I wondered about that too. The previous descriptions just said it was a musical with the score of the original show but was actually about the making of it. Now this description says its BOTH the original musical plus additional details about how it was made. I'll be curious to see how it works out.
It says a new book so does that mean new musical? I'm not sure how this works.
The last show that had this impressive a cast and crew was...A Woman on the Verge, which I thought was awful (probably exacerbated because I was so disappointed)so you never know.
That said, I cannot wait to order tickets for this one. i would even order full price in advance.
"It will be considered a NEW musical. It's not "Shuffle Along". Its "The Making Of Shuffle Along.........." I can't remember the entire title."
I just find it curious that the original descriptions just described it as a musical about the making of the musical. Now this new article says it "presents both the 1921 musical itself, and additionally details the events that catalyzed the songwriting team of Noble Sissle and Eubie Blake, and librettists F.E. Miller and Aubrey Lyles to create this ground-breaking work."
so the new description suggests that it actually is shuffle along but with some additions.
I'm not saying it won't be a new musical. I'm just interested that now they say they actually are presenting the musical itself but also adding to it.
A bit of an odd concept to me but I don't care--it's still on my must see list for spring. I'll be interested to see how it plays out.
If they're contextualizing parts of the actual show with new material about its creation, I can't imagine a world where they get away with ruling it a revival. That framework changes the entire scope of the piece.
That said, with this team, this is already a can't-miss event.
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
Wow, incredible cast. This Broadway season is exciting me more and more. A few days ago there was a thread about "who do you want to return to Broadway?" and one of the people I said was Brian Stokes Mitchell. Looks like I got part of my wish!
Scott Rudin may want to position the show that way to avoid competition with HAMILTON, but based on how it's been described, they'll never get away with it.
Tonya Pinkins: Then we had a "Lot's Wife" last June that was my personal favorite. I'm still trying to get them to let me sing it at some performance where we get to sing an excerpt that's gone.
Tony Kushner: You can sing it at my funeral.
Without knowing anything about the original SHUFFLE ALONG or this new production, only going by what's written, I can see how they might actually succeed in getting to be a Revival.
As Mr. Nowack points out, a new book is usually allowed for a Revival. Significant alterations to CABARET, YOU'RE A GOOD MAN CHARLIE BROWN and PORGY AND BESS (among others) didn't stop them. CANDIDE and ANYTHING GOES, shows that have had multiple different iterations, also have been nominated as Revivals.
However, those also maintained a fidelity to being identified as the same show, just with alterations. ONE MAN TWO GUV'NORS petitioned and failed to be a Revival, which was much more questionable since the material was all-new and only based on THE SERVANT OF TWO MASTERS.
The thing that seems in debate here is how much of this is the original material of SHUFFLE ALONG, and how much of is the story of the original production. The title and original description surely seemed to indicate something new. But what if the majority of the text is the original material? Is there anything in the bylaws akin to the Original Score rule about 51% of the content must be original to qualify?
Words don't deserve that kind of malarkey. They're innocent, neutral, precise, standing for this, describing that, meaning the other, so if you look after them you can build bridges across incomprehension and chaos. But when they get their corners knocked off, they're no good anymore…I don't think writers are sacred, but words are. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.
Also, to stay on topic: good grief that casting is loaded with talent!
Words don't deserve that kind of malarkey. They're innocent, neutral, precise, standing for this, describing that, meaning the other, so if you look after them you can build bridges across incomprehension and chaos. But when they get their corners knocked off, they're no good anymore…I don't think writers are sacred, but words are. They deserve respect. If you get the right ones in the right order, you can nudge the world a little.
This is giving me Nine Revival vibes. STELLAR cast.. but it won't last long on broadway. I feel like Spring Awakening, The Color Purple, and Hamilton are taking ALL the audience from all the upcoming shows after/near them.