| re: The myth that the authors wanted it known as "A Musical Fable" | |
| Posted by: AlanScott 04:47 pm EST 12/30/24 | |
| In reply to: re: The myth that the authors wanted it known as "A Musical Fable" - scoot1er 06:02 pm EST 12/25/24 | |
|
|
|
| Hi, scoot1er. Sorry it’s taken me a few days to reply. I watched several Laurents videos on youtube, but couldn’t find the one you saw. If you can find it, please post a link. I’d like to see it. It was worthwhile watching the various interviews I did watch. I should explain why I feel confident that “a musical fable” was put there to try to get around Havoc’s objections. In the Dramatists Guild group discussion of the creation of the show, seemingly done in the early 1980s (definitely after the Lansbury production and before the Daly production), Laurents brought up the problems with Havoc. The other participants in the discussion were Sondheim, Styne and moderator Terrence McNally. Laurents also discussed the subject in Original Story By. Havoc demanded many changes to the script, most of which Laurents was willing to make. Unsurprisingly, Laurents went into more detail in Original Story By, and some details differed slightly from things he said in the group discussion. Where they diverge, I am inclined to go with what was in Original Story By, as Laurents would have had time to look back over notes and documents when writing it. The change Laurents refused to make was when Havoc demanded that it be made clear that June was 13 when she married and ran away. (In fact, she was 16.) Laurents felt it would make Rose too much of a monster if she didn’t go in pursuit of a 13-year-old who had gotten married. Havoc refused to sign a release. In both the group discussion and in Original Story By, Laurents mentioned that Merrick’s solution was to change June’s name to Claire. In neither does he mention “a musical fable,” In both he says that Havoc came to see the show in Philly and signed off. In the Dramatists Guild discussion, Sondheim then chimed in to say that the mistake made by the producers had been in thinking they could get away with giving Havoc a percentage. In the end, he said, she got percentages from both producers and from her sister. “That’s what it really came down to—money.” Contradicting some of this, and getting very specific about some things, is Erik Lee Preminger’s memoir, Gypsy and Me: At Home and on the Road With Gypsy Rose Lee. Preminger went into extensive detail about the situation. I'm not going into anything like the amount of detail he goes into as it's not necessary for this post. He’s quite sympathetic to his aunt, seeming to feel that Gypsy had been unfair in her portrayal of June, but June had let it slide because Gypsy was her sister and had worked hard on the book. But David Merrick was not a relative. She demanded changes to the script and royalties. According to Preminger, getting the royalties was not the problem, which seems to contradict what Sondheim said. It was the changes she demanded that were a problem. Gypsy promised June that she would see to it that casting and direction lessened or eliminated the things that bothered June. June signed a limited release. Five weeks into rehearsals, June was not satisfied that her desires were being met and filed suit to stop the show. It was at this time, according to Preminger, that Merrick came up with changing June to Claire and billing the show “a musical fable.” He says that Merrick “promised to keep June so tied up with lawyers that she’d be unable to stop the show.” An agreement was reached. I had surmised several years ago, when I realized that “a musical fable” was gone by Broadway (except, for reasons explained earlier, on the cast recording and the sheet music), that “a musical fable” was part of Merrick’s solution, even though it was not mentioned by either Laurents or Sondheim. But Preminger specifically mentions it. As he is also very specific about things like the dates on which things happened, I trust him on this. And it just makes sense. |
|
| reply | |
|
|
|
| Previous: | re: The myth that the authors wanted it known as "A Musical Fable" - scoot1er 06:02 pm EST 12/25/24 |
| Next: | re: The myth that the authors wanted it known as "A Musical Fable" - PlayWiz 03:51 pm EST 12/25/24 |
| Thread: | |
Time to render: 0.060715 seconds.