First Mainstream LGBT Musicals

[missthemountains]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 3:22am

Recently I got into an absolutely maddening argument with someone who claimed Rocky Horror Show/RHPS was transphobic (I'm not even going to indulge everyone in this argument as it was truly bogus) but it made me bring up the point that in many ways, Rocky was one of the first LGBT musicals in our modern understanding of the term. I would love to know what everyone would consider being the first mainstream LGBT musical to be--and I'm limiting this only to musicals--meaning a musical with great influence in public knowledge. Although, from a strictly historical perspective, I am also curious what the first LGBT musical was. This website offers a pretty good list, but did they catch all of them? Also not all of them list years, and I'm far too lazy to double check all of them, as some don't even have Wikipedia pages.

 

Apologies if this has been posted.

Updated On: 11/10/17 at 03:22 AM

[CallMeAl2]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 4:09am

Well, the first gay character I remember seeing in a musical was René Auberjonois playing a hairdresser in Coco. He was not treated well. There were gay aspects laced into Hair's free love tribe. In LA Boy Meets Boy ran for over a year. I wasn't in New York then, so I don't know how well it did off Broadway, but that probably is in the running for first gay musical. San Francisco had the long-running drag musical Beach Blanket Babylon.

I think A Chorus Line needs to be mentioned. It mainstreamed gay characters and gave one of them the emotional high-point of the show. 

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 9:17am

Lee Roy Reams played Dwayne, Margo Channing’s (Lauren Bacall) gay confidant/assistant in the original 1970 Broadway production of APPLAUSE. Heck, she even asks him to take her and Eve (Penny Fuller) to a gay bar to celebrate her play’s opening night. That’s what prompts and leads into the musical number “But Alive.”

[BwayLB]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 9:26am

I always thought La Cage Aux Folles was one. I saw the national tour five years ago with George' Hamilton as George's and Christopher Sieber as Alvin. The production was beautiful

[edmundog2]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 10:09am

Point to consider, and I don't want to derail, but it's possible for Rocky to be both one of the first LGBT-affirming musicals AND to be transphobic. The problem you run into with that show is that what was once bold and transgressive has now become trite and yes, possibly offensive. Frank is a walking collection of "predatory trans/bi person" stereotypes, and while depicting him was, at one point, daring, it can be VERY tricky to walk that line in an era of more gay and trans acceptance.

Think, by way of comparison, of Shylock. If you compare him to other contemporary portrayals of Jews, like Marlowe's Barabas, he's amazingly progressive. But apart from that one speech, he's still a pretty strong antisemitic stereotype, and it can be hard for directors to walk that line now. For like 300 years, they didn't even try, and Shylock was just "the evil Jew", and it's just as easy to accidentally make Frank "the evil queer".

That's why the 2001 RHS revival was, for my money, the only truly good modern production. They cut the gay camp angle in favor of the 60s sci-fi camp angle, they changed the tone from "These gays are having sex and it's WEIRD" to "These people are having sex and it's COOL", they made Frank the "manliest" character instead of mincing and effeminate, and they cast an actually gender nonconforming gay woman as Eddie. 

But productions that don't take that level of care can very frequently wind up accidentally embracing some pretty regressive views. So I don't think your friend was as far off the mark as you might think. I don't know what their exact argument was, of course, but it's certainly something I've thought about.

[edmundog2]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 10:13am

Perhaps a better comparison, to keep it musical-related, would be "The Mikado" or "Flower Drum Song", and how cultural perception of Asian people has caused both of those shows to require pretty extensive changes in modern productions.

[Lot666]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 10:45am

A somewhat unique aspect of The Rocky Horror Show is that, despite the character's inherent "negative stereotypes", Frank-N-Furter is unequivocally the hero of the show. Virtually no one in the audience perceives the old man in the wheelchair as the hero, and everyone is sad when Frank is hunted down by Riff Raff and Magenta at the end. For all of his flaws, the audience adores Frank; he's the one they want to be.

[edmundog2]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 11:08am

I have to say, I think you are the first person I've ever seen claim that Frank is unequivocally the hero. He's depicted as a murderer and cannibal* who is violently abusive to his underlings and his lovers. Like many grindhouse horror films of the 1960s, which influenced the story even more than classic sci-fi did, I think there isn't a "hero" per se, just a desire on the part of the audience to see people make it to the end alive. I would say Frank is unequivocally the villain, and while he does let them discover a sort of freedom, he only did so as part of a selfish plan to **** them to death, and they are miserable afterwards.

*In the movie, at least.

[edmundog2]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 11:09am

Again, I really don't want to derail the thread, because it's a good thread concept.

