PASSION Off-Broadway Preview Thread- Page 4

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 7:10am

"She does some awful, unkind, and unlikable") things,"
"I don't think her tricking and manipulating someone is a joke. "

Interesting how these insignificant little details go unmentioned by the enrapt enthusiasts. Perhaps they aren't bothered by them. Or who knows? Perhaps they even approve of them. ("Go, Fosca! Destroy that sucker's life!")

"Its interesting to see how much more loved the show becomes with each revival. I think in time history will place it amongst Sondheim's greatest works."

Yes, that is very interesting. Problem is, each of Sondheim's works is among his greatest works, and was the moment it was placed on a stage. So history has the easiest of all tasks before it.

[newintown]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 9:27am

That's been a major bone of contention about Passion from the start. Is Fosca's love "true" love? Is it more "real" than Clara's?

Clara knows that she will ruin her children's lives if she leaves her family for Giorgio (for those who are oblivious to the changing mores of society, watch this season's "Downton Abbey"); Giorgio "realizes" that Fosca's love is more "pure," because she will do anything for him. It's a selfish little boy's argument: "You don't love me, because I'm not the only thing that matters to you!"

To some (including me), Fosca's "love" is not love at all, but unhealthy obsession; the fact that Giorgio eventually decides that he prefers to be the object of obsession rather than to be loved by an equal is hardly a denouement worthy of admiration (in my opinion).

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 10:16am

I'm not sure we're suppose to admire it. At least...that's what I got from this production last night, which is probably the best case for this piece I've seen presented thus far.

The key to this take on the material (imo) is the scene between Giorgio and Fosca after he returns from his brief leave to Milan. Kuhn is actually funny (bitchily so) in her take-down of Giorgio. It lets the audience have the moment of laughter it desperately needs, and which doesn't come back in the later scenes, as was the case on Broadway.

It is said in this production that Fosca is in here late 30's. It's appropriate for both Kuhn's actual age, and for understanding the desperation. It's not just vague illness...it's a long life of loneliness that leads to her off-putting behavior. And Silverman makes a really strong case for Giorgio, who comes truly, scarily alive only when with Fosca. The relationship has a great deal of...well...passion. The more conventional relationship with Clara is cool and it feels ordinary. For the first time, I understood why Giorgio would make the choice he does. It also helps that they didn't go out of the way to make Kuhn appear grotesque.

I don't disagree that Fosca's love is actually obsession. But ask a million different people the definition of love and you'll get a million different answers. I wouldn't presume to decide which love was 'true.' But I do buy that the experiences of the lead characters are each true. And I haven't always felt that way about PASSION.

It does lack in humor. But I don't think it's a terrible trade-off because what's presented is a thing of absolute beauty.

[newintown]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 10:38am

You're right - "admire" isn't the right word. But it does seem that Sondheim/Lapine expect us to sympathize, to agree with Giorgio that Fosca's obsession is a "truer" love than Clara's more measured feelings and actions.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 10:47am

Guys, quit disrupting After Eight’s willfully blind fantasy that Sondheim fans idolize Him and His works all out of proportion. (Uh, no, make that – they romanticize Him and His works all out of proportion. Better.) Ignore the fact that the most avowed Sondheim fans dissect and deconstruct the great, good, problematic, and bad elements in all of his shows in thread after thread, right here on this very board, in discussions that After Eight himself cannot resist participating in with frequency because his angry experience of the confusingly changing world passing him by makes him secretly happy.

Let us pray.

Our Father, which art Stephen Sondheim,
Company be thy Name.
A little night music come.
Thy will be done in the woods,
As it is in company.
Give us this day our daily assassins,
And merrily we roll along
As we forgive them that whistle against us.
And lead us not into pacific overtures
But deliver us from forums
For thine is the Sunday

The Sweeney, and the gypsy,

For frogs and west side,

Road show.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 10:49am

Do I have to drink a cup of His blood after saying that prayer?

[newintown]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 10:53am

You have to eat his body.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:00am

Well...I left that out cause been there, done that.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:03am

Transubstantieightion.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:04am

SH*T.

You win.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:08am

Newintown and Robbie J --

I loved reading your posts, because I think you articulated so beautifully a big piece of what is, in my opinion, an inherent flaw with the musical adaption; namely that it's extremely difficult for most audience members to accept Georgio's rather abrupt turn of heart regarding Fosca, in the face of behavior that most of us would deem unhealthy obsession rather than unconditional love, despite the musical essaying that the realization of 'real love,' is indeed what has happened..

In the original novel (and film 'Passione D'Amour') Fosca is really described as something of a monster - toxic, with an almost vampirish hold on Georgio, that ultimately takes root in him and virtually destroys him. The final scene in the film shows the once beautiful Georgio completely transformed -- sick, ugly, fettered -- in the context of the original story "your love will live in me" is not unconditional love of the spirit, but the cruel promise of a pariah. And in death, Fosca seems to almost have taken over Georgio's mind and body with the curse of her poisonous obsession. Romantic? I think not...

