The Ball and the Hall

ALRIGHTY FOLKS, LET'S GET THIS SHOW ON THE ROAD. As you are aware, 2 scenes will be discussed and compared up in this blog post.

Scene 1: West Side Story's gym dance.

ba-BAM --->

Scene 2: Romeo and Juliet's ball.

ba-ba-BLAMM -->

Wait, was that Paul Rudd? What the hell? Paul Rudd plays Paris in Romeo+Juliet. Alrighty then. HOORAY FOR LEARNING NEW THINGS!

Anyways, on to the main event. I feel like

The End

One thing that really stuck for me is the popularity of live theatre. Back then, it was like a religion, literally. Now, not so much. On Broadway, yes, it is popular and many people go to them. But around here in Vancouver, as an example, most of the shows I've been to have only filled half the seats. Theater then had a different meaning then it does today, in other words. I guess I just don't like how theater is labeled nowadays. And that we won't make a lot of money, if any at all.

Would theater be more popular if we used mask work more frequently? Like in the good old days of Greece. That'd be cool. Coming back to how theater is viewed today, people would probably be a little creeped out. Especially if we were to do satyr plays. That stuff would not go well.

Anyway, I think I'd like to see a Greek performance back in the day if I could travel through time. Get a feel for what it was like. I picture BC Place split in half and cheering just as loudly as if there were a touchdown.

Final Thoughts

I apologize for the late submission, but I just had to get two-cents in here!
This term has been a very interesting experience for me. I have always had an interest in history and of course I have always loved theatre, but I had never had much knowledge of how theatre developed into the form we're studying.
I'm the type that will always attempt to argue the abstract, even if it doesn't align with my actual opinion. The discussion we had at the beginning of the year was, for the most part, one of those circumstances. I felt that although events which involved spectacle and entertainment could be considered "theatrical", I wouldn't consider them "theatre". Studying the many evolutionary forms of the art and the different ways that they have expanded and developed, has not altered my opinion much... it has, however, widened the spectrum of what I perceive as theatre. A chant, based on religious practices, would not fit my definition of theatre, but, knowing that theatre came from rituals worshipping Dionysus, theatre and choral chanting are much more closely related than I ever would have guessed.
Theatre is incredibly universal. It could almost be used as an example of convergent evolution, where different sects of the same species develop a similar skill at a similar time. Theatre has risen out of a variety of cultural practices, but has always been connected by the elements of storytelling and spectacle. From Europe to Asia, theatre has been a means of communication and entertainment, a way of connecting the masses through story. I'm sure if we delved into Native American culture we would see similarities in several of their practices as well.
The power of communication is one we're all familiar with.  The different styles of theatre are tailored to fit the needs of the society at the time, but it also has the power to influence change (we see this in Shakespeare's age, with the development of his language style). It is both influenced by society and also influential to society. As Oscar Wilde said "life imitates art almost as much as art imitates life".

- Sabrielle

History Of Theatre

The thing I found most interesting in the history if theatre, is the way the acoustics work in a Greek theatre. After hearing many educated guesses from people through history, I believe what most people have concluded. Theatre comes from rituals.Though there is no way to prove where theatre comes from, religion seems to be the beginning of many things. I suppose theatre falls under that category as well. I loved all the different rule alterations during the development of theatre, and how it is still changing today. From natives dancing around a fire praising spirits, to live puppet sex in vigorous harmony. Theatre has changed quite a bit since when ever it started. Even though it has come so far, it is best sometimes to consider your roots. It is like the Greek theatre. You could stand in the center of the orchestra, whisper, and people in the last row would hear what you're saying. Since then, shows around the world have tried to find a theatre that provides as good of acoustics as that but all they had to do was look back into the old ways.

Final Thoughts

Hello fellow bloggers,

I'm going to share my final thoughts about theatre. Exciting, I know... okay.. so.. I conclude.. Theatre is awesome!!

Ha I'm just kidding. Well it is awesome. No, I'm going to discuss how I never actually thought about theatre history before. Of course, there's history in everything ever made, but I never have actually took the time to really try to dig deep in.

I find it really interesting to think theatre started from brilliant works, such as Euripides or Shakespear, and have to developed into our huge spectacles of today!

