A Professor Professes

Apologies for the hiatus.

Funnily enough the world has continued to spin in my absence and MusicalTalk has continued its fine work with an interview with Professor Robert Gordon. And he has a theory or two.

Musical comedy: we started it

Basically the Americans often claim musical comedy as their own. They invented it, they perfected it. Well, it ain't necessarily so, says the Good Prof. In fact the musical comedy is a British thing, starting with Gilbert and Sullivan and continuing via the Princess theatre musicals of Guy Bolton and PG Wodehouse.

So not only did we give them classical liberalism and the philosophical underpinning of the Founding Fathers, we're also claiming Pal Joey. All of which explains why the Yanks are a bit miffed and why Broadway critics can get a bit snarky when it comes to British musicals.

Well I've looked at the G&S influence before. Now I'm not denying that it's there, only that it's not really what's important. The Good Prof cites the patter songs in the Gershwins' Of Thee I Sing. But the patter songs aren't really what we think of when we think of Gershwin. A Gershwin song is highbrow slang, blue notes and energizing syncopation, all of which are fairly non-Gilbertian and non-Sullivanian.

The Princess musicals may make a better case. I can't say I know much about 'em. But it's odd that, if they are such significant shows, that they are so little-known. Then again, significance is not always the same thing as enduring appeal.

Advancing it Backwards

No, not the plot of Merrily We Roll Along.

Instead the discussion turned to whether the newer Broadway shows - The Producers, Avenue Q, Hairspray, The Book of Mormon - represent a new kind of musical comedy. Not really, says the Good Prof. Critics have over-emphasized their innovations but, in truth, these are old-fashioned shows.

Couldn't agree more. Structurally they follow most of the conventions (two acts, a romantic plot) and musically they tend to hark back to old song styles. Nothing wrong with that.

Where they do innovate is in the choice of subject matter. Part of the joke of these shows is the clash between subject and form: high-kicking Nazis and cheery songs about racism. These shows play on the conventions of musical comedy and, in doing so, need to maintain some of the conventions themselves. You could say that they are advancing the form backwards.

Is Billy Elliot the Greatest British Musical Ever?

Not a bad choice.

But I wouldn't agree with the Good Prof's reasons which are:

(1) that the events of the Miners' Strike still resonate in people's memories
(2) because it's about a boy wanting to dance, this justifies the story being told as a musical

I'd say that (1) won't be true for everyone. It's not the vividness of audience members' memories that makes the show work but the convincing way in which the authors have portrayed the tension and atmosphere of the miners' community. On (2) I'd agree that every musical needs a justification for being a musical. But if musicals can only be justified if they are about dancing (or, presumably, singing) then we're seriously limiting their scope.

So what is the greatest British musical ever? Oliver! is the obvious choice but personally I'd plump for Jesus Christ Superstar. In fact it may well be the greatest musical ever.

Don't tell the Americans.