![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat[Lots of people on livejournal are talking about lj april fools jokes, but it doesn't appear on mine. I don't see serialladder or stalkers, or any of this today. In fact my journal looks the same as it always has. Weird.]
Went out with my friend, CW and the IT geeks last evening. During the outing found out an exceedingly odd little tidbit:
Did anyone know that the Broadway (or rather Off-Broadway) revival of Fiddler on The Roof has removed all the Jewish or Judaic elements from the musical? There's no one Jewish in the cast. They've made the story completely secular. Why? Because they wanted to appeal to a broader audience. Now, to make this story just a tad weirder - CW told me that a friend of ours, work colleague, who is "orthodox" jew and a former "rabbi", saw this musical and loved it.
So here I am attempting to imagine Fiddler on The Roof with all the Jewish references removed from it. The musical is partly about anti-semitism and prejudice. Many of the songs actually comment on this.
Also saw what an iPod was. Expensive little gadget. But very handy. Now feel less like an idiot online for not having a clue what one was.
And had an interesting conversation about tv watching where I learned once again that I'm somewhat left of center on this (they adored the procedural shows which I find incredibly dull, I love the more metaphorical/emotional character arc shows)and how our responses to entertainment have a lot to do with our own emotional and psychological makeup at the time of viewing.
Rant on TV suspension of disbelief or shows that are stretching it:
1. 24 - okay how many things can a person possibly do within a 24 hour period? I think 24 just exceeded the suspension of disbelief quota on its gimmick again.
2. The OC - interesting show, but some of the teens look the same age as their parents, this is not good. Misha Barton who plays Marisa looks the same age as her mother. Actually the only two actors who look like they might be teens on this show are the ones playing Seth and Summer and even that I wonder about. Reminds me of Beverly Hills 90210 and the 30 somethings playing 19 year olds. At least the OC has made fun of this factor. I'll give them that. Interesting show. Still not a worthy replacement for ATS, but better than anything else on on Wed with ATS on hiatus.
3. Joan of Arcadia - Joan getting ankle stuck in a washing machine, and why does she always do what these supposed avatars of God tell her?
4. Tru Calling - why hasn't the police questioned Tru yet for always being on the scene of the crime and stalking people who get attacked?
Character bashing/criticism/venting (whatever you want to call it) has raised its ugly head online again. Always does when people get bored. Actually beginning to find some of it fascinating - the bashing/criticism/venting about S7/S6 and certain characters - tells me more about some fans than it does about the show or the authorial intent. It also says something fascinating about the relationship between the author/creators-the text-the viewer/reader. How that relationship can twist, turn and get clouded by outside factors: such as a horrible terrorist event, a fan's depression or own life experiences, an author's loss of interest or some other component of the creation process - say an actor's, and our own cultural values and environment.
There's a lengthy essay somewhere in all this, now the question is? Should I figure it out and write it? Or let it go? Probably let it go...since it's not like I don't have ahem other things I should be focusing on. But it is interesting to think about. How we react to certain characters or stories, why we reacte to them and even more important how we react to one another's views concerning them? It's relatively easy to support or even react to a view that validates your own but how do you react to one that is contrary to it? I'm not very good at reacting to contrary views right now, I admit, but that may be why I find it fascinating.
Went out with my friend, CW and the IT geeks last evening. During the outing found out an exceedingly odd little tidbit:
Did anyone know that the Broadway (or rather Off-Broadway) revival of Fiddler on The Roof has removed all the Jewish or Judaic elements from the musical? There's no one Jewish in the cast. They've made the story completely secular. Why? Because they wanted to appeal to a broader audience. Now, to make this story just a tad weirder - CW told me that a friend of ours, work colleague, who is "orthodox" jew and a former "rabbi", saw this musical and loved it.
So here I am attempting to imagine Fiddler on The Roof with all the Jewish references removed from it. The musical is partly about anti-semitism and prejudice. Many of the songs actually comment on this.
Also saw what an iPod was. Expensive little gadget. But very handy. Now feel less like an idiot online for not having a clue what one was.
And had an interesting conversation about tv watching where I learned once again that I'm somewhat left of center on this (they adored the procedural shows which I find incredibly dull, I love the more metaphorical/emotional character arc shows)and how our responses to entertainment have a lot to do with our own emotional and psychological makeup at the time of viewing.
Rant on TV suspension of disbelief or shows that are stretching it:
1. 24 - okay how many things can a person possibly do within a 24 hour period? I think 24 just exceeded the suspension of disbelief quota on its gimmick again.