Another thing I'd like to touch on was the asain theatre we learned about. Again, I had never thought of theatre from foreign places, but all the theatre genres sound so cool. Kabuki and showdow plays are the two that were my favourite. I really love big, eloborate costumes, and in most of the asain geres, theor costume were truly gorgeous

Anyway, I learned a lot and I'd just like to thank everyone for and awesome class!

Sophie Leroux

The thing that surprised me the most about theatre, is that it seems to naturally emerge within any society. If we look at both the Greek and the Japanese, both societies came up with theatre without influence from each other. Although their traditional forms have many distinct differences, they involve similar factors. I found this incredibly interesting. As if theatre is inherent in human nature and that it will always exist. For me, this realization has validated my choice to pursue performing because it is something that is very important to our culture. It was also neat to see how theatre evolves. Because people get so passionate, they want to revolutionize this art and make it their own. All of the rules (neoclassicism), choices (reducing the dithyramb), and rebellions (storm and stress/romanticism) individuals and groups of people have made in the past have shaped what theatre is today, which is very broad and diverse (this is why theatre is so hard to define). My idea of what theatre is hasn't changed much from the start of this course, but I now have a better understanding of why i define it the way I do. I feel that above all else, it must tell a story and entertain an audience. The story does not have to be anything concrete, but it must be something that has been thought out in order to have an influence on the viewers. My reasons for believing this are because, when we look at history, theatre was used as a tool to prove a point, create change, satirize, glorify, mock, etc. In general, theatre has been our way of communicating something to the masses. It is then the responsibility of the public to do with it as they will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJcCLr19tIs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Rlp1zrBl4g

Theatre Reflections

At the beginning of the year when we had the definitive theatre debate I was on the side that said that anything could be considered theatre as long as it involved players and an audience. In some ways I still agree with that I mean look at the ancient greeks and dithyramb or Japanese Banraku... If chanting in front of a crowd without dialogue and big puppet shows are "theatre" then who's to say that Pro-Wrestling, or a birthday party clown can't be considered the same.

However, my gut tells me that there are things in life that are more theatrical than others without actually crossing into the realm of theatre and that's where I stand.

Theatre is planned but not necessarily scripted, it has to be acted but sincere, it has to be a performance that resonates with the players and anyone watching through the 4th wall unbeknownst to the players.

Theatre is like emotion, it is a cluster of contradictions, but always powerful and present.

Theatre

Over this past few months I've learned a lot about theatre (mostly in the past few weeks of cramming, but hey, that's learning, right?)

The biggest thing I have realized is to not rush to compare different styles and genres of theatre, as well as everything that comes with it. Learning to appreciate everything for it's differences and similarities, much like anything in life.

Without learning about the origins of Greek Theatre, or Minstrel Shows, or the life of Stephen Sondheim, we wouldn't have what we know today as the Musical Theatre lifestyle that we love and live for.

The history of anything takes more than just a few steps, it takes an entire set of stairs to build up to what the present holds, and what the future promises.

The Art of Sharing

At the beginning of this semester, we were asked as a class: "What is Theatre?" Naturally this sparked a debate as obviously musicals and plays fit into the category, but other events that are theatrical in own manner could be debated to fit the definition of theatre. As a part of the Practice blog post, I wrote that "arguably, [theatre] could be anything you want it to be. But I think if we examine theatrical elements and determine what is crucial to most pieces of theatre, we may be able to be closer to defining the ever-undefinable art of theatre." (To view the entire blog post, go here.) Now that we are at the end of the semester, I feel as though I still agree with this statement.

We have traveled through the many eras of theatre, but one thing remains true: Theatre is about sharing the art of humanity with society and taking influences from society and integrating it. From Thespis stepping out of the Dithyrambic chorus and becoming the first actor to the introduction of the proscenium arch in the Italian Renaissance to Agnes DeMille's choreography in Oklahoma!, theatre continues to shape itself and redefine itself. It acts as a mirror to societies values and stories; the showgirls in the Ziegfeld Follies might not have been as popular in the time of Plautus' comedies, but in their respective eras, they were a hit simply because it was the sort of entertainment that the public was looking for. Theatre is a shared experience. The performers and the artists assemble to inspire the audiences, and the audiences and the general public inspire the artists to create these stories. In the theatre, the energy of the audience and the actors is shared infectiously. Theatre teaches us how to observe others and really listen. It shares ideas and stories. 