[Lot666]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 11:27am

edmundog2 said: "I have to say, I think you are the first person I've ever seen claim that Frank is unequivocally the hero. He's depicted as a murderer and cannibal* who is violently abusive to his underlings and his lovers. Like many grindhouse horror films of the 1960s, which influenced the story even more than classic sci-fi did, I think there isn't a "hero" per se, just a desire on the part of the audience to see people make it to the end alive. I would say Frank is unequivocally the villain, and while he does let them discover a sort of freedom, he only did so as part of a selfish plan to **** themto death, and they are miserable afterwards.

*In the movie, at least."

Must be a regional response. I saw the stage show back in 1980 and saw the movie countless times in my youth, and everyone loved Frank. As I stated, he's full of flaws, but he's the one everyone rooted for.

[helvizz]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 11:55am

This is a very nice topic. As far as I know -and that isn't much, I may be wrong and chances aren't slim-, Rocky was the first mainstram LGBT-themed musical. I've never heard of others before, so I'm assuming that if there were, they weren't very successful. Like I said, I may be wrong - this is all based on assumption.

On the other hand, if we're talking stage musicals (you didn't specify this, but this being a Broadway chatboard, I felt I should mention it), I'd say it was La Cage Aux Folles: first time two gay men in a relationship were the lead characters in a Broadway musical. Not only that, but the show is about their relationship, which makes it centered around an LGBT theme - that's what makes it the first mainstream LGBT musical in my opinion. The production was a hit, winning the Tony for Best Musical and running for 3 or 4 years. It's also good to mention that this happened during the AIDS crisis, so the impact of the show was much bigger.

However, one could argue about other musicals that had LGBT characters which came first - A Chorus Line and Cabaret come to mind (I'll admit I don't know how LGBT the original production of Cabaret was, though), both of which won the Tony for Best Musical too (A chorus line won the Pullitzer too), had successful runs and spawned revivals, movies and regional productions. Nonetheless, I wouldn't really call them LGBT musicals, just shows with LGBT characters. 

Updated On: 11/10/17 at 11:55 AM

[newintown]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 11:56am

Whether you call Frank the "hero," "anti-hero," "protagonist," or merely the "star," he's undeniably the character with whom the audience falls in love, evil or not.

Personally, I find it baffling that anyone would prefer Tom Hewitt's rather lifeless approach to the role over Tim Curry's benchmark performance, much as I would look askance at a statement that Craig Bierko was a superior Harold Hill to Robert Preston.

[edmundog2]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 12:20pm

I'd say they were two different approaches for two different time periods. Curry's (magnificent) performance wouldn't have played well in that production at all. This was basically proven when Terrence Mann took over and did it very Curry-style. (As I knew he would, he's always been an exceptionally Tim Curry-ish performer. They even looked almost identical in the 70s.) He just didn't fit.

As to Helvizz's point, I'm not sure we can count Cabaret. A LOT of the gayness was sanded off of the original production. I don't know much about it in any detail, but as I recall, Grey's MC was much more of the "wink/nudge" kind of gay, if anything. They didn't make anything explicit with him until the revival. And, of course, Cliff was totally de-gayed from the original play.

[darquegk]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 3:12pm

On a related note, I played Brad a few years ago and ended up having a long talk with the director and the actress playing Janet about our interpretation of the role. I felt like the rather common interpretation of Brad as a closeted gay man learning to live his truth bordered on offensive- Frank isn't a queer liberator messiah, he's a sexual predator (albeit an immensely charismatic, fun one). We ended up interpreting the role this way:

Brad really IS an asshole- even if he's never cruel, everything he says and does is typical ignorant, casual misogyny of the Mad Men era. But when he steps into Frank's world, the roles are reversed and inverted. In the castle, queer is more appreciated than straight, women have more sexual freedom than men, Janet's sexual dalliance empowers her, and Brad's sexual dalliance leads to him being objectified, mocked and ultimately made to feel powerless. In the opening scene, we had Brad dragging Janet by the hand, forcing her to keep up; as counterpoint, the final image was of Brad offering his hand to help Janet up from the ground, then exiting finally as equals.

[MrsSallyAdams]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 3:52pm

I've referenced this website in the past when researching gay musicals:

http://www.queermusicheritage.com/gaymus.html

The site discusses several 1970's musicals outside of NY including "The F****t", "Lovers," "Fascination," "Boy Meets Boy" and "Gulp!"

On Broadway the successful review "Side By Side by Sondheim" had David Kernan perform "Could I Leave You with lyrics unchanged in 1976. "Dance a Little Closer" flopped on Broadway in 1983 but featured a love duet and wedding for Brentt Barrett and Jeff Keller's characters.

William Finn's "In Trousers" was mounted Off-Broadway in 1979. "March of the Falsettos" followed Off Broadway in 1981. "Falsettoland" wasn't till 1990. The full "Falsettos" wouldn't get to Broadway till 1992. 

This was followed by "Kiss of the Spider Woman" in 1993. That shows portrayal of a gay protagonist has probably aged worse than "La Cage Aux Folles" has.