That Lapine and Sondheiml tried to take this twisted story and turn it into a metaphor for 'unconditional love' - has for me always been a problematic stretch, and I think despite the power of the score, fails largely because of this conceit.

But Robbie, that you describe Georgio in this production as feeling rabidly 'alive' only in the presence of Fosca I think could be a really salient way to circumvent the flaws in the musical adaptation. That could justify both of their behaviors, and perhaps guide the theme more towards a desire of 'obsessive feeling' more than a desire of obsessive love, which would be a lot more tangible given the script and score.

I can't wait to see it.

Updated On: 2/15/13 at 11:08 AM

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:30am

Sorry, newintown, I missed your response to me earlier...before the new Follies Creed.

I think you're right that the intention of Lapine and Sondheim is to lead us to make the decision that the love between Fosca and Giorgio is truer than that of the love between Girogio and Clara. But even if that's their intention, I'm grateful that others can take a different look at the material and present it otherwise.

Kuhn's Fosca is deeply human...and very smart. Even she seems to be surprised by the depth of feeling Giorgio stirs in her. And because she's not grotesque (no mole for her!), it takes on this meta bit of heartbreak that you're simply watching an actress be stripped of make-up and a decent wig and just presented as unattractive. It's actually hard to take in at first, because you don't want to look at Kuhn, who is a theatrical treasure, as anything but lovely. But no. So the audience is not at a safe remove. They cannot say, 'Oh, this is just some make-up trick that lets me judge this character.' It's simply a homely woman who's imprisoned by her looks.

It also helps that Silverman isn't a complete stud. I mean...he's handsome. But in a way that isn't off-putting...it's a relatable kind of attractiveness. He also possesses an innate intelligence that is a really good match for Kuhn. And so, when they do engage, sparks fly. Not sexual sparks, but something different. They are two people who seem to be most themselves when they're with each other. All of this combines to make the eventual union between the two actually believable...and not some bizarre joke.

On a completely unrelated note, what an absolute joy to hear a score that doesn't ask the singers to perform any kind of Herculean tasks. It's written in a way that clearly shows off each human voice, without taxing them in the way so many musicals now ask singers to stretch their abilities to the point of being unhealthy. And the small orchestra sounded marvelous.

ETA: MB, I'm reeeeeeally interested to see what you think.

Updated On: 2/15/13 at 11:30 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:46am

Yes Robbie! And viewed in the context of the times and world that PASSION take place (which you must do to accept the story) it makes sense for Fosca (in the musical) to be such a parodx -- a witty, shameless woman whose long festering desperation combined with undesirable looks basically frees her from the oppressed role of respectable female behavior.

Clara's behavior is almost the flip side of that same context -- she is also breaking with respectability in her adulterous affair with Georgio, but ultimately she can't completely free herself from the restrictive (and yet privileged) cage her respectable married life affords her.

And if Georgio is really searching for what amounts to a a tandemonium of real feeling in the face of a romantically repressed society, the danger of Fosca's attention could suddenly prove exciting and irresistible.

I hadn't ever really thought the 'obsession' in PASSION as equally applying to the tear against the 'repression' of the world of the characters. But all that you describe makes sense and I think Doyle was perhaps wise in approaching the material in the way he has.

At first I was surprised and skeptical about the lack of nudity, but that does indeed seem to be a very strong choice in guiding the themes of this particular staging...

Updated On: 2/15/13 at 11:46 AM

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:54am

That's something that kept going through my head last night: the world around them does not allow for this kind of behavior. So when it occurs, it becomes something dangerous and thrilling. All without showing much skin.

Though...I kept thinking what it would look like to see the entire opening number performed completely naked. Like, not even a sheet to cover them. Just complete nudity. I would be interested in seeing that. AND NO, BITCHES. Not for prurient reasons.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:58am

Well, complete nudity on stage tends to lose its eroticism and become rather mundane after the first tantalizing few minutes, so that would be an interesting approach to the opening number, and rather telling of the theme of the story, no?

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 12:00pm

That's exactly what I was thinking. I always find it fascinating when actors can find a sort of complete freedom when doing nudity so that it no longer becomes some sort of sexual thing. And I wonder how that scene would play out in that kind of staging.

[lemiz3001]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 8:11pm

I totally agree with you Robbie and MB. But I think it's also interesting to note how repressed Giorgio is, along with the world he lives in. He clearly did not want to be in the army, but states he only signed up because his father was an officer.

I think that's why this production makes their love somewhat more believable. Fosca targets Giorgio because she can see his vulnerability and emotional depth ("They hear drums, you hear music, as do I") and I think Giorgio falls for her in the end because, like MB said, it is "exciting and irresistible" and he is breaking free from being emotionally repressed all his life. Ryan Silverman plays Giorgio as someone easily susceptible to this kind of event that leads to catharsis. ( I also think the Doctor can see this as well, which is why he manipulates Giorgio.)