One of the theatrical elements that I think really defines theatre is one that Peter Brook declared. It is that there must be an agreement between the artists and the audience that a theatrical event is taking place. After all, two people can't share if only one of them knows that they are sharing. So let's share.

Theatre is the question!

This question has always struck me as unusual- because, theatre is theatre, how could it possibly be anything else? Yes of course, there's the argument that things that are theatrical in nature could in fact be identified as theatre, but I just don't agree.

All year we have been studying Musical Theatre History. I feel that everything that we touched on: from Greek tragedies, to Operetta, to the book musicals of today, can be fully and unquestionably considered to be theatre. I feel like instead of broadening my views on the definition of theatre, the things we have learned this semester actually narrowed them. At the beginning of the semester I believed that most things could be considered to be theatre, if there was some sort of spectacle and spectatorship involved, but now, I'm not so sure. Certainly the phenomenon of gladiators influenced the development of what theatre is today, but if it is theatre, then a hockey game could be called theatre, and that's just something I can't agree with. Because we didn't really study gladiators and hockey players did we? We studied playwrights and opera singers and the Quem quaeritis tropes. Those are all things that I would consider to be theatre. Or at least steps toward it.

I don't think this new perspective is narrow-minded in any way. It really just comes down to personal opinion, and I think that theatre in its true form was revealed to us through the things that we have learned throughout the semester.

So to conclude...

Theatre:

Not theatre:

Hello! So I am not entirely sure what I am supposed to do for this post but here is what I think I was asked for... Funnily enough I feel that our first class involving our obnoxious discussion about, "What is Theatre?" gave us an amazing insight into the link between each topic we studied this semester! That link is...........EVERYTHING WE LEARNED ABOUT THIS SEMESTER HAS BEEN CONSIDERED THEATRE AT AT LEAST SOME POINT IN HISTORY!!! ...I know shocking but it's true! Due to this link I have learned that what theatre actually is definitely comes down to personal interpretation, era, personal opinion, and taste. A strong example of this is me showing my sister Kabuki theatre and her saying, and I quote, "What the f&$@ is this? Do people actually watch this stuff?", after I had just described how wonderful it was. I feel that my opinion of what theatre is has broadened simply because I now know so many different types of theatre from so many different periods in time.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLUPwdAfNPY


As a closing statement I’d just like to say that I have had a wonderful year with all of you and that this class has been hugely complimented by all of your strong and unique personalities and incites. I could not have chosen a better class or a better to teacher to join and guide me in exploring the history of our crazy career path that is theatre. I Love you All! Break a leg next week! XOXO

after this semester I have actually changed my mind of what my definition of theatre is.  I now believe that theatre is your class play/musical/orchestra/dance/ etc. type performance on a traditional stage set up with an audience.  Things such as street performers, flash mobs, weddings, movies and such I view as being entertainment.  I feel that entertainment is a more broad definition than theatre which is why I think it pertains better to performances that are not on your traditional stage.  another reason is because if we are in the musical THEATRE program we are not learning how to do flash mobs and rehearse weddings... we are learning how to sing, dance, and act, which are your everyday theatre experiences.  I believe there are many different forms of entertainment, theatre being one specific section to it all.

As simple as that. THE END.

Final Thoughts

This is still a strange question for me.  I'm one of the people who argued that darn near anything can be classified as theatre depending on the situation and the person.  I still believe this strongly, and though I can understand where people from other points of view are coming from, I don't think I'm likely to change my mind, haha.

As far as what we've done this year, and how it has affected my point of view, there are quite a few things of note.  For instance, I really enjoyed studying plays with their musical counterparts, and beginning to understand the tendencies that occur when a show is rewritten into a musical format.  I think that, based on what we have studied this year, I have come to a few conclusions as to what these tendencies are.
   1. Music is added to create a heightened mood or sense of being for the characters (as we have been told since the beginning of the year - a character sings when they mere words cannot express what they want to say).  I believe this assists the audience in following a character's journey through the plot of the show.
   2. In rewriting a show with music it is often the goal of the writer/directing team to create something new, or perhaps a better word is, relevant.  For example, with Spring Awakening, the difference between the two versions of the show is over 100 years, and yet the issues that are raised are still valid concerns in today's modern world.  The introduction of popular sounding music and adding a sort of suspension of disbelief with the sudden shifts from early 20th century speech to modern rock, I believe,  makes the show more accessible to audiences today.