2. The OC - interesting show, but some of the teens look the same age as their parents, this is not good. Misha Barton who plays Marisa looks the same age as her mother. Actually the only two actors who look like they might be teens on this show are the ones playing Seth and Summer and even that I wonder about. Reminds me of Beverly Hills 90210 and the 30 somethings playing 19 year olds. At least the OC has made fun of this factor. I'll give them that. Interesting show. Still not a worthy replacement for ATS, but better than anything else on on Wed with ATS on hiatus.
3. Joan of Arcadia - Joan getting ankle stuck in a washing machine, and why does she always do what these supposed avatars of God tell her?
4. Tru Calling - why hasn't the police questioned Tru yet for always being on the scene of the crime and stalking people who get attacked?
Character bashing/criticism/venting (whatever you want to call it) has raised its ugly head online again. Always does when people get bored. Actually beginning to find some of it fascinating - the bashing/criticism/venting about S7/S6 and certain characters - tells me more about some fans than it does about the show or the authorial intent. It also says something fascinating about the relationship between the author/creators-the text-the viewer/reader. How that relationship can twist, turn and get clouded by outside factors: such as a horrible terrorist event, a fan's depression or own life experiences, an author's loss of interest or some other component of the creation process - say an actor's, and our own cultural values and environment.
There's a lengthy essay somewhere in all this, now the question is? Should I figure it out and write it? Or let it go? Probably let it go...since it's not like I don't have ahem other things I should be focusing on. But it is interesting to think about. How we react to certain characters or stories, why we reacte to them and even more important how we react to one another's views concerning them? It's relatively easy to support or even react to a view that validates your own but how do you react to one that is contrary to it? I'm not very good at reacting to contrary views right now, I admit, but that may be why I find it fascinating.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-04-01 02:15 pm (UTC)Interesting, I've heard nothing but bad things about this revival, from Jewish friends and relatives who have seen it. Even worse than the removal of the Jewish elements is the fact that the two main characters, Tevye and Golde are depicted as being incredibly sexually attracted to each other, which although it seems innocuous enough, strips the show of the dichotomy between the generations that is the main theme of the play. Tevye and Golde met the day they were married. Over the years, they have learned to love and respect each other. But is their daughters who fall in love, and go against tradition by choosing their own husbands, and marrying for love and lust. This play, which is about the dissolution of ancient traditions and evolution from the old to the modern times, loses a great deal if Tevye and Golde are, in the words of a friend of mine, shown to be as hot for each other as their kids are for their boyfriends.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-01 02:28 pm (UTC)I agree, that's also weird. Why did they make that decision? It goes against the original authorial intent (the playwright's) and the thematic element. Fiddler on The Roof is a fascinating play/musical about differences in generations, how tradition affects people, and how we view one another through the veil of tradition or what we were taught and how you need to break away from that.
There's a song in Fiddler about why Golde doesn't seem to show the same affection for Tevyv that his daughters show their boyfriends. It's a brilliant song - "Do you love me?"
And she tells him all the things she does for him. But he keeps asking, because she's not exhibiting the physical component. That song would make no sense whatsoever if Tevyve and Golde are shown really into each other physically.
I can see changing the location or even modernizing the show a bit, but to change items in it that cause the story to make no sense? Just seems really odd to me. I mean, Hamlet has been done so that it takes place in the business world/corporate arena and I've seen West Side Story substitute different racial groups (which sort of worked) and Jesus Christ Superstar placed in 21st century, but they still stuck to the essential themes. Or even Cabaret which redid the choregraphy. The changes didn't cause songs or dialogue to seem out of place. The dialogue if anything was enriched or given an interesting twist. I just don't see how these changes to Fiddler work in that context. And if they don't work? Why do them? Why attempt to fix what isn't broken?
Weird.
no subject
Date: 2004-04-01 05:16 pm (UTC)Me too. It sounds like a banana split without the bananas and ice cream. Can't deny there might be something left of value, but after taking out those elements how the heck and you call it a banana split?
no subject
Date: 2004-04-01 09:10 pm (UTC)And she tells him all the things she does for him. But he keeps asking, because she's not exhibiting the physical component. That song would make no sense whatsoever if Tevyve and Golde are shown really into each other physically.
Yes! And I read in an article somewhere that in the new version, this is no longer a comedic song. That all of the irony is stripped out of it, and instead it is a straightforward love song between the two characters. Whether this was done through how the lines are delivered or whether the lyrics themselves were changed I don't know. What I do know is that I have absolutely no interest in seeing this production. If I really want to see a show, I could always just spend my money on seeing Wicked for a third time. ;-)