I don't think Passion and it's authors try to claim that Fosca's love is "purer" than Clara's. Love is love, plain and simple. No type of love is "purer" than any other. But I think they suggest that Giorgio & Clara's love is an immature kind of love, the kind of feelings we experience the first time we fall in love, whereas Fosca and Giorgio's love is mature, "grown up" love. In "Happiness", we see that Giorgio has never really had a true loving relationship before. ("I never knew what love was"). He is truly in love with Clara, but he doesn't realize the consequences of that love- that Clara cannot truly be with him and won't leave her husband for him. Fosca offers Giorgio unconditional love. Although, yes, she does manipulate and stalk until she gets her way but I think that Giorgio eventually falls for her because it is sort of a "big kid" kind of love, not the sort of love that stems from Clara "pitying" Giorgio. ("You pitied me/How quickly pity leads to love")

Just my two cents :)

[Idiot]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 8:59pm

I've never viewed Fosca's 'love' for Giorgio as 'pure'. It's based in wild obsession, and I think that's fairly clear.

I've always viewed this piece as a bit of a fantasy - not a treatise on 'true love'. It strikes me as rewarding (I am a fan of it) because the obsession wins its prize in the end -- which rarely happens in real life, or at least that's what our mores say. Therein lies the challenge of the piece, and why I enjoy it so much.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 2/15/13 at 11:14pm

What's taking so long for a photo flash?

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/16/13 at 12:02am

Well, what a heaping mound of pretentious, longwinded hogwash all devoted to disguising/rationalizing/perverting the simple truth that the woman is a vile monster, a predator, destroying another person's life without compunction, as morally repugnant within as she is repulsive without, shoved down our throats with abject effrontery by the show's creators, to stick it to us all but good.

Nice try, guys, but no one (no one outside the cultists' circle that is) is buying. You can't disguise the truth no matter how hard you try. It's like pouring Chanel no. 5 on a compost heap- it still reeks.

Time for some fresh air.

[WhizzerMarvin]

Posted: 2/16/13 at 12:20am

After Eight,

Maybe it would do you well to actually pay attention to the likes of MB and Robbie J. You just might learn something.

MB is one of the most knowledgeable and articulate posters on this board. He continues to provide insights that greatly enrich all of our understandings of different pieces, Passion included. I can vouch that he's the real deal, and you should show him some respect.

[chrisampm2]

Posted: 2/16/13 at 1:18am

After Eight, you continually make assumptions about artists' intentions and everyone else's opinions. It makes it difficult, for me at least, to take you seriously.

I don't consider myself a Sondheim cultist. I respect many things, love some, and have great difficulty with some others in every show he's written. But I buy much of what MB and Son of RJ write here.

I saw the original Passion production and sensed an ambiguity in both relationships. The piece seemed subjectively tied to Giorgio's POV. The women seemed to represent opposing poles of love - fearsomely obsessive and evanescently lovely. I remember feeling that Fosca awakened in Giorgio a sense of love's possibility.

I felt the intent of the growing relationship between Giorgio and Fosca, even in the original, was as Son of RJ wrote so well, "They are two people who seem to be most themselves when they're with each other." I didn't think Shea could quite there but Gallagher sounds like he did in the workshop and Cerveris certainly did.

[After Eight]

Posted: 2/16/13 at 7:07am

Chris,

I'm sorry to have to open your eyes to the fact that some people refuse to check their moral compass at a theatre entrance. Yeah. Imagine that!

So whether you take me seriously or not is of no importance whatsoever.

The fact is that you, in your post, just as everyone else here -- save nasty khakis-- have failed to address the essential matter of this monster's actual character and conduct.

Therefore, although it pains me to say it, it is YOU, along with all those who have done the same, who cannot be taken seriously.

"But I buy much of what MB and Son of RJ write here."

I don't buy a word of it. Not a single, solitary word. (And there sure are a lot of them.) And for the record, I've always thought highly of MB's writing and opinions..... Until now.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 2/16/13 at 11:47am

After Eight,

I think its pretty clear in my original post that I am not in complete disagreement with you. I point out pretty plainly my reasons for believing that PASSION is an inherently flawed adaptation, because Sondheim and Lapine are not completely successful in their attempt at humanizing a character that in the source material has essentially no redeeming qualities, and instead, have unconvincingly tried to impose a theme (the meaning of love) on a story, that as written, is about the poisonous effects of pure rabid obsession.

My commentary here is simply a dissertation on how those flaws can be 'best' circumvented through directorial approach. I'm excited to see what Doyle does with the material, because it sounds like he has through his directorial concept perhaps found a reasonable bridge to really an impossible pass better than directors prior to him have done with this material.

Just to be clear, I don't believe that in itself will eradicate completely and validate Sondheim and Lapine's choices and elevate PASSION beyond what I presume it will always be a - a very flawed but fascinating musical, and worthy of debate, if no other reason because of the legacy of the man who composed it.

[Thespinoy]

Posted: 2/16/13 at 11:52am

I don't buy a word of it. Not a single solitary word.