To end this post I think it might be prudent to examine a piece from a certain Stephen Sondheim show that we are about to audition for.  "Into the Woods" is an excellent example of what I was saying above; you can't get much more classic than the fairy tales that are being told in this show.  However, Mr. Sondheim and James Lapine manage to take those fairy tales and make them relevant to the audience of today by throwing them on their head in the second act, creating three dimensional characters out of what used to be sheer stereotypes, and having their actions be riddled with consequences, not at all like the classic fairy tales we grew up with.

Apologies for the awkward text at the beginning, it's not like that the whole way through I promise.

Innovations
The main realizations I had about theatre through this course are its development through innovators. The modern musical theatre show we see today is only a result of people who broke away from traditional constrictions and conventions of theatre and revolutionized aspects of theatre. Innovations through each age is what allows us to enjoy the theatre that we love to see today.
Not just acting styles has allowed for these changes. Everything from set design to the sociological aspects of societies has influenced what we see on stages today.
Italian designers such as Serlio helped to develop perspective scenery on stage and allow for new technologies in set movement. Our standard indoor theatre buildings with the proscenium arch as taken extreme changes since the times of the ancient Greeks and their huge outdoor ampitheatre.
Even the topics of shows has changed- whereas the ancient Greeks mainly wrote about god and dieties, Medeival people wrote about religion as well; in fact, the initial main purpose of theatre in this time was to affirm and establish faith throughout the society. Fast forward to 2011, and we have musicals ridiculing the Morman religion (in a charming way). 
It took ALOT to create the genre of musical theatre that we love so much- it has really only come to develop in the last century. Although many things have changed since the time of the Greeks, many elements have contiued in some way. This can be seen with elements such as the stock characters in the comedies of ancient Rome. These were then rediscovered in the renaissance, and playwrights such as Moliere used this same type of stock characters in commedia de'arte.  Now, it is carried over into countless shows such as A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum.
The Florentine Camarata, in an attempt to recreate Greek and Roman theatre, started developing opera which was a great influence on the development of musical theatre.
In short, I made the connection that musical theatre didn't just spring up out of nowhere from talented people such as Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, and the Gershwin brothers.  Musical theatre is the product of human innovations through centuries and centuries, and is still a work in progress today. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2ODfuMMyss
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDZC5UOPb6E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s62MrU8mHx4

Final Thoughts: What is Theatre

My notion of the definition of theatre has not changed much, if at all. It's always been a very broad term for me, and is subjective. Different things mean different things to different people, and theatre is no exception. What one may see as theatre, others may not. For me, it's such a broad term that you can't really label it. There are so many forms of theatre that weren't touched on in class that would be so exciting to explore. For example, flash mobs, human behaviour, and popular artists such as Mariah Carey. To me, allof these are things which qualify as theatre. As it is, our time together was short and we were only able to explore one of the many branches of the theatre tree. A recurring theme which popped up for me during the course was rebellion against higher powers. For Oedipus, it was fate. For Romeo and Juliet and Spring Awakening, it was the parents. For West Side Story, it was human ignorance and our own minds and preconceptions. Unfortunately, in the span of a term we can only dig so deep. Although we merely scratched the surface of available knowledge, knowing this class, I'm sure we'll keep searching.

To end on a high note:

But... Seriously guys... What IS theatre?

At this time, I'd like you to click on the link below and listen to this while reading my post. I think it adds to the experience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbN0g8-zbdY

Alright guys, here we go. Theatre History is wrapping up, writing a final blog, it's time to say goodbye.

But let's all take a moment to reflect.

A big thing for me in this class that I've gained is a perspective of everything that has lead to what we call modern Musical Theatre. Seeing how theatrics from way-back-when influence our era is really quite interesting, and I think knowing how to observe and comment on these things can only further our knowledge as a unit in understanding the beast that is musical theatre.

