Sondheim's Memory Will Absolutely Be a Blessingby Randi / November 30, 2021The brand new musical Hex is due to open tomorrow night at London’s National Theatre. Given its awesome-sounding premise — it’s a dark musical retelling of the Sleeping Beauty story starring the great Rosalie Craig as the fairy responsible for the curse — I was too excited to wait for opening night. Instead, I saw an early preview and. . .well. . .yeesh. Rather than parroting the fellow audience members we overheard as we left the theatre (“wow what an absolute mess”), I’m going to list some of the questions I hope the creatives can manage to answer before the show is frozen. If these questions can be answered in time, and the holes they address fixed, then there’s a chance this show can be saved. There is so much potential in that elevator pitch, but that potential has unfortunately been left to gather dust with Lorelai’s golf clubs.
Question 2. What was Fairy’s backstory?
This question gets to the big hole in the show. Fairy’s sad history is hinted at throughout — she’s the only fairy left; she has no wings; she was ‘left behind’ by all her brethren — but we never hear a ‘why’ for any of it. What happened to all the other fairies? Why is this weird schizophrenic* childish being the only fairy left in the land? Why is she so messed up? How did she get so messed up? Why can’t she think straight? Did she suffer trauma? Is she supposed to be special for surviving, or is it just dumb luck — or bad luck? How did she lose her wings? Answers to any of these questions would go far to help develop the character in interesting ways: why she’s so weird, why she’s alone, why her story deserves to be told. But we get zilch.
*not using offensively; she legitimately is portrayed as schizophrenic, displaying classic symptoms including but not limited to: hearing voices, having delusions and hallucinations, being unable to communicate effectively, having abnormal motor functioning, neglecting personal hygiene, having useless/excessive movement, exhibiting bizarre posture, &c. Which, actually, forces a Question 2b: Why is Fairy portrayed as schizophrenic???
Question 3. Why didn’t the queen sleep?
My crim law professor used to go through alleged facts and point out where something “didn’t pass the smell test”. I thought of that frequently during this show. Let’s start at the very beginning: The queen has a new baby who refuses to sleep. The entire castle’s staff is exhausted. So, the queen orders a lackey to go find a fairy to put the baby to sleep. Okay, so, if they had already gotten a doctor and the doctor couldn’t do anything – and couldn’t find anything wrong with the baby underlying the wakefulness – why not just have the staff rotate caring for the baby? I don’t buy that this self-absorbed (annoying, very panto) queen hadn’t slept. She surely would have go to bed in far away quarters each night and left her staff to watch the baby. (And also, if there’s nothing medically wrong, why turn to black magic? But that would undo the whole myth, so whatever.)
Question 4. What urged Fairy’s hex?
An interesting new aspect of this story is the notion that fairies are supposed to only ‘bless’ (give magical favors that the person being blessed actively wants), rather than ‘hex’ (put magic on a person that they don’t want). She found that the baby didn’t want to sleep, and as a result the fairy didn’t want to force the baby to sleep as that would be a hex. (Drink!) Fairy said the baby would sleep when she was tired, i.e. when she wanted to sleep. This wasn’t good enough for the royal family, and they ‘forced’ Fairy to hex the baby to sleep. The forcing made Fairy so. . . something, that she hexed the baby to sleep unendingly once she gets pricked by a thorn (until, of course, the true love’s kiss). But this huge pivotal moment of the story was rushed through so it was unclear why Fairy did such a hex. Yes she was being held captive and she was clearly stressed out, but what made her think of this specific, peculiar curse with all its random details? Why not hex the people who are actually assaulting her, capturing her? Why not put the baby to sleep then and there? Why do such a bizarre hex? Literally one line supporting her action, revealing anything about her mindset, would have been good. Her decision here is the entire foundation of this story, so it needed to be supported at least a little. I keep seeing Michael in The Good Place waving his hand and saying ‘don’t worry about it’ in response to questions.
Question 5. What happened to the staff?
