![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Got Into the Woods from Netflix. Am very confused now. I've never listened to the score before, so it was a little hard at times figuring out what everyone was singing.
Spoilers
There's this very dizzying switch in tones that happens during the musical, from the frothy, funny, but mostly forgettable first half, to the rather disjointed but more interesting second half. The first half is mostly a telling of the stories of Cinderella, Jack of beanstalk fame, and the Baker and his wife, who want children, and how they gallivant around trying to lift a curse. Rapunzel, the witch, and Little Red Riding Hood all make their own appearances. And while much fun is poked at the fairy tales, ultimately everything is tied together in a nice big knot for the finale to Act 1 (which I thought was the finale, period, and was rather glad to find out that there was another act coming). I did like the parallel of Red Riding Hood and Jack's songs, about having found something rather scary and exciting and eye-opening at the same time. I sort of wish that had been followed through.
The second act just really confuses me. There's the sudden serious turn, which was rather welcome after the slight fluffiness of the beginning. But suddenly we have several random deaths thrown in, some of which are taken seriously and some of which are not. And then there's the entire talk about killing the Giantess rampaging through the kingdom, and there is a more nuanced discussion of whether or not the Giantess should in fact be killed or not. The witch also reminds Red Riding Hood that the wolf killed earlier had a mother too. And then they go off singing that no one is alone, that everyone's actions affects everyone else, and then they go off and whack the giantess anyhow.
It didn't quite seem fair to me. I mean, one can see the argument for killing off the wolf, given the eating of various people and malicious intent in general. But the giantess is right -- Jack went off and invaded her house and stole her things and then went off and killed her husband. So they go kill the giantess because she is rampaging and stepping on people left and right. But then, the Baker argues against killing the Steward for killing Jack's mother, and everyone in general seems to think that giving Jack to the giantess to be killed is wrong, despite prior damages. The general consesus seems to be that offing people for prior mistakes is not a good thing to do. But right after that consensus, they go and blind the Giantess and kill her without a second thought. Does the Giantess not apply for some reason?
Maybe I just need to sit down a think a bit more about it. But it felt really rather off to me.
Spoilers
There's this very dizzying switch in tones that happens during the musical, from the frothy, funny, but mostly forgettable first half, to the rather disjointed but more interesting second half. The first half is mostly a telling of the stories of Cinderella, Jack of beanstalk fame, and the Baker and his wife, who want children, and how they gallivant around trying to lift a curse. Rapunzel, the witch, and Little Red Riding Hood all make their own appearances. And while much fun is poked at the fairy tales, ultimately everything is tied together in a nice big knot for the finale to Act 1 (which I thought was the finale, period, and was rather glad to find out that there was another act coming). I did like the parallel of Red Riding Hood and Jack's songs, about having found something rather scary and exciting and eye-opening at the same time. I sort of wish that had been followed through.
The second act just really confuses me. There's the sudden serious turn, which was rather welcome after the slight fluffiness of the beginning. But suddenly we have several random deaths thrown in, some of which are taken seriously and some of which are not. And then there's the entire talk about killing the Giantess rampaging through the kingdom, and there is a more nuanced discussion of whether or not the Giantess should in fact be killed or not. The witch also reminds Red Riding Hood that the wolf killed earlier had a mother too. And then they go off singing that no one is alone, that everyone's actions affects everyone else, and then they go off and whack the giantess anyhow.
It didn't quite seem fair to me. I mean, one can see the argument for killing off the wolf, given the eating of various people and malicious intent in general. But the giantess is right -- Jack went off and invaded her house and stole her things and then went off and killed her husband. So they go kill the giantess because she is rampaging and stepping on people left and right. But then, the Baker argues against killing the Steward for killing Jack's mother, and everyone in general seems to think that giving Jack to the giantess to be killed is wrong, despite prior damages. The general consesus seems to be that offing people for prior mistakes is not a good thing to do. But right after that consensus, they go and blind the Giantess and kill her without a second thought. Does the Giantess not apply for some reason?
Maybe I just need to sit down a think a bit more about it. But it felt really rather off to me.
no subject
no subject
Well, that's at least partly a warning, though. "Someone is on your side/someone else is not." Sondheim isn't arguing against the concept of making a call and choosing a side, there. He's saying that actions have consequences and you have to face up to those consequences, not that you should never act or that you're required to give up your friend for squishing because he made a mistake.
(And yeah, you know, it's a fairy tale musical. The audience is supposed to be on Jack's side.)
they go and blind the Giantess and kill her without a second thought
Well, they do, though. The beginning of No One Is Alone specifically frames the killing-the-Giantess decision as a difficult one.
no subject
Exactly. Sondheim said in an interview that I saw years back that most people miss the significance of the song because they focus on "No one is alone." It is not meant to be a comforting song about community or about how everything will turn out alright in the end. It imparts some harsh truths, too. For example, as you said, "someone else is not". Other examples: "Others may deceive you...No one acts alone. Careful. No one is alone...Sometimes people leave you halfway through the wood," etc. It will turn out alright only if you learn the essential truth that actions have consequences, and that you own up to your actions and be willing to sometimes do unpleasant things to make them right or better.
no subject
no subject
"I did like the parallel of Red Riding Hood and Jack's songs, about having found something rather scary and exciting and eye-opening at the same time. I sort of wish that had been followed through."