Ah, musical theatre, it is a beautiful beast.

Has my perception on the difference between theatrical/theatre changed? Probably. I think my original view on theatre prior this class was the 'Oh, everything's theatre, because theatre is in all of us' kind of thing that you get out of fortune cookies. I do still feel that to a degree, but the more I think looking back at watching (and researching on) the projects on every era and having a few thoughts of 'Hm. I don't know if I totally think of that as 'theatre.' necessarily.' Important to theatre? Definitely. A puzzle piece to the world of theatre as we know it? I fully think so. But I see a bit more of a difference between certain things.

And hey, maybe in like, 50 years, when Joel Grey's brain has been placed in a cyborg to preserve his career forever and Phantom on Broadway has maybe, perhaps, closed, students at Cap in the year 2062 will look back at what we're doing and go 'But wait, how can you call that theatre?' And they will face that same debate on the first day of class.

But until that time, I believe we have to say goodbye.

http://prezi.com/_93dedy2r8bp/mature-book-musicals-oklahoma-to-the-book-of-mormon/

Questions:
1.When did Oscar Hammerstein die?
-1960
2.All the awards Richard Rodgers won were collectively known as a what?
-EGOT
3.Who was Stephen Sonheim's Mentor?
-Oscar Hammerstein
4.The creators of, "The Book of Mormon", were also the creators of what TV show?
-"South Park"

....yes we did four questions...not sure if they all will be used but there they are just in case :)

Henry, Elise and Sophies Questions

Heres our questions:

Who was the librettest out of the parteners, Gilbert or Sullivan?
-Gilbert

What was the Savoy Theatre originally going to be called?
-Beaufort

What was the name of a well known Gilbert and Sullivan play, the only one to be set in an asian country?
-The Mikado



http://prezi.com/ebgsiooejhkj/present/?auth_key=zewbo7b&follow=agw3kpdqkk2o

Makayla And Paige's Trivia Questions

Still wrestling to get the project onto the site, but until that point, here are our trivia questions!

1.What was the first musical comedy to win a Pulitzer Prize for Drama? (Of Thee I Sing)

2.Which Irving Berlin tune almost replaced the American national anthem? (God Bless America)

3.What was something that was new to musicals in this era? (Equal balance between music/plot development/character journey)

Early Opera and 19th Century Opera

Here is the Prezi presentation by Sabrielle and I.

Musically Speaking Project - Opera on Prezi

Questions -
1. The ideas of the _______ _______ originated the style of music known as monody. (ANSWER - Florentine Camerata)
2. About 70% of singers in the Baroque period were men, emasculated to preserve their high voices. What were they called? (ANSWER - Castrati)
3. Who created the concept of Gesamtkunstwerk (total art work) and created the Ring Cycle? (ANSWER - Richard Wagner)

19th Century Europe
http://prezi.com/uoy44tudyvdq/19th-century-europe/

The most memorable moments in both Romeo and Julliet and West Side Story is the dance/ party scenes. Both involve members from both families being at the event, involves some sort of "partying" and has a member of the families being in some sort of conflict with the other. The only difference is that in West Side Story the families know that they are at the same party.

WSS VIDEO                             R&J VIDEO

My personal opinion is that R&J and WSS cannot be compared because of the difference time periods they are set in and also the language. In both cases, they are so vastly different that the comparision could only be made as a general comment rather than a comparision of the same thing. Both stories are good in their own way with their own merit.

Burlesque, Vaudeville, Extraviganza

http://prezi.com/ilhqj3-w9-pd/present/?auth_key=utc240m&follow=rgavjt8wiinc


Questions:
1. Word Burlesque comes from with language?
2. Who was the father of American Vaudeville?
3. What are the 5 types of specticle?


Answers:
1. Italian
2. Benjamin Franklin Keith
3. Equestrian, Military, Burlesque, Fairy, and Romance.

18th Century Opera Round Two

Race in American Musical Theatre

Here is a link to Katherine, Ben, and my Prezi - http://prezi.com/sqjgveckcoq7/present/?auth_key=u0ej3qr&follow=8_phfsvz7bup
 

Also, here is my section of the bibliography:

Bibliography

Jones III, Marshall. "Theatre Communications Group - American Theatre - March 2012." 24 March 2012. Theatre Communications Group. Article. 30 March 2012.