The baby, Rose, grew up sheltered in an attempt to prevent her from ever being pricked by a thorn. But that day finally came when she was a teen, and she fell into her hexed sleep. Rose woke up after 100 years, ostensibly having long been alone in the castle. No one else was there. Did the existing staff really abandon this cursed princess? There was no plan put in place by previous royals to continue keeping watch over this child throughout her slumber, throughout the subsequent generations? I don’t buy that at all! That’s so irresponsible! Abolish the monarchy!
Question 6. Are the murderous thorns supposed to be funny?
The personified ‘thorns’ who pricked Rose to sleep then set about pricking every single prince who tries to enter the kingdom to lift the curse, sending them into long-term sleep as well. (Though it seems at first like straight up murder.) This whole segment is done like a creepier murdery-er version of the Oompa Loompa songs but it’s also clearly supposed to be funny. I found it so cringey. So much murderous energy. So much of an annoying song. So much time devoted to these giant murderous thorns who want to put everyone who crosses their path to sleep forever?? I hated it.
Question 7. How did Rose know wassup?
When Bert* wakes Rose up and they immediately seem to love each other, how did Rose — who has been asleep 100 years and before that lived a completely sheltered childhood to prevent the cursed (two syllables) thorn prick — seem totally in the know about love and sex and I don’t know IMMEDIATELY HAVING TWO BABIES?? She would be a total Nell ta ta, not a regular modern teen who is totally chill with becoming a teen mom with no support system.
*Question 7b. What kind of name for a prince is Bert?
Question 8. What’s going on with the music?
With each of the songs, I struggled to get a handle on what was happening. Instead of a cohesive single song (let alone cohesive score), each movement felt like different groups of small musical phrases smashed together, never coalescing into actual songs with melodies, or foundations, or points. It was a very strange chaotic experience, to think you grasp what a song sounds like and what it’s doing and then have it keep shifting away from you musically, in a lawless deranged way rather than a creative way. And there was so much of the modern pop vocalizing/shrieking/riffing instead of legitimate singing, a trend I truly despise. Of course Rosalie sounds wonderful but her talents are not given enough to work with.
Question 9. Why was the whole second act focusing on the ogre grandmother eating her grandchildren?
This was where every audience member I could see was imitating my favorite little blonde toddler girl gif, you know the one. The action shifted to focus entirely on the ogre queen wanting to eat her grandkids and being unable to control herself. Why, just so much why. Why didn’t Fairy tell Rose that the ogre was after her babies and would probably kill her too and urge her to GTFO RIGHT NOW? Instead Fairy killed some animals to trick the queen into believing she was eating the babies. Is Fairy that inept, that much a bumbling fool? It was insufferable. Why didn’t she just say RUN instead of cowering with the babies? It took a helluva lot more time to hunt down the goat and the rabbit and whatever it was (NOT great sound effects of slaughter btw, could definitely have done without that awful harrowing bullshit) than it would have to just shove the babies into the arms of their mother and shove them all out the door.
Question 10. Why don’t the book and score match up?
My biggest problem (okay they’re all the biggest) was that the book didn’t make sense on its own, and then the song lyrics didn’t match the book/action at all. It reminded me of the Broadway flop A Tale of Two Cities. In that show, this powerful supporting character spends the whole show wanting to get revenge for her brother, and then in Act II sings her big number, the main lyric of which was ‘out of sight, out of mind.’ Which had exactly zero to do with her character’s situation or the need for revenge for her brother. It was like, wtf?? That’s not what’s happening here, that’s not what you’ve been saying? I thought of that during this show.
Specific songs:
– Bert’s song was both indecipherable and also a heroic pomp-y song but in a creepy minor key. Why that key if it’s supposed to be a pump-up song? It didn’t fit to introduce the character.
– The opening song of Act II, with all the suitors singing about maybe one day finally being the one or one day it’ll be me or maybe this time or whatever, made no sense. These people also just woke up from decades being cursed asleep, and their first thought is about one day winning? getting the prize? (the princess? gross) and not about ‘oh my god where is my family, where is my home, do I not have a home anymore? how many years of my life did I miss?’ What do you mean one day it’ll be you, do you know you just woke up from like 80 years asleep? You just got a miracle second chance done on you and you’re complaining about the before times? Go see about your life, men! Make it make sense.
