What is your own personal "Golden Age" of Broadway?

[Miserent]

Posted: 7/30/13 at 11:29pm

I'm watching Rick McKay's "Broadway: The Golden Age" documentary (if you havent seen it, order a copy immediately, it is FABULOUS), and can't help but wonder how it must have been to have lived through those legendary Broadway years. On the alternate ending for the doc, one of the interviewees talks about how his favorite time was the mid to late 70s (Pippin, Dancin', Evita, A Chorus Line, etc), and it made me think about my favorite Broadway time period. Maybe it's because this was when my love for theatre really came about, but 2006-2008 was probably the last time I was really excited about Broadway...the magic of The Lion King, Phantom, and Wicked, the energy of Rent, the absolute joy and fun of Hairspray, the abundance of talent in the Patti LuPone production of Gypsy, the hype and naughtiness of Spring Awakening...I'll never forget how exciting and magical Broadway seemed to me during that brief period. Which time period do you all consider your own "Golden Ages of Broadway"?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/30/13 at 11:36pm

My teenage years: Company --> Follies --> A Little Night Music

Updated On: 7/31/13 at 11:36 PM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 12:32am

PalJoey, I am so envious of those shows being part of your formative teen years! Though I do feel like I could have done worse than Grey Gardens and Passing Strange and, at least, REVIVALS of those shows. I mean...it could have been the early 90s.

Updated On: 7/31/13 at 12:32 AM

[best12bars]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 2:06am

The first shows I saw on Broadway all in the same week ...

Dreamgirls
42nd Street
Cats
Agnes of God
On Your Toes
Torch Song Trilogy

Plus the original cast of Forbidden Broadway.

Updated On: 7/31/13 at 02:06 AM

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 2:44am

The 2008-2009 and the 2010-2011 seasons are my favorite. The 2008-2009 Tony awards were right after my first trip to NYC. I saw five shows that week including Billy Elliot and Hair. Being able to watch the Tony Awards right after seeing the shows made me feel more "connected" and involved with Broadway. Plus it was my first trip to my favorite place on earth and future home!
The 2010-2011 season was one of the most fascinating seasons ever. We had Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark, Women On The Verge, Wonderland, Scottsboro Boys, and Catch Me If You Can. These shows were all "failure" to some extent. Some of them were just pure trash, while others just could't gain momentum or never quite got it all together before opening. That same season we got Book of Mormon and Roundabout's stellar revival of Anything Goes. We also got to see Patina Miller make her Broadway debut.
That season was one of my favorites on the boards as well. I remember the excitement as we all waited to hear from the people at the eagerly anticipated (probably more so than any other shows) first previews of Women On The Verge and Spider-Man.

[After Eight]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 7:01am

My Golden Age is the actual, and only Golden Age.

Let's not render terms meaningless, please.

[quizking101]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 8:06am

The 2011-2012 season at MTC-Friedman. I experienced some truly transcendent theatre between MASTER CLASS, WIT, VENUS IN FUR, and THE COLUMNIST

[Jon]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 8:16am

My Golden Age ended in August of 1979 - opening night of 42nd Street/the death of Gower Champion. It was followed by AIDS, the invasion of the British megamusicals, the loss of Bob Fosse and Michael Bennett, and the Disneyfacation of Times Square.

[rorschach37]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 11:21am

My Golden Age would have to be the 2008-2009 season.

[WOSQ]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 1:52pm

Oklahoma (1943)through Fiddler (1964), at least for musicals.

Yes, there are some great post-Fiddler musicals, but the non-smashes were better too, and there were more of them.

It is my personal and highly unpopular opinion that there have been no great musicals since Sweeney Todd. Near-great, yes, very good, yes, but none have been great. Ragtime comes closest.

[justincharacter]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 2:12pm

As for the original question, I'm not sure. But, this season was actually pretty good to us.