Padgett, Ken. Blackface! - A History of Minstrel Shows. 13 March 2012. 30 March 2012. <http://www.black-face.com/minstrel-shows.htm>.

—. Blackface! - The History of Racist Blackface Stereotypes. 13 March 2012. 30 March 2012. <http://www.black-face.com/>.

Public. Youtube. 30 March 2012. 30 March 2012. <www.youtube.com>.

Rogin, Michael. Blackface, White noise: Jewish Immigrants in the Hollywood Melting Pot. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996. Online book section.

Yes Sir, Mr. Bones. Dir. Ron Ormond. Perf. Chick Watts, Cotton Watts and Ches Davis. 1951.

 And our three questions:

Q: What were the two different methods of applying blackface?

A: Burnt cork over a layer of cocoa butter or black grease paint.

Q: What was “the first full length musical, written and played by blacks to be performed at a major Broadway house.”

A: In Dahomey

Q: Who was the composer of “Porgy and Bess”?

A: George Gershwin

The Expressions of LUUURRRVE

Since I am a romantic, the two scenes that stood out to me as having the most similarities in Romeo and Juliet and in West Side Story are the scenes in which Tony/Romeo profess their great love for a woman.  They are both young men that have been forever changed after having laid eyes on a particular woman.

In West Side Story, this exclamation of love is expressed in the form of song, titled “Maria”.  Tony is in wonderment at this new woman he has met, Maria.  This song is sung shortly after Tony and Maria meet.  Here are some lyrics that represent the emotion and feel of the song:
“The most beautiful sound I ever heard (Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria)
All the beautiful sounds in the world in a single word (Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria, Maria)
Maria!
I just met a girl named Maria
And suddenly that name
Will never be the same
To me”

In Romeo and Juliet, a similar exclamation of love is made by Romeo of Juliet, in the form of a now famous soliloquy.  Beginning with the line “But soft! What light through yonder window breaks?” Romeo is in wonderment at Juliet, whom he had recently met.  She is beautiful to him, and he spends this speech explaining her beauty.  Here is an excerpt from his soliloquy:

“The brightness of her cheek would shame those stars

As daylight doth a lamp; her eyes in heaven

Would through the airy region stream so bright

That birds would sing and think it were not night.

See how she leans her cheek upon her hand!

O that I were a glove upon that hand,

That I might touch that cheek!”

 http://www.monologuearchive.com/s/shakespeare_068.html

These two scenes are similar for obvious reasons: these two young men have just fallen in love with a woman and are expressing that love.  However, they do differ from each other.  “Maria” has simple lyrics.  The object of the song is clear, and there are only a few different lyrics throughout the song and they are repeated.  To profess his love for Maria, Tony is mulling over her name and how that one name has forever changed his outlook on life.  Romeo’s soliloquy differs from this greatly.  It is much more complex in terms of its dialogue.  It uses poetic devices and diverse comparisons to describe his love for Juliet.  In the end, however, both of these songs generally convey the same message: LURVE!   

Romeo and Juliet vs West Side Story

I love Romeo and Juliet. I like West Side Story too, but Romeo and Juliet is just so good! People don't like it because they think the story is stupid, or they can't keep up with the language, but it is a language evolved into what you speak today. The two stories are the exact same. The only difference is that Maria does not kill herself. The problem with Shakespeare is that people are forced to read it in high school. Well, when you read lines off a page, the story does not move very smoothly. When you go to see it and the lines actually sound like a conversation, the show has a lot more substance. I feel that West Side Story is the equivalent to the new Oceans Eleven. It is a great movie and it is very entertaining and clever, but a lot of people only know the version with George Clooney. They don't know about the fabulous original 1960 movie with Frank Sinatra and The Rat Pack. It is sort of like For Good from Wicked, and then For Good from Glee.

Shakespear's West Side?

It’s clear that most people see and believe these two pieces of art to be separate entities, which I fully agree, however it seems almost inhuman to not compare them. Without comparisons, we wouldn’t have the ability to decide the things we like.