– The big climactic song about how everyone is different on the outside vs the inside was the greatest example of the aforementioned Tale of Two Cities illogicality. The lyrics do not reflect what had been told in the story. Rose says she’s smart on the outside? She has not lived at all and left two babies unattended for an ogre to catch! Bert says on the outside he’s seen as a hero? He hasn’t done shit heroically yet! No one thinks you’re a hero! Worst of all, the ogre who just thought she happily ate her grandbabies says that she is going to start being true to herself. BEING TRUE TO YOURSELF IS EATING BABIES! You need to work to NOT be true to yourself!!!
Question 11: Why is the promising Rose and Bert conflict treated like an afterthought?
The Rose and Bert conflict is infuriatingly done. He doesn’t believe what Rose says about his mother – that she’s an ogre and so on – and he NEVER DOES believe her, not until his mother reveals the truth herself. Yet afterward, Rose is the one to run after him to apologize, leaving her babies unattended. I mean I guess that’s all believable for an 18-year-old who just woke up but I don’t think it was presented in that way. It seemed actually presented as her needing to apologize to him, which is absolutely bonkers. And it all seemed secondary to Fairy trembling and wincing around the stage and also wanting to be friends with the ogre? When did the ogre become her best friend? See so many questions.
The most frustrating part of this show (okay it’s all the most frustrating part) is that in this climactic segment, instead of having a song about Rose and Bert’s conflict and giving some character depth and development through song as musicals are supposed to do, they give us a silly R&B song for the suitors that lifts right out. Another point in the panto column.
Question 11b: Why does Rose consider the suitors, who she never met until right now, her best friends? They have all been asleep and never met before.
I have more questions, like why is the humor geared to the lowest common denominator? why are there so many elements that evidence a favoring of panto over the musical art form? is this for kids or adults? but I’ve asked enough. With some work, it would be a decent show – it has so much promise in that premise. But it’s presented as though the creatives don’t believe in the premise and instead stuff the hours with low-grade jokes, unfinished sentences, and mere sketches of characters. Hex was unfortunately tonally confused and sloppy. I hope there is time to answer these questions before the show is set so that it can try to find its proper footing.
INFORMATION
Hex opens Wednesday December 15 at the National Theatre. At my performance, Act I ran from 7:20 to 8:38, Act II ended at 9:55. Hilariously, the placards outside the doors said the run time was 2 hours 34 minutes, a mind-boggling specificity that I will never understand the point of announcing.
Related Posts
It’s Olivier Awards Weekend! Predictions, Thoughts, Rants, Jazz Hands
Just kidding there are no jazz hands in here, unless you just imagine me doing them but then how would I be typing? The Olivier Awards, the most bonkers awards show in the world (yes even crazier than the Golden Globes, if you can believe it) are this Sunday, April 7, and even though I have rage bubbling inside me, RAGE, about all aspects of the Oliviers (not least of all the fact that this is the one award show I can watch on TV in the UK?? no Tonys, no Oscars, but this? (and they don’t even let the TV audience see the whole thing OR see it live! They make a supercut and air it after the fact BRITS GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER STAY IN THE EU AND DO AWARD SHOWS BETTER)) (also the Mastercard sponsorship visibility is excessive and obnoxious), they are still an award show honoring musical theatre, I mean, you’re doing my two favorite things guys I’m still EXCITED even though I’m ANGRY, okay? It’s like Amy Adams’ anger in “Enchanted” when she is excited about being angry. “Oh! I’m angry! ha ha! I’m angry!” You know? You don’t know!
