Ok stay with me here: Rapunzel and Joanna are the same person. Think of it. Both are locked in a tower and taken away from their parents before they can remember ( by The Witch and Judge Turpin respectively). They pass the time by singing. One of their parents show up throughout the show mysteriously, but their significance isn't revealed until it's too late ( The Crazy Beggar Woman and the Mysterious Man). They both have yellow hair like a grain ( Corn for Rapunzel, and wheat for Joanna). One of their family members wonders what they are like, but never really interacts with them ( The Baker and Sweeney). Both are admired from afar by a man who wants to rescue them ( Anthony and Rapunzel's Prince). Now the question is, is Sondheim doing this on purpose?
The Mysterious Man is Jack's father. When he is talking to Jack and hears Jack's mother approaching, he runs and hides. After abandoning the Baker as a baby, he hooked up with Jack's mom, then abandoned jack as a baby. Jack and the Baker are half brothers.
In addition, as punishment for their romantic attentions, their possessive and jealous guardians banish them (Joanna to Bedlam, Rapunzel to a desert). And for their sins of disobedience, they suffer devastating haircuts.
Adding insult to injury, they arguably have the least interesting roles in their respective musicals.
I assume Johanna came from the original Bond play and maybe even from the Sweeney Todd folk story that dates back to the early 1800s. But that doesn't mean similarities to to Rapunzel are entirely accidental, just that Sondheim himself probably didn't invent them.
The INTO THE WOODS personae are based on Bruno Bettelheim's study of fairy tale archetypes, characters that have been used and reused in thousands of stories throughout Western (and sometimes non-Western) cultures.
Plus of course Sondheim said most of the actual story of ITW was Lapine (and of course all of the actual dialogue was...) Joanna, or a character like her, is in many versions of Sweeney--and is in the Bond play pretty much the same as the musical.
The characters in Sweeney Todd like those in fairy tales, could largely be seen as archetypes (or even ciphers in the case of Joanna and Anthony).
Gaveson, hasn't Sondheim somewhat discounted the Bettelheim book as a source? I know it is often brought up, and particularly was when ITW premiered, but I believe in some interviews--including the one with Charlie Rose that aired when PBS first aired ITW, he seems to think people harp on that too much.
Gaveston, of course, Johanna and Rapunzel's similarities predate Sondheim's musicalizing these stories, but it's still notably coincidental that he musicalized both of their stories. I've never noted these similarities, or just how markedly coincidental they are (and they go far beyond a mere archetypal parallelism) until NoHSM brought them up, and am very curious when they might have first occurred to the maestro.
Sondheim plotted all his melodies, lyrics, stories, and characters while in the womb. He knew at an early age how to properly manage his time. The only other human beings on earth who didn't slack off during their pre-natal days are J.K. Rowling and Stephen King. The rest of the world is nothing but lazy slobs.
"What can you expect from a bunch of seitan worshippers?" - Reginald Tresilian
Thanks for the specifics, Eric. I've seen a SWEENEY TODD film (non-musical) from the 1930s or 40s, but it's been so long I don't remember the supporting characters.
I don't doubt that Sondheim has said people read Bettelheim into WOODS too literally, but, frankly, hasn't Sondheim made a cottage industry out of denying all influences other than Milton Babbitt and Jerome Robbins?
Look at the number of "I hate Brecht" interviews Sondheim has given. Yet who has been more responsible for the introduction of self-consciously Brechtian techniques into the American musical? Even assuming the Brecht influence was channeled through Robbins and Prince, methinks Sondheim doth protest too much.
My copy of LOOK, I MADE A HAT hasn't arrived yet, but my guess is we should NOT look at WOODS as Bettelheim-by-the-numbers. On the other hand, both Lapine and Sondheim were aware of Bettelheim's work, work that the author himself would claim reflects archetypes known by everyone.
And that was basically my point: not that Bettelheim led Sondheim to write Joanna, but that the Rapunzel archetype was sufficiently well known that it probably influenced Bond, Sondheim, Wheeler, et al.
I really wasn't clare--because I definitewly agree withyou, and while I posted that I specifically thought how Sondheim denies so many influences (and to be fair, I honestly think he doesn't see them ias direct influences even if on some level they obviously are, and isn't just being defensive). I think Sondhheim has actually said that the Brech influence is thanks to Prince, not himself, but I definitely agree with you.
Yeah the Rapunzel archetype (or maiden locked away from men by a controlling parental figure often in a tower) can be traced back at least to Greek mythology pretty easily, so.
Egerman, I dunno, I remain unconvinced that they do go much further than being faithful to the source or archetypes. The only one that strikes me that way is her hair colour, really...
Gaveston, I agree that Sondheim protests too much in his denying that he knew nothing bout birthing Bettelheims. As I recall, at the time of the creation of Into the Woods there was a great deal of talk about Bettelheim and fairy tales. It would be safe to say that no one was engaged in a serious psychological discussion of the fairy tale without invoking Bettelheim.
But Gaveston if we're talking about the introduction/proliferation of Brechtian technique in the American musical, don't we need to also focus on Kander, Ebb and Fosse? Updated On: 12/10/11 at 12:02 PM