Personally speaking, I would choose WWS over R+J. Why? Because it has singing and dancing, big surprise, though this is not to discredit R+J. In fact, I believe that WWS gives new life to R+J, for those (like me) who find Shakespeare’s work a bit daunting. After knowing a version of the R+J story, I think many people would want to research the root of WWS and discover the play which the musical was based off of. Not only does this enhance your knowledge of the musical, but it also can make it more enjoyable by find the similarities, and how they have been modernized.

Some of the comparisons (which have been mentioned) are…

·         The Montagues and The Capulets – The Jets and The Sharkes

·         Romeo falls in love and gets killed – Tony falls in love and gets killed

·         Juliet has a relative killed by her lover – Maria has a relative killed by her lover

·         The Prince tells the families that if there was another riot that the heads of each family would be killed – The Lieutenant tells the Puerto Ricans and the Americans that if they get into another fight, they’ll be taken to jail.

·         Both stories have an accidental death, which causes the hero to kill their lover’s relative.\

·         Both a meeting moment at the dance

·         Both have a romantic moment on an outside structure

·         And both have a fight near the end, which leads to death.

Of course we could do this whole comparison thing with Romeo and Juliet and the animated film Gnomeo and Juliet. But I’ll leave that for another day.

Romeo and Juliet vs. West Side Story

While the two remarkable pieces of theatre are beautiful and have achieved great success in their own right, I have to say that Shakespeare will always hold the highest esteem in my mind.
While West Side Story's jazzy melodies and awesome dances are easy to fall in love with, it lacks the tragic irony that we see in Romeo and Juliet. Where both the lovers murder themselves for love of each other in R&J, Tony is killed by Maria's prospective husband. This adaptation does not follow the thematic thread of true love, as outlined in the play, but is perfect to illustrate the major theme of discrimination in the Musical. West Side was written as a social statement about discrimination and gang war in the 1950s, the additional themes make it arguably a little more layered than Shakespeare's tragedy, which could then be seen as beautiful in it's simplicity.
Romeo and Juliet iconicized the forbidden love scenario that perpetrates our culture and has given us a model of young passion, which so many now compare themselves to. I'm not going to say it was the first of its kind, but it certainly was the biggest.
Romeo and Juliet is also timeless, which gives it an advantage. There have been hundreds if not thousands of different versions. It's ability to adapt to every culture and every period is just one of the many things that keeps it alive. West Side Story does not have this name versatility, the lyrics alone clearly establish the setting. Mounting a production of West Side set in 18th century London would be as difficult as performing "Grease" as cavemen.
Here are two movie trailers for Romeo and Juliet, completely different from each other.

Romeo and Juliet v. West Side Story:

In my opinion, I do not think that R+J can be compared to WSS at all because of the difference in language.  R+J is a very serious play if you think about it, whereas WSS is your typical cheesy musical.  Yes, of course WSS has it's deep moments with individual characters but after watching it I only remember the life in the sound of the music and the difficulty in choreography.  After watching R+J I think about the sincerity in their words and how carefully they were chosen to develop specific emotions, atmosphere, mood, etc.  I know I am not the only one who feels this way.  Although I love musicals much more than plays, Romeo and Juliet is one of the greatest plays I have ever seen and I love it just as much as any musical.  It is rare, but that is what makes it so interesting to pick out the difference between such a wonderfully written play and a fantastic musical.

19th and 20th C. Operetta/Challenges to Operetta

http://prezi.com/nsietbz6p6cn/american-operetta-in-the-19th-and-20th-centurychallenges-to-operetta/

Gwen And Justin

QUESTIONS:
1. What is arguably the most successful American Operetta of the 19th Century?
2. Who founded the Ziegfeld Follies
3. In what year did Tin Pan Alley find a great resource in sheet music causing sales of millions of copies within the year


ANSWERS:
1. Robin Hood
2. Florenz Ziegfeld
3. 1910


 Works Cited
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operetta
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/broadway/hello/operetta.html
http://www.essortment.com/musicals-artists-history-60668.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_Pan_Alley
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziegfeld_Follies
McLamore, Alyson. Musical Theatre: An Appreciation. Upper Saddle River: Person, 2004.
Wilson, Edwin, and Alvin Goldfarb. Living Theatre: A History. 4 ed. Boston: McGraw, 2003.