Why am I such a nonfan of the Olivier Awards? Why am I experiencing some serious agita and going through my stash of Rennie all week (nb: that’s British for Tums)? How on earth could anyone in their right mind say they are crazier than the Golden Globes? Because they are, Mitch. One peeve with the Oliviers is that they loves, LOVES, them some group nominations when they aren’t really appropriate. Group nominations are okay when it’s children rotating in the same part: the four Matildas, the three Billies Elliot. They are not the right move when voters simply can’t or SHANT choose between cast members that are all doing a good job. Guys, I don’t know if you know this, but they’re all supposed to do a good job, that’s literally their job. And your one job, you insane voters, is to CHOOSE. MAKE A G-D CHOICE! Oh it’s too hard for your pale British sensibilities? IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE HARD! THAT MEANS PEOPLE ARE DOING GOOD WORK IN YOUR THEATRES! In recent years, Olivier voters have literally nominated ENTIRE CASTS into ONE slot instead of choosing among them. They’ve done so this year with the three lead actors in The Lehman Trilogy – all playing different roles, this is not a child-rotating sitch – and with all six of Henry VIII’s wives in the musical Six, all put into one supporting actress slot. Not only is that not fair to the other competitors (who wants to compete against an entire cast?), it’s the same as giving a participation trophy. They’d all deserve a nomination in their own right, of course. These are all incredible performers and I’d have trouble deciding who to nominate among them. But that’s the point of an awards show, to choose the best of the best. lol like that’s what voters ever do.
My other biggest gripe with the Oliviers is my same problem with most award shows: they’re hella wrong all the time and I can’t punch them in the face about it. Oh also the aforementioned refusal to air the telecast live on BBC, choosing instead to show a ‘highlights’ reel hours later. First of all, how dare you.
The indisputable biggest problem of this particular year, hoo boy, is that we’re just going to pretend that Hadestown, the best musical of the year, the best musical on Broadway this season likely to win the Tony, and one of the best musicals in years period, wasn’t eligible for the Oliviers, because if we recognize that it was eligible and the voters just completely overlooked it, I might explode. Honestly get some new voters; they are obviously incompetent. Okay so we are all in agreement that Hadestown wasn’t eligible because that’s the only way we can get through this, right, because otherwise they would have swept every category? Right, good. Let’s do this infuriating nonsense!
This one isn’t even a question; it’s The Inheritance by a mile. Or by more than 7 hours of amazingness, as this play is an epic in every sense of the word but not least because it’s a two-parter of almost four hours each part. And I loved all of it! The exquisite Part 1 on its own would still be the best new play of this year and probably most years, but together with Part 2, The Inheritance is one of the most important, impressive, emotionally taxing shows ever. I can’t wait for it to go to Broadway and get even more acclaim. The only other new play I’d love to be in this category is the great Home, I’m Darling, which, because it’s funny, is nominated in the separate Best New Comedy category, which is another reason why I hate the Oliviers. I mean I’m glad it has a better chance to win in that one but still, comedies are plays too, guys. So classist.
THIS SOME BULLSHIT, HEAR ME? Poor Kyle Soller, gave the best performance by a longshot but will lose to either Ian McKellen (because it’s Ian McKellen and doing King Lear at that, a pairing that’s like the theatre version of Ricky Gervais telling Kate Winslet on ‘Extras’ how in order to win an Oscar she should do a Holocaust role (which she did because she did)), or to the triumvirate that shouldn’t be of Adam Godley, Ben Miles, and Simon Russell Beale all nominated in one slot. All five men are doing excellent work (and should be the five nominees total ok you get it) but Kyle’s performance was the most human, touching, and with over 7 hours of material, difficult. Shouldn’t that give him the edge? I wish.
Oh and one more reason to hate the Oliviers this year a bit extra: Kyle is the only actor from The Inheritance nominated, out of a cast of all incredible performances. I’m not going to write separately about supporting actor in a play because I’m too furious, but how Andrew Burnap wasn’t nominated for his Toby Darling when I would have bet the world on his win is beyond me, let alone no Walter? No JBenj Hickey? What a mess.
I haven’t seen Summer and Smoke yet, which is a shame because I’ve heard that Patsy Ferran is the one to beat. I did see all the other nominees, though! Gillian Anderson should not be nominated for the pile of rotting garbage that was All About Eve. The other three though are all worthy competitors. Eileen Atkins was heartbreaking and vibrant in The Height of the Storm, Sophie Okonedo was crayballs and fire emoji power in Antony and Cleopatra, and Katherine Parkinson would have my vote for her wonderful starring role in Home, I’m Darling. Love her! Excited to see what happens here.
