Sondheim vs. Porgy & Bess - YIKES!

[macbeth]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:36pm

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/10/stephen-sondheim-takes-issue-with-plan-for-revamped-porgy-and-bess/?src=tp

[AC126748]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:43pm

Passions aside, he articulates very well many of the concerns that admirers of the work (myself included) have with this revisal.

I've thought for a long time that the use of the title "The Gershwins' Porgy and Bess" was quite like when Kenneth Branagh called his film adaptation "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein," when what ended up on screen was 110% Kenneth Branagh.

Updated On: 8/10/11 at 12:43 PM

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:49pm

YIKES is right. Pretty juicy, and I agree he makes very good points that I tend to agree with. I am sure we will get a rebuttal from THE WOMEN saying things were taken out of context.
This should be a great debate and help the show with P.R. in the long run.

[North2009]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:55pm

Agree with AC126748 and Mr. Sondheim. And the Branagh comparison? Right on the money.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:55pm

I commend Sondheim for his unabashed, impassioned, and, it must be said, somehwat persuasive argument.

I also feel horribly sad for Paulus, Parks, McDonald, Lewis and company. No doubt Sondheim is a hero to many in the cast - certainly to Audra! - and team and I expect some might be mortified by this.

However, I still expect that much of what is being said in advance of this production is mere spin, and we are not going to see anything all that objectionably revisionary. People are constantly talking up their new takes on classic works as if to ignore the fact that what they see in them was always there to begin with, and often presented front and center. How many times have we heard that a new production of "Show Boat," "Oliver," or "Carousel" will convey the graver elements, as if earlier productions failed to recognize them?

This might be an example of the converse.

[jv92]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:55pm

Bravo! Kudos! Excelsior! Exactly what I would have said-- but with much more of a flourish.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 12:58pm

Sondheim makes some strong and valid points and fully backs them up.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:03pm

I wonder what Mr. Sondheim thought of his mentor's re-imagining of Bizet's CARMEN?

I guess I don't fully understand the vitriol (though I do think some of the comments made in the original article definitely sound self-aggrandizing). The original work still exists. And will continue to be produced. And, at some point, this work will enter the public domain and lord KNOWS what's going to be done to it. From the Western-set Taming of the Shrew to the current modern take on Vanya, directors will always put their stamp on classic works. Why are we freaking out about this?

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:04pm

I hurt for each of these three talented women. Not because their artistic visions were challenged, but because of the very public shellacking they just received from a colleague.


Warranted? Sure. Necessary? Maybe not.

[Play Esq.]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:07pm

"I wonder what Mr. Sondheim thought of his mentor's re-imagining of Bizet's CARMEN?"

Bernstein? Hammerstein? Sorry, missed the reference but I'm very curious about whom you are speaking of and which production.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:10pm

“I think that’s what George Gershwin wanted, and if he had lived longer he would have gone back to the story of ‘Porgy and Bess’ and made changes, including the ending.”

Sounds like what that crazy lady who did Rent said.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:11pm

I agree completely with RobbieJ. Artistic license being taken in the theatre?!?! Heaven forfend! Next thing you know, someone's going to bastardize Romeo and Juliet with something totally ridiculous like Juliet not dying at the end. SHAME!

Classics will always be adapted, altered, reimagined and reconceptualized. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but this conservative idealism towards the performing arts is somewhat distressing and more than a little hypocritical.

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:12pm

How is this any different than one of us commenting on how bad a show is before it opens? It's unprofessional.

If you haven't seen it, you shouldn't say it's terrible. In fact no one's actually seen it, which makes this even worse.

It doesn't matter if you're Stephen Sondheim. It doesn't matter if the show was written by a dubious prospect like Frank Wildhorn. Shows shouldn't be condemned before they even start. Especially not by theatre legends in The New York Times.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:14pm

Sono was referring to Hammerstein's Carmen Jones, Play Esq.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:17pm

It;s one thing to adapt TAMING OF THE SHREW to a Wild West environment. It's another to think that the audience is so stupid that it needs backstories on everyone.

Unprofessional? Perhaps. But I'm willing to gamble that Sondheim's legacy will still be around long after this revival is a footnote in opera history.