Updated On: 11/10/17 at 03:52 PM

[blaxx]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 4:51pm

This reminds me when ReNt came out and everyone swore that it was ground breaking for having homosexual characters on Broadway for the first time

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/10/17 at 5:01pm

There were probably earlier apparent gay characters, but the earliest one I know of would be Russell Paxton in LADY IN THE DARK (1941).

Far more apparent but more openly pansexual than gay would be Woof - what else would he be called? - in HAIR (1967).

The first unabashedly gay characters in  Broadway musical was, as stated earlier, likely in the 1969-1970 season.  First, Sebastian in COCO and then Dwayne in APPLAUSE.   Sebastian is a nasty, vindictive piece of work.  Dwayne's character is based on a woman's, Birdie's, in the sourced All About Eve.

Updated On: 11/10/17 at 05:01 PM

[missthemountains]

Posted: 11/11/17 at 3:36am

I think if we're talking in terms of mainstream LGBT musical in which queerness was a major part of the plotline (and gay sex is displayed), I think our answer is Rocky Horror Show (1973) in terms of date and influence--especially because of how iconic the film is, although I think there's even an argument here that Frank isn't really a man as much as he is an alien in a male's body. It's very confusing. But technically, that scene is also between two cis men, so there you have it. That being said, in double checking the list on The Guide To Musical Theatre it would seem that Aint We Got Fun (1921) is the earliest example of having "gay themes or characters" in terms of the list, but since it's a musical revue, I have a hard time finding any evidence of gay characters, or even a gay kiss--which would presumably leave either Applause (1971) (which I haven't actually seen, so are there only characters or also depictions of gay relationships andor sex?) followed by The Faggot (1973). 

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 11/11/17 at 10:06am

I know this doesn't "count" technically but I've always been convinced Bobby in Company is gay, and the first gay protagonist in a musical.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/11/17 at 12:19pm

This reminds me when ReNt came out and everyone swore that it was ground breaking for having homosexual characters on Broadway for the first time

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that.  Ever.  It sounds like you surrounded yourself with a LOT of stupid people.

[edmundog2]

Posted: 11/11/17 at 10:33pm

I've always been convinced Bobby in Company is gay, and the first gay protagonist in a musical.

You're the second person I've heard say that, and the reasoning the first had was that since Sondheim is gay, Bobby must be too, which is terrible logic on all sorts of levels. Can you elaborate? It's an intriguing idea, but I don't see it myself.

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 11/11/17 at 10:44pm

edmundog2 said: "I've always been convinced Bobby in Company is gay, and the first gay protagonist in a musical.

You're the second person I've heard say that, and the reasoning the first had was that since Sondheim is gay, Bobby must be too, which is terrible logic on all sorts of levels. Can you elaborate? It's an intriguing idea, but I don't see it myself."

I don't think it has anything to do with Sondheim being gay. The whole premise of the musical is that Bobby has a "problem." He can't commit to a relationship. But in addition to that, his interactions with women are sterile and sexless. He does have the one-night stand with April but when she actually wants to stay with him he's scared off again. 

When he finally expresses this desire for love, it's entirely gender-neutral:

Somebody, crowd me with love,
Somebody, force me to care,
Somebody, make me come through,
I'll always be there,
As frightened as you,
To help us survive
Being alive,
Being alive,
Being alive!

Company was made in 1970. Back then people were still "confirmed bachelors" and NYTimes obits would discreetly mention secretaries, assistants, or "companions." I don't think it's too far off the mark to make this connection that Bobby's "Being Alive" is really a sort of internal coming-out party. All the ladies that fail to stimulate him are forgotten, and he's ready to blow out the candles on that part of his life and embark on a love that (at that time) still dared not speak its name.

This is just my interpretation of Company. I guess we could ask Stephen Sondheim.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/11/17 at 11:13pm

If Bobby is supposed to be gay, Company would be the most incompetent libretto ever written.

Which it’s not.

Updated On: 11/12/17 at 11:13 PM

[wonkit]

Posted: 11/12/17 at 7:48am

Bobby's reactions to women are hardly sexless! The problem is not that Bobby doesn't want women; it's that he doesn't know what he wants from life and therefore can't commit, but floats from one woman to another. He is afraid of marriage because he afraid that he will never be able to discover who he is.

 

But I digress from the topic. with apologies.

[quizking101]

Posted: 11/12/17 at 8:05am

Mister Matt said: "This reminds me when ReNt came out and everyone swore that it was ground breaking for having homosexual characters on Broadway for the first time

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that. Ever. It sounds like you surrounded yourself with a LOT of stupid people."

While it does sound silly, I would venture to guess that RENT was the first time anyone saw LGBT characters openly expressing their sexuality in a way that was deemed subversive, as opposed to the antiseptic asexuality of gay characters in LA CAGE, and even FALSETTOS.