This one’s hard for me, a fight between my head and my heart. Caroline, or Change was not my cup of tea; in fact, I was quite disappointed in the story and score, though I can admit this production is doing a good job of presenting those subpar elements. I know, we all know, that the much-beloved, much-raved about, much-exalted gender-swapped and groundbreaking revival of Company is going to win and possibly sweep. But The King And I is better. The Broadway transfer lost a little of its magic as it crossed the pond, but it’s still a solid production of a great show. The Company revival, on the other hand, revealed all the weaknesses of that show. I get that it will (and should win) because it’s an important revisioning of an old property, but honestly I just did not enjoy it. And I saw it twice, convinced it was my fault. It wasn’t. It’s a very impressive show visually, but there’s no heart in that story, no matter what gender Bobby is. The more I think about what message it was trying to convey this time around, the more I want to throw up my hands and sigh petulantly.
But because Company is such an otherwise well received and yes important show this year, with yes groundbreaking changes, Marianne Elliot will probably also win for direction. Oh this is ANOTHER reason I hate the Oliviers – they combine all directors, of plays and musicals, into one category. What a way to show how little you value their work! Ashley’s direction was the one part I liked of Come From Away, and I understand why he won the Tony, and I would be okay with him winning here (if that was the only thing CFA won, of course. The only one it deserves). Although I would be voting for Daldry’s impeccable work on The Inheritance, I admit that Elliot’s win would be deserved. Her vision of a new Company is notable, even if I don’t like the finished product.
How forking STACKED is this category! I’d be okay with any one of these actresses winning. Well that’s not true; I’d be okay with Kelli (since she won’t win a Tony this year) or Adrienne (working harder than anyone ever has worked up on that stage) winning, yet I realize that it’s more likely for Rosalie or Sharon to win. I was so ready to be awed by the latter two, and while they were good, the flaws of their respective shows did them no justice in my eyes. I’m pretty sure it’s Rosalie’s award, but I’d be happier for my queen Kelli or the incredible Adrienne to win.
Whereas Best Actress in a musical is the tightest race, Best Actor in a Musical is the weakest. None of these stand out to me. I love Ken Watanabe’s King but I’d be shocked if he won. And out of all the many nominations Fun Home deserved, I’m beyond shocked that the one acting nod it received was for the weakest performance in the show. (Zubin was good, but it was the weakest. I’m shocked that Middle Allison wasn’t nominated.) This race will surprise me, I’m sure, but I think it’ll go to Suddenly Seymour.
Faaaack, I take back what I said about the strongest race being Best Actress in a musical. It’s definitely Best Supporting Actress. All of these are pretty worthy performances, even though one of them should have five fewer people in there. Oof. Okay, let’s start at the top. Patti LuPone is going to win, because everyone loves Patti. I love Patti too, but I think her Joanne is her least inspired performance to date. It felt like pandering for cheap laughs to her devoted audience that would cheer for her even if she slapped their grandmothers. Ruthie, my god I love Ruthie and would love this win for her, but she didn’t actually perform on the show’s official opening night (she had an alternate), so some bozos are salty that she even got nominated, which stinks, because she is so lovely in this role. Rachel Tucker gets to perform the one great song in Come From Away and she does incredible things with it, but she’s one of a superbly hard-working ensemble that all play numerous characters, and they don’t really get the chance to make an impression as any of the characters, too busy running around and changing hats. And then we have six actresses from Six sharing the last nomination, which by now you know how ridiculous I find that. Yes, they were all great in a spectacular show, but it’s not that hard to pick the best of them. Why can’t voters vote for their favorite and see what happens? I could have helped them narrow the field to the very best: it’s Katherine Howard, played by Aimee Atkinson. She has the best song and forking kills it beyond belief. She is spectacular and deserved to get an nomination in her own right.
This is the only category that’s a lock: It’s Jonathan Bailey in Company, the first man to play Jamie and sing about how he’s Not Getting Married Today. He was the main reason I was almost happy to see the show again, with a performance that’s the definition of award-worthy. He’s hilarious, riveting, magnetic, and did I say hilarious? I hope he performs on the telecast. The best part of the show.