[newintown]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:18pm

Read the article, Vespertine. He specifically says that he's not talking about the quality of the work, but rather the hubris of Paulus & Parks et.al. for saying that they know how to adapt the story better than the original writers.

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:19pm

I don't think comparisons to "Carmen Jones" and "West Side Story" are apt. Those took public-domain works, turned them into something completely different, and titled them as such.

A better comparison would be taking, say, "Sweeney Todd," rewriting the ending to make it more upbeat, and calling it "Sondheim's Sweeney Todd."

And we're not talking about simple staging issues (as one Times commenter implied, comparing it to a modern-dress "Richard III"); it sounds, from all we've been told, like rewriting.

I'm still very eager to see this. I fervently hope that it works and is wonderful.

[jdrye222]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:20pm

He doesn't say the production is terrible - his letter is in response to the quotes of the creative team and Audra that show complete arrogance and ignorance ....

I love when someone intelligent and esteemed is at a point in life where he doesn't have to care about what might happen if he speaks his mind. He is at a position where he is able to say what many of us have thought or said privately about this production. I fully agree 100% with all of his points, and he makes them better than I ever could have... There is a difference between just taking a plot and writing something wholly new (like "Aida") and taking "The Gershwin's" Porgy and Bess and making it something it's not. It is hardly "The Gershwin's" anymore, I agree with Sondheim.

I also think Susan Lori-Parks is an angry playwright - I have yet to see something of hers that isn't written from a place of anger instead of enlightenment. And it sounds like she's approaching this material with a disdain for the original, instead of honoring it and the time it was written.

[newintown]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:21pm

I agree with SS 100% - if you want to adapt a work, go whole hog and make an entirely new piece. That's creativity (as opposed to grave-robbing).

Of course, they would then have to sell that new piece on its own merits and their own reputations, which would be so much more difficult that just riding on the coattails of the Gershwins.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:24pm

A fun read; and I agree with him. And yes, to echo what Reginald says, the comparisons to Carmen Jones aren't apt. That was a completely new work inspired by the opera.

I imagine Sondheim won't be alone in his thoughts on this.

I wonder if the creative/producing team would ever consider renaming the production entirely.

Truth be told, I think there are as many people who would be turned off by the title "Porgy and Bess" as would be drawn to it (and those drawn to it, are likely to be the folks who side with Sondheim's feelings of the revivisions).

There might be something said for giving this a new title ("Summertime" ?)or something along those lines if they are trying to market this as a new or re-conceived musical to a general going public who are opera-resistant.

Updated On: 8/10/11 at 01:24 PM

[jv92]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:35pm

The CARMEN JONES comparison is moot. It was a new work-- new setting, new characters, same music. The egomaniacs behind "The Gershwins'" PORGY & BESS are keeping the same show, just making it "happier."

SS, you made my day. Kudos again!

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:35pm

Eh...I really think it's a mountain/molehill situation. Sounds like Sondheim just doesn't like Paulus's POV for this production and is crapping on it before it even has the opportunity to get going. I really don't understand such vehemence for a tryout still in rehearsals. Let Paulus try what she wants and if she fails, she fails. Just save the attitude for later and gloat, but it is entirely possible Paulus may be on the right track towards a more marketable production.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:37pm

Matt, he's taking issue with their attitude in the article not the effectiveness of what they are trying to do.

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:38pm

I'll wait to say anything further until I've had a chance to see the production.

I did read the article. I still think it's silly and inappropriate to criticize theatre directors for being headstrong. That's like the definition of the job. And in the case of people reworking classic material, it's even more necessary. Whether the production flies or flounders is of course another issue.

The estate of the original creators are the only people who really have a say on how things are adapted for new productions. Personally I think it's more interesting when they allow people take new approaches rather than rehashing the past, but that's just me.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/10/11 at 1:58pm

Bennett - I know that's what Sondheim states, but all the previous paragraphs indicate something deeper. He does take issue with more than their attitudes and he details specific exaples.

To me, it sounds like the "attitude" is mainly to flesh out the book to an opera that was painted mostly in broad strokes (like most operas) while maintaining the integrity of the celebrated score. Perhaps he didn't care for the way they expressed themselves, but I hardly see it as offensive as Sondheim makes it out to be.