running for Office), Fifty Miles from Boston (1908), The American Idea (1908), and The Man Who Owns Broadway (1909). His song “You’re a Grand Old Flag,” in George Washington Jr., became the first song written for a musical to sell more than a million copies of sheet music.

(A quick side note: In Forty-Five Minutes from Broadway, Cohan made the unprecedented move of starting his show with a lone male voice singing offstage a cappella. Everybody thinks Rodgers and Hammerstein were the first to do that with Oklahoma! but Cohan actually did it first.)

Cohan wrote a total of twenty-one musicals and twenty plays during his career. His plots were sometimes slight but still coherent and dramatic. His life story (partly fictionalized) was told in the 1942 film Yankee Doodle Dandy, which recreated the climactic song and dance from Little Johnny Jones. A revue of Cohan’s songs that also told his life story was created in 1968 called George M, which gave many of his songs new life, and introduced him to a whole new generation.

Little Johnny Jones (1904), Cohan’s first hit and one of his best shows, was inspired by the real life Tod Sloane, an American jockey in London for the English Derby. But in Cohan’s show, the jockey Johnny Jones is framed on bogus charges of fixing the race, by an unscrupulous American gambler. Strangely enough, this story occupied the first two acts, while Act III returned to San Francisco’s Chinatown where Jones’ fiancĂ©e is kidnapped. Of course, the kidnapper is the same guy who framed poor Johnny in London. The show ran only fifty-two performances in its initial New York run, but Cohan kept fiddling with the show as he took it on tour, learning from his audiences, and when he brought it back to Broadway, it clocked in an impressive two hundred additional performances. The score contained “Give My Regards to Broadway” and “The Yankee Doodle Boy,” later known as “Yankee Doodle Dandy.” Of course, as coincidence would have it, both Johnny Jones and George M. Cohan were born on the Fourth of July. (For a long time, Cohan’s birth certificate dated July 3, 1878, appeared to expose a lie, but it’s generally agreed now that the certificate is in error.) And as if Cohan wasn’t all-American enough on his own, consider that his first monster hit song, “The Yankee Doodle Boy,” contained quotations from “The Star-Spangled Banner,” “Dixie,” “The Girl I Left Behind Me,” and of course, “Yankee Doodle.” You can't get more American than that.

Here's the most famous number from Little Johnny Jones, as recreated at the Goodspeed Opera House in 1980, based on what we know of the original staging and choreography.



Imagine the impact of a rowdy, smartass show like this after decades of operetta. Probably a lot like the impact of Bat Boy and Urinetown in the late 1990s, after decades of Rodgers and Hammerstein-style musicals.

The Milwaukee Press said of Cohan's show Forty-Five Minutes from Broadway, “All the forth, the humor, the fatalism, the philosophy, compounded of Epicureanism, cynicism, and opportunism, characteristic of the futile little rialto world are perfectly reflected by Mr. Cohan in his songs and slang dialogue.” One review of The Honeymooners said, “It goes so fast that it almost bewilders and gives the impression of a great machine shooting out characters, choruses, songs, dances with rapid-fire quickness and precision."

Once again, that quote could have just as easily been written about BBAJ.

An opposing view was expressed by James Metcalf in Life. He said Cohan was “a vulgar, cheap, blatant, ill-mannered, flashily-dressed, insolent, smart aleck, who for some reason unexplainable on any basis of common sense, good taste, or even ordinary decency, appeals to the imagination and apparent approval of large American audiences. As a living character in any American town or village, it is hardly to be conceived that he would not by driven out as a public nuisance and a pernicious example to the youth of the community. The round of applause which greets the efforts of this offensive personality must convey to the minds of ignorant boys a depraving ideal for their inspirations and imitation.” Now that sounds like they're talking about the character of Andrew Jackson in BBAJ.

How dare Cohan portray an ill-mannered character! And how dare Grease and Rocky Horror portray horny kids...

I've never felt more connected to my artistic roots. The more I let go of the weight and constraints of the Rodgers and Hammerstein model, the freer I feel to raise hell and break the rules as often as I follow them. Cohan is my artistic hero, along with his disciples, George Abbott, Hal Prince, Bob Fosse, and Tommy Tune. He did his best to get at the truth of America while also giving his audiences a hell of a good time. I can't imagine a more noble agenda.

And meanwhile, New Line's latest neo musical comedy, Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, is in such great shape – hilarious, heart-wrenching, emotionally powerful, freakishly insightful – and we've still got two weeks before we open.

The adventure continues...

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

The People's Voice

Last night I started watching this three-part PBS special, Broadway or Bust, about this national musical theatre competition in NYC for high school performers. I have mixed feelings about this show. I love it anytime musical theatre makes it into mainstream culture, but I hate the idea of competition in the arts. Also, these kids are massively talented and they all seem really great, but it seems none of them understands yet that an actor "gives" a performance. After all, nobody ever says, "Wow, she got a really great performance tonight!" No, you say she gave a great performance.

Making good theatre is not an act of ego; it's an act of sharing.

But nobody has taught these kids this yet. And admittedly, they're teenagers so we should cut them some slack. They're just finding their way. But so often I encounter young people who love musical theatre, and the only path they seem to see is one heading to Broadway – and if they don't make it to Broadway, they think they failed. They're each traveling through their own personal hero myth, and they think their magic amulet (i.e., light saber, ruby slippers) is a great singing voice, but it's really just honesty. Elaine Strich and Harvey Fierstein don't have great voices, but they've got honesty.