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 2:24pm

I just try to see theatre, as much as possible, hoping that I'll have profound, moving, or entertaining experiences. Sometimes I do and sometimes I don't. Take the good with the bad. I've been attending professional theatre in NYC and beyond for 22 years and I hope to continue doing so for decades to come.

When it comes to "The Golden Age," I think about something Barbara Cook said. To paraphrase: "They tell me now that I was part of a golden age. I was just walking around, putting one foot in front of the other."

Updated On: 7/31/13 at 02:24 PM

[Sauja]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 5:07pm

Company, Follies, and Night Music as a teen! My God, you were spoiled, PalJoey.

I too spent my teen years hitting new musicals on Broadway, but for me that meant Tommy, The Life, Side Show, Titanic... It's just not the same league.

That said! Those shows were formative parts of my youth and guided my love of theater. As flawed as they all are (to varying degrees), I will always love them. I was so particularly in love with Side Show and listened to the cast recording enough that I can probably still sing along to the entire thing. I deeply hope that the new production can clarify the story and really make it work.

And whatever may have been wrong with The Life (like half the songs and most of the book), I will never forget Lillias White bringing the house down with "The Oldest Profession."

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 5:32pm

My teenage years: Company --> Follies --> A Little Night Music

Ditto.

But it's hard to ignore the early to mid-1960s: DOLLY, FIDDLER, MAME, MAN OF LA MANCHA, FUNNY GIRL, ON A CLEAR DAY, SHE LOVES ME, STOP THE WORLD, ROAR OF THE GREASEPAINT, etc.

So I'd say the decade from 1963 to 1973.

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 7/31/13 at 5:51pm

I tried to "like" PalJoey's comment... man I have been away from BWW and on Facebook far too much.

Personally, I loved the 2005 and 2006 seasons- not that they were comparable to the all time greats- but they were the first full season I was living in the city.
Spelling Bee was good little show. Dirty Rotten Scoundrels with Norbert and Litgow was possibly still amoung my favorite nights out- and with the empty lotto a great way to spend a cheap evening over and over. Light in the Piazza with Victoria Clark was so fantastic. Spamalot I didn't care much for...
Then the Doyle Sweeney Todd came that fall, it may still be my favorite thing ever...

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 1:27am

I missed PJ's golden trio by a year or two, managing only to catch the OBC of NIGHT MUSIC. But my memorable run of shows came in 1975 when I saw the original PIPPIN, CHICAGO and A CHORUS LINE in one glorious week.

So I'll be magnanimous and dub the Golden Age 1943 to 1975, despite a run of stinkers in the late 60's. (Sorry, Gaveston.)

Updated On: 8/1/13 at 01:27 AM

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 3:08am

I believe that Sondheim said in one of his "Hat" books that each person's "golden age" is the time right before they were around to witness the new theatre. To me, it has to be the 70s with those great Sondheim shows and Chicago and A Chorus Line opening within weeks of each other. However, every period has great shows and lots of duds. The difference is that we've forgotten about the bad shows from the 50s and 60s, allowing us to glamorize what happened then. I think the most consistent time for theatre was probably a couple centuries back at the Globe Theatre in London as Shakespeare was writing one historic work after another. Even his problem plays are captivating! Then again, it's very difficult to compare a time we know so little about to our current time period.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 6:53am

My Golden Age is the actual, and only Golden Age.

Let's not render terms meaningless, please.

I've heard academics argue ad infinitum as to whether the Golden Age was the more formalist period (20s to 1943) or the more representational period (1943 to 1970) that followed. It might surprise some Americans to know that many people worldwide prefer Rodgers & Hart to Rodgers & Hammerstein.

Let's don't pretend terms can only be defined one way, please.

The OP question clearly asked each of us for the period we find "golden".

***

And no apology required, Someone. 1943 to 1975 sounds good to me (and there WERE some stinkers in the late 1960s, though no doubt After Eight will want to extoll the supreme pleasures of HER FIRST ROMAN).