All the other critics and audiences are loving Come From Away, and even though I don’t think it’s actually great, the show as a whole is moving and that tricks people into thinking all its parts are of great quality. I get that, but there’s no excuse for thinking the music is the best of this bunch. That honor belongs to Fun Home, who should win for its elegant, sophisticated, deeply felt score about a real family and all the intimate thoughts and memories that come with that. If Fun Home can’t win, the honor should go to Six, for some of the catchiest, most riotously fun and clever music to come out of British musical theatre. I’ll be pissed if Come From Away wins for its mediocre score. The other two nominees are plays!! No surer sign of a dip in musical theatre quality than when plays are nominated for score. (I mean unless they are absolutely incredible play scores but I don’t even remember the music from The Inheritance.)
All the momentum and good will (however misplaced I feel it is) belongs to Come From Away, no matter how wrong I hope I am. Maybe Fun Home would have had a better chance if it didn’t end all the way back in September, but regardless of when it played, it deserved to win. I’m sad that it won’t. I’d be happy with Six winning, even though it is not a fully-fledged book musical and more of a fun rock concert. Everyone enjoys Tina but, like most jukebox musicals, it has a weak book. I will be surprised if CFA doesn’t win, but I will be happy.
What kinds of crap do you think will go down on Sunday? Will the voters ever live down their shame for ignoring Hadestown? Will someone with no ties to NYC talk about 9/11? Will Patti LuPone talk so long that they try to play her off and she tells them to can it? My guesses are no, yes, and hell yes.
Fiddler: A Miracle of Miracles, A Must-See Documentary for Theatre-Lovers
It’s Theatre Thursday! Today we are talking about a theatre documentary film that will be in select theatres tomorrow, August 23.
Few musicals have the staying power and continued resonance of Fiddler on the Roof, the 1964 musical about Tevye the poor milkman, his wife Golde, their five daughters, and their struggles as Jews in their tiny village of Anatevka at the turn of the century. After all these years, it’s hard to imagine a world without this miraculous piece of theatre, and the new documentary Fiddler: A Miracle of Miracles, from director Max Lewkowicz, shows us how fortunate we are that all the pieces came together as they did. The amount of jaw-dropping names that appear throughout the doc exuding praise over this classic musical is endlessly entertaining. Featuring interviews with composers Sheldon Harnick and Jerry Bock, book writer Joseph Stein, producer Hal Prince (to whom the film is dedicated; he died just a few weeks ago), and tons of actors, writers, experts on cultural studies, journalists, and family members of the creative team, this Fiddler does the unthinkable and makes the musical even more special.
Interspersing footage of various productions, the classic film version, and even footage of Aleichem’s silent films with interviews, the doc provides interesting historical context and testimony as to why it’s such a lasting show. Joel Grey, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Harvey Fierstein, Fran Leibovitz, Itzhak Perlman, and endless amazing historians and writers share worthy thoughts on what makes Fiddler still resonate.
Everyone today loves Fiddler, and for dern good reason, but it opened to surprisingly bad reviews. Variety even wrote that there were no memorable songs, a statement that is beyond ludicrous for a show without a single weak moment and a widely known and widely loved score (okay except for “Now I Have Everything”). But it took a lot of hard work to create the final masterpiece, as Harnick, Bock, Prince, the original actors, and their relatives and those of Jerome Robbins share. H&B got the idea to write a show inspired by Russian-Yiddish author Sholem Aleichem’s short stories, narrowing their idea down to the story of Tevye the milkman and his daughters in turn of the century czarist Russia. They faced a lot of obstacles in the early days from people who, rightly so, heard this idea and went, ‘are you crazy?’ Who would see a musical based on such a niche story that will likely be super depressing? But this genius team turned this depressing, niche story into one that’s as heartwarming as it is heartbreaking, and one of the most relatable pieces in the canon, since at any time in history, people have been oppressed. One of the best stories is when during intermission of a Japanese production, an actor asked if Americans actually enjoy the show since “it’s so Japanese.”
I could talk forever about how wonderful this documentary and Fiddler itself are, but Ima let you discover some things for yourself because I hope you are seeing it, if you are near a theatre playing it. However, I do want to share a few of my favorite discoveries with you.
