"The Spectacle has, indeed, an emotional attraction of its own, but, of all the parts, it is the least artistic, and connected least with the art of poetry. For the power of Tragedy, we may be sure, is felt even apart from representation and actors. Besides, the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the poet."
--Aristotle
I'm afraid all the drag queens in this show are supposed to be ugly.
It's one of those things about British productions of musicals I will never get. They think making a musical unattractive somehow makes it more "important."
"They think making a musical unattractive somehow makes it more important."
I'd rephrase that as:
"They think making a musical realistic makes it more accessible."
We need to remember here that Broadway musicals (rightly or wrongly) were considered naff in the UK throughout the 1980s (and the long list of failed transfers testifies to this perception). When I was in my teenage years in the 1980s I was considered "old before your time" because I was more interested in Broadway musicals than Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet, Wham, etc.
It wasn't until I was at a houseparty in Amsterdam in the late 1990s where I met a lawyer from NY and mentioned in a rather apologetic tone that I liked Broadway musicals, and he responded "Hey, you're a gay guy, that's allowed", that I actually had a positive response to telling someone I liked musicals. If I hadn't been with someone and he hadn't been with someone I might have fallen in love.
So what has gone on since then is re-directing these brilliantly written and brilliantly scored works in a way that makes them accessible to British audiences. And this production of La Cage is a perfect testimony to that because my schoolfriend, who was very much into 80s chart music and thought musicals were silly, loved it.
Or maybe he's just got old and naff.
Or maybe he's finally caught up with me. Updated On: 4/3/10 at 04:29 AM
I would also argue that making the show more realistic is not sucking the fun out. Although, from what I've seen I still don't think either the original production or this revival have hit spot on what the boys would have really looked like in a club like that, but this production being smaller and not as glamorous, is definitely closer in my mind than the original designs.
And the drag queens are most definitely not ugly, PalJoey. I think they're pretty damn gorgeous in this show. You clearly have a very negative view of us Britons, so I doubt anything anyone says will convince you otherwise...
"And the drag queens are most definitely not ugly, PalJoey. I think they're pretty damn gorgeous in this show. You clearly have a very negative view of us Britons, so I doubt anything anyone says will convince you otherwise..."
Ugly... Gritty... Same thing.
It has nothing to do with the Brits at a whole.
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2
Ugly and gritty are not the same thing. Check your dictionary. Also, if it has nothing to do with Brits as whole, why say 'it's one of those things about British productions of musicals...'?
I usually agree with PalJoey and find his entries to be right on the money. But I am bewildered by his contribution to this thread. There are many British takes on the American musical that are imaginative and endearing to American tastes; The 1994 CAROUSEL was a beautiful example. And there was nothing ugly about the 1987 London FOLLIES, even if BWW regulars seem to abhor that production (even if the vast majority never saw it) due to the re-writing of the book and a few songs. I will see for myself in May when I see LA CAGE AUX FOLLES. I missed the original production on Broadway and the revival relatively recently.
Ugly and gritty are not the same thing. Check your dictionary. Also, if it has nothing to do with Brits as whole, why say 'it's one of those things about British productions of musicals...'?
I would take the testimony of a former drag queen over yours.
I'm not testifying to anything. But just because someone has previously been a drag queen does not mean that he is correct in stating that ugly and gritty are the same thing. Or that his opinion on this production and the look of the Cagelles is automatically more valid than anyone else's.
This is a crazed debate anyway. Seriously: you think Jacob looks homely? That's because he's JACOB. The character crossdresses but he is not a skilled drag queen. That's part of who he is, it's in the script and everything. Why are you judging the overall attractiveness of the drag in this show by this one character? I mean, have you even SEEN the Cagelles? Those boys are STUNNING. http://www.lacagelondon.com/sights_and_sounds/ (And god I LOVE Jean-Michel's trousers! I hope those make it intact to the transfer!)
I'm not even going to comment on any anti-Britishness in this thread, but it is here, and we don't appreciate it. How about seeing the show and judging it on its own merits, instead of having mild xenophobic fits?
"TheatreDiva90016 - another good reason to frequent these boards less."<<>>
“I hesitate to give this line of discussion the validation it so desperately craves by perpetuating it, but the light from logic is getting further and further away with your every successive post.” <<>>
-whatever2