Re: Fiddler and The Rothschilds

[George Robinson <GRComm...>]

I'm disinclined to argue with Robert on this. His explanation, combined
with the disappointment that The Rothschilds "wasn't Fiddler," makes as
much sense as any darker explanation that leaps into my cynical brain.

However, I still think it's a better score than Fiddler.

And I like Irving Berlin (except for God Bless America -- I happen to
like White Christmas,although I would sooner eat broken glass than sing
it myself.)

George "If it's good enough for Bing and Fred and Ginger, it's good
enough for me" Robinson


Robert Cohen wrote:
> 
> Since my cousin (by marriage) _wrote_ the (best-selling) book from which THE
> ROTHSCHILDS was adapted, I suppose I should have some words of wisdom
> regarding its (only relative) lack of success as a musical.  But I'm not
> sure I have any special insight on the subject.
> 
> I do, however, have some reservations about what George has written here.  I
> think his proferred explanation is rather too glib; I respectfully suggest
> that George has wheeled into play a plausible, and always discouraging,
> thesis--to the effect that some American Jews and some American non-Jews are
> more comfortable w/ Jews being depicted as victims than as successful--and
> applied it, I think, not especially ... applicably.
> 
> Consider:  Would George's proferred explanation _really_ explain the
> phenomenal, world-wide appeal of FIDDLER (of which I was by no means a
> tremendous fan, btw)?  Did Japanese audiences, say, really shell-out bick
> bucks to see Fiddler cause they cared _that_ much to see Jews depicted as
> victims?  (And, btw, I think Fiddler's depictions of Jews and Judaism,
> however romanticized, are far from so uniformly negative, either.)  Surely
> not.
> 
> When I asked Theodore Bikel to comment in my NPR documentary, "One People,
> Many Voices:  American People Comes Of Age," about the astonishing success
> of Fiddler, he opined:  "It is universal because it is understood that what
> this is about is not a narrow, Jewish thing but an experience that can be
> shared:  poverty, oppression, persecution ... and tradition, and children
> who refuse to follow it."
> 
> That's a lot closer to the mark, I suspect.  Fiddler was a phenomenal
> success not because it so successfully depicted Jews as victims, but
> precisely because it transcended its subject(s) and context:  It had a
> *universal* appeal, because of its universal themes.
> 
> The songs from Fiddler--I don't really remember those from The Rothschilds
> musical, even though I saw it, in its origianl staging, and from front-row
> seats!--brilliantly succeeded in capturing and embodying that universal
> appeal.  Do you really think "Sunrise, Sunset" is, I imagine, played and/or
> sung in weddings all over the world because of how Fiddler did or didn't
> depict Jews?  No--it was a phenomenonally successful song because it
> captured an experience, and emotions, that every parent, every future
> parent, every potential parent, and even every quasi-parent (of nieces and
> nephews, friends' children, etc.)--in other words, everyone--could relate
> to.
> 
> (Though, btw, my favorite song from Fiddler is the Sabbath prayer of
> blessings for their girls.)
> 
> I'd really caution all of us from too readily invoking dark explanations for
> the greater popularity and success of things we don't like.
> 
> Then again, I'm all too ready to sally forth, darkly, on why Irving Berlin's
> infernal music was so popular....
> 
> --Robert Cohen
> 
> >Khaverim --
> >
> >Since the subject has come up indirectly, I thought I would pose a
> >question to the list regarding Fiddler on the Roof, or more accurately,
> >the next Bock-Harnick show, The Rothschilds.
> >
> >I have to admit that I have never seen The Rothschilds staged. However,
> >I am very fond of the original cast album and know large parts of the
> >score by heart. I have always wondered why the show was (comparatively)
> >a failure; I actually prefer the music and lyrics to those of Fiddler.
> >
> >I have always suspected that the reasons for its failure were two-fold.
> >First, it wasn't Fiddler -- how do you follow a success of that
> >magnitude and NOT disappoint people?
> >
> >Second, and I think more salient, its attitude towards its Jewish
> >protagonists and non-Jewish antagonists is very different. Fiddler
> >sentimentalizes the shtetl (as we have established earlier this week ;))
> >and makes loveable victims of its Jews. The Rothschilds paints a very
> >different picture -- it shows Jews who fight back and do so not with
> >conventional weapons but with their financial acumen. And it shows the
> >Gentiles as overtly hostile, uniformly so, and pretty damned nasty at
> >that (In fact, the casting of Keene Curtis as all the bad goyim sort of
> >creates a Universal Bad Gentile who transcends history.)
> >
> >Somehow I think it was easier for the theater-party crowds to handle
> >long-suffering noble shtetl Jews than a bunch of take-no-prisoners
> >wheeler-dealers who beat the Gentiles at their own game.
> >
> >Of course, it's also possible that the book was weak and the supporting
> >performances disappointing. Hey, I never got to see the show.
> >
> >At any rate, anyone who has looked into this, I'd welcome comments.
> >
> >George Robinson
> >
> >
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
> 

-- 
___________________________________________________________
ARE YOU A FREELANCE WRITER? 
Then you should be a member of the NATIONAL
WRITERS UNION!
Web <http://www.nwu.org>, Ph:(212) 254-0279,
Email <nwu (at) nwu(dot)org>

---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+