A few things I learned from the Fiddler Documentary
The idiot defense attorney from My Cousin Vinny was Broadway’s original Motel the Tailor
Now look, I’m not reducing Austin Pendleton’s stellar theatre career in calling him the bad lawyer from MCV; I just never realized that that was him until I was watching this doc, okay? I wish I could have seen him in this role!
There’s a Sholem Aleichem statue in Kiev.
Oops.
I don’t think I love any move more than Danny Burstein’s Tevye Shimmy
If you read my review of the 2016 Broadway revival of Fiddler, then you know how I feel about Danny Burstein’s Tevye and, above all, Tevye’s Lil Shimmy. With a solid amount of footage from this production interspersed throughout, we get to see a few of his positively delightful shimmies and I couldn’t be happier. (I put a clip of what I’m talking about in my instagram stories today, and it will be saved in the 2019 Theatre highlights so you can enjoy the Burstein Shimmy FOREVER.)
Jerome Robbins and Zero Mostel were not BFF
Although an undeniable genius, Jerry Robbins was extremely difficult to work with, and Zero was not a fan. During Joe McCarthy’s (more like McCunther (“that cunther made a list???”)) Senate hearings for Trying To Find Commies and Destroy Careers, Robbins named names, like the one thing you were not supposed to do if you wanted to still be considered Not An Asshole. But as always, it’s not as simple as that. McCunther S. Prick and his cronies threatened to out Robbins as a gay man if he didn’t cooperate, and back then that would have been a serious problem. They say he always regretted it afterwards, which like of course, but it wasn’t exactly a black-and-white situation. He was still an asshole to actors and others on set though, and no amount of genius can excuse that away, but he was a g-d genius.
The original Tradition lyrics were hilarious
Luckily, H&B perfected everything before the show was frozen, but we saw an early CBS television appearance of theirs in which they sang a song to the tune of what would later become “Tradition”: “There’s noodles to be made, and chickens to be plucked, and liver to be chopped and challah to be baked.” It’s a good change, it’s a goood change.
Every character has a name – like every character
Despite my assumption that my ensemble role in high school was just ‘one of the village daughters’, she had a specific name. In the original rehearsals, Jerry Robbins named every ensemble character and treated them all as integral parts of this show. So there’s a good chance I was actually playing Anya or Rivka, to name two I saw when they showed his original sketches, which is prettay prettay cool.
Jerry Bock says ‘ambience’ so amazingly
Not really a thing just wanted to remember how cute it is for him.
Yiddish Fiddler includes the best line ever
Currently in New York there is a Joel-Grey directed production of Fiddler being performed entirely in Yiddish, and receiving critical acclaim. The doc shows a snippet of the recording session for its album, in which Steven Skybell sings the Yiddish version of “If I Were a Rich Man”. The subtitles show us that these lyrics include just the best thing ever to exclaim probably at any point in your life: “Jews, I laid an egg!”
Marc Chagall’s work inspired the title and thematic elements of Fiddler
You know the Chagall painting with the violinist in a purple coat floating between two rooftops? Well helloooo, that’s the fiddler on the roof! Chagall’s work inspired the creators in establishing that central thematic element of the difficulty of finding balance between tradition and progress in a changing world, balancing like a fiddler on the roof. The Fiddler in the movie version is even wearing a purple coat. After learning more about Chagall in the show The Flying Lovers of Vitebsk, I imagine Chagall would have loved this show and the homage it pays to the plight of Jews in Russia during this era.
There’s so much information and emotion jam-packed into this beautiful film and I want to rave about all of it (like, did you know The Temptations covered “Rich Man”? It’s so fun) but definitely go see for yourself. And if you have to wait longer until it comes to your town or for it to be available for purchase, spend that time listening to one of the many great cast recordings. Or better yet, go see a local production. Chances are you’re near one, whether a regional theatre or a middle school, because the most heartwarming, unbelievable fact shared in the film is that, since debuting in 1964, a production of Fiddler has been performed somewhere in the world every single day, a fact that proves just how incredible and indelible this musical’s mark is on the world.