Isn't it in some ways? With the Baker's Wife and the Prince in the Woods, for example? In a way, i think that's in large part what the whole experience of going Into the Woods is all about -- finding things "scary and exciting and eye-opening at the same time"? *restrains self from channeling Shakespeare professor about the pastoral tradition*
There are always wolves,
There are always spells,
There are always beans,
Or a giant dwells there.
So into the woods you go again,
You have to every now and then.
Into the woods, no telling when,
Be ready for the journey.
Full score here (http://www.mit.edu/people/nocturne/athena/text/woods.html) if you're interested.
no subject
Agreed. I think the entire second act is a reflection on how a trip into the woods is "scary and exciting and eye-opening at the same time," such as with the Baker's Wife's brief tryst with the Prince, something that pleases her, disturbs her, confuses her, and shakes her world upside down...a sensation that cannot be codified, explained, or categorized by her standard, everyday morals or beliefs.
no subject
One of the problems with the video is that that performance had a particularly poor audience, as they laugh at some inappropriate moments. None of the deaths in the second act that seem to be comical due to the audience's reaction, are funny at all, as they usually play on stage, such as with Jack's mother and Rapunzel. The only really comedic one is when they turn on the Narrator, which isn't just a meta joke but has some disturbing thematic significance, too. Interestingly, in his very next play, Sondheim used the characters-turning-on-the-narrator concept again, in Assassins, when the Assassins gang up on the Balladeer and drive him off the stage in Another National Anthem.
But right after that consensus, they go and blind the Giantess and kill her without a second thought. Does the Giantess not apply for some reason?
One of the major lessons of the play is that in some circumstances the regular rules we have been taught growing up have to be ignored. Killing the Giantess is not the ideal option, but they have no other choice in this situation. She will not listen to reason, is still a very real danger, and has already killed many of their friends. It isn't so simple as "kill her without a second thought." Take for example this exchange with Little Red and Cinderella:
Little Red: I think my granny and my mother would be upset with me.
Cinderella: Why?
Little Red: They said to always make them proud. And here I am about to kill somebody.
Cinderella: Not somebody. A giant who has been doing harm.
Little Red: But the giant's a person. Aren't we to show forgiveness? Mother would be very unhappy with these circumstances.
Into the Woods is a very complex play, particularly in how the seeds for destruction (and rebirth) in the second act are all laid in the seemingly light operetta of the first act. The first act is the fairy tale, and the second is reality. In the real world, Jack has to pay for his crimes, Rapunzel's family must suffer for stealing the radishes, Cinderella and Rapunzel's princes eyes do not stop wandering after "happily ever after," etc. If you rewatch the first act, every single thread of the second was set up in the first. Sometimes the confusion of the first distracts us from the simplest little actions, such as Cinderella flinging the last bean that the Baker's Wife tries to trade with her for her golden shoes. As with most Sondheim plays, it really rewards multiple viewings.
no subject
Yes. When i wrote "I actually tend to want to stop after the first act because i know dark and depressing stuff is ahead," i meant to add that although i want to stop watching there, i can't because having seen it before i see so clearly all the stuff that is set up and know that there is so much that hasn't yet been dealt with.
"One of the major lessons of the play is that in some circumstances the regular rules we have been taught growing up have to be ignored."
Agreed. Although it bears pointing out the characters don't reject the tenet that killing people is bad, that human life gets priority over all other kinds, though the potential for the former is broached by the witch, and the latter is problematized in the whole discussion over the problem of the Giantess. "Last Midnight" is possibly my favorite bit of the whole show.
You're not good, you're not bad,
You're just nice.
I'm not good, I'm not nice,
I'm just right.
I'm the witch.
You're the world.
no subject
You're not good, you're not bad,
You're just nice.
I'm not good, I'm not nice,
I'm just right.
I'm the witch.
You're the world.
Completely agree. In the recent Broadway revival with Vanessa Williams, those lyrics were actually changed, which made me want to tear my hair out. It changed to (singing to the baby):
You're so pure
But stay here,
And in time, you'll mature,
And grow up
To be them,
So let's fly,
You and I,
Far away.
I'm the hitch,
I'm what no one believes...etc.
The end is changed too to...
I'm leaving you alone,
Squirming in the mess that you've made.
Fix it on your own,
Time for me to go, I'm afraid.
Back to what I know,
Back to long ago,
Safe inside the world that I'm from
Better ugly and spurned
With my powers returned--
And I fear, midnight's here.
Time to disappear...
Mother here I come!!!
I think Sondheim should have left well enough alone and kept them the way they are. The original is so much more powerful and meaningful, whereas the new lyrics seem rather trite and dumbed down.
no subject
no subject
no subject
And yeah, "Better ugly and spurned / With my powers returned..." is so trite and dumbed down compared to the powerful original. Especially because my interpretation of the original was that she didn't even necessarily demand that she get her powers back along with the curse of being ugly and spurned just so long as she was able to get the h*** out of Dodge -- away from the Giantess (so as to not be killed) and away from all these humans (who are driving her crazy).Nothing about powers in there, and i think it works better that way, on a lot of levels.
no subject
no subject
Killing the Giantess is a matter of survival, not right. In that much, they follow the Witch -- if it's the Giantess or them, they pick their own survival.
But, yes, the second act is confusing and painful next to the first. Which is intentional.
no subject
Also, specifically...
no subject
I've always seen "No One Is Alone" as a big influence on "Where Do We Go From Here?" in "Once More, With Feeling."