Besides, so few people ever work on Broadway that turning that into an end-all-be-all is pretty self-destructive. And let's be honest, a lot of the work on Broadway is shallow and bland. Only some of the greatest works of the art form ever find commercial success in the now very tourist-centric industry of commercial New York theatre. Broadway is no longer the pinnacle of the art form, as it was in the 1940s through the 1970s; now it's just the commercial arm of the art form. After all, doing great work is exhilarating no matter where you do it. The question is: do these kids want to do great work with other great artists or do they want to be Stars? The answer to that is everything.

After all, Snookie is a star. Is that really something to aspire to...?

When young people ask me about working in musical theatre, I try to convince them that the goal should be to do great work and connect powerfully with lots of audiences, not to "make it" in just one tiny sliver of the art form in one city. Broadway and off-Broadway productions are only the thinnest slice of musical theatre in America. There are amazing writing, amazing productions, and amazing performances going on all over our country, all the time. Before the mid-1990s, most of us didn't know about a lot of it, but in the Internet Age, it's easy to find out about almost everything that's going on out there. And there's a lot.

Like for instance, New Line's third show this season, the brilliant, adult musical comedy Bukowsical.

Sure, I have a bias on this topic, but I think it's a defensible bias. Miranda Lundskaer-Nielsen writes in her wonderful book Directors and the New Musical Drama, “After the pioneering efforts of theatres such as the Public Theater and Playwrights Horizons in New York, the idea of the serious nonprofit musical spread to theatres across America during the 1990s. While these shows met with varying levels of economic and critical success, the very existence of this alternative home for the art form began to redefine the musical, offering an alternative to both the traditional Broadway musical and the new West End shows. As the economics of the commercial theatre became increasingly forbidding, the nonprofit theatre became vital incubators for musical drama and nurtured a new generation of musical theatre writers.”

New Line was part of that New Wave in the early 90s. On our website, we say we do "daring, provocative, muscular theatre about politics, sexuality, race, religion, the media, and much more, offering an alternative to the commercial musical theatre of New York and Broadway tours since 1992." Offering to whom? Audiences. It's always about the audiences. The theatre companies that don't get that don't survive long.

And as I think about all this now, I realize my job as director is almost entirely about the audience. Can they see what's going on? Will they hear and understand what the actors say? Will the story be clear to the audience? Will they understand the show's central statement – in the case of Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson, the idea that good and bad are always tangled together, or as I put it more bluntly in another blog post, that sometimes our heroes are assholes. It's all about the audience. As theatre people like to say, without an audience, it's just a rehearsal.

When we stage the curtain call for each show, I always tell the cast the same thing: This isn't the time to be a show-off; this is when we humble ourselves by bowing to the audience, thanking them for their indulgence, for the opportunity to share this story with them, hoping they will like the gift we've given them. It's not about Clap for me!

I know actors often crave attention, and that's often offered as a shallow explanation of why they love to perform. But the truth is, some of the best actors I know are serious introverts. They don't want attention. They want connection. They want that magical alchemy that happens only among live actors, live musicians, and a live audience. When theatre artists say making theatre is a religious experience for them, I think most people hear that as an exaggeration and/or metaphor, but it's neither. It is religious. It is deeply spiritual, communal in the truest sense of the word, as in to commune with. It traffics in Great Truths and higher consciousness, and when the alchemy is right, genuine ecstasy. One of my favorite lyrics from Hair gets at this experience:
My soul is in orbit
With God, face to face.
. . .
On a rocket to the fourth dimension,
Total self-awareness the intention.

No, I'm not talking about scary-magic-daddy-figure-in-the-sky God; I'm talking about what the hippies called the Cosmic Consciousness. Even those of us who don't believe in human religion know there's lots out there we don't yet comprehend. Theatre gets at that stuff. Especially musical theatre, because of the abstract language of music. When you combine the magic of storytelling with the magic of music, you get a pretty potent cocktail – if you can respect it, if you can put yourself at its service. Actor Ben Kingsley says to actors, "The tribe has elected you to tell its story. You are the shaman/healer, that's what the storyteller is, and I think it's important for actors to appreciate that. Too often actors think it's all about them, when in reality it's all about the audience being able to recognize themselves in you."

Sure, we're doing Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson because it's crazy amounts of fun for us, but even more because there is important stuff in this show that we want to share with our audience. We New Liners believe live theatre is one of the most powerful tools humans ever created for understanding and self-awareness, and therefore, for social and political change. And we also believe those of us who have been given the gift of talent have an obligation to use this powerful tool to make the world a better place, even if only in small ways, to explore the issues of our times with the people of our region. Acting guru Stella Adler once said, "Unless you give the audience something that makes them bigger – better – do not act."

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson is really funny, but it's also a fascinating socio-political mirror, and we would do well to look at it closely. As Mark Twain once said, "History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme." In these politically treacherous times, we all need this mirror more than ever. Politics is important; it's how we decide how to live together. But our politics in 2012 is poisoned. Maybe a knowing glimpse into 19th century politics will give us some insights into our own. We may have lots to learn about ourselves from Jackson and his times.

It's been amazing working on this show during this campaign season, seeing all the resonances between Then and Now. Sometimes, it's almost impossible to tell the difference.

You'll see what I mean when you see the show.

It's completely blocked now, we move into the theatre tonight, and we do nothing now but run the whole show at every rehearsal. This is when the really cool work starts happening. Stay tuned...

Long Live the Musical!
Scott

Editor's Note, 2014: Here's a companion post, specifically about the Tony Awards.