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 7:52am

no doubt After Eight will want to extoll the supreme pleasures of HER FIRST ROMAN

Or OUR AMERICAN COUSIN

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 8:37am

Not surprising that After Eight completely misunderstood the question posed in this thread.

It wasn't "What is THE Golden Age?" but rather "What is YOUR OWN PERSONAL Golden Age?"

It's not a question of rattling off academic dates to define the era, it's the shows YOU'VE SEEN as in "personally" and defining YOUR OWN PERSONAL (yes, overuse of CAPS) Golden Era.

He had his chance and muffed it.

Unless he was there on opening night of Oklahoma!, 70 years ago.

[After Eight]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 10:52am

"It's not a question of rattling off academic dates to define the era, it's the shows YOU'VE SEEN as in "personally" and defining YOUR OWN PERSONAL (yes, overuse of CAPS) Golden Era. "

No it's not necessarily the shows ONE'S SEEN that defines one's personal concept of a PERSONAL Golden Age. According to you, then, someone who may never have seen even one Broadway show but saw other productions, listened to cast albums a zillion times, read scripts and books on the subject, immersed himself in the theatre lore of the time, memorized every statistic of every show that opened, etc. could not have a have a personal attachment to a theatrical period, or possess a personal idea of Broadway's Golden Age, PERSONALLY!

What an outrageously obnoxious, exclusionary, braying jackass you are, you with your presumptuous lectures and capital letters.

And about as genteel as a bull in a china shop.

Go back to the ass menagerie where you belong.

To reiterate, my personal Golden Age is the actual, and only Golden Age.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 11:25am

Oh thank God, I was worried we were only getting one snide, dismissive quip from After Eight in a thread this tempting. The requisite, self-righteously stodgy lecture doesn't disappoint.

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 11:26am

After Eight, what about then saying what it is about that particular era that you find so appealing?
Engage, entertain, enlighten... instead of harping on the use or misuse of the terminology.

Though for me, my "own personal Golden Age" as asked here, is what is most grand and golden about the theater- that I have seen live, for me it is necessary component.

So it seems your answer to the "own personal Golden Age" query is the officially sanctioned "Golden Age of Broadway" (a different term) which is a grand and glorious personal Golden Age to have. And perhaps it may be mine, if in time I were to be able engage in the same way. Currently though, that is not the case. (Not that I don't love and feel personal connection to every era of Broadway... I still feel sad when I hear them mention the Hippodrome in On The Town)

[JayG 2]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 11:38am

What Jon said. My personal Golden Age ended on the opening night of 42nd Street with the announcement of the death of Gower Champion. It was the end of an era - and the succeeding ones (British pop operas, faux rock musicals, Disney mega bores) cannot in any way come close to what once was.

[newintown]

Posted: 8/1/13 at 12:43pm

I think "Golden" could also be used to mean having a lot of high-quality to choose from.

Look at a year like 1965, when 17 new musicals opened, including bona-fide hits like Mame, Oliver, Sweet Charity, and Man of La Mancha; and failures with a lot to love like It's a Bird It's a Plane It's Superman, A Time For Singing, Flora The Red Menace, and On a Clear Day You Can See Forever. That's a great year for Broadway musicals.

In the last 20 years, we've averaged just under 6 new musicals each year ("original" meaning, to me, including an original score). The best year in that range was 2006, with 10 new shows, including what I think are 2 good shows: The Drowsy Chaperone, and Grey Gardens; and some (to me) real clunkers like Legally Blonde, Tarzan, High Fidelity, and The Pirate Queen. There were some successes that others found worthy, like Mary Poppins, and Spring Awakening.

But it seems to me that none of those successes are going to capture and keep the public like 1965's Mame, Oliver, Sweet Charity, and Man of La Mancha did. That might be (at least partly) because we (as a mass culture) care about theatre less than we did back then. It's become much more of a niche art than it used to be.