Skip to main content

Dan Rant

 I find deep pleasure in disliking something I'm "supposed to" like -- and that's how I feel about the current revival of "Ragtime."


Everything about this effort seems misguided. It's a resuscitation of a mediocre show that does not need to be resuscitated. Also, the "bold vision" seems to be this: "We've taken everything from the original production and made it slightly worse!" It's like the 1990s "Ragtime" -- but without a set. It's like the 1990s "Ragtime" -- but without Audra McDonald. It's like the 1990s "Ragtime" -- but without an effective publicity team. (It seemed especially unfortunate that the production announced a "first choice" Sarah, only to lose her. The team then announced a "second choice" Sarah, only to lose her. "Grab your wallet and come on out for....our *third* choice!")

"Why look for answers where none occur?" The earnest, rule-following stars of "Ragtime" have made media appearances -- and, when pressed to discuss the "thematic richness" of the show, they widen their eyes and talk about Terrence McNally's profound "racism is bad" message. That's to be expected.

What I can't tolerate is a new series of clips, in which the stars are filmed while listening to the cast album. They don't dance; they don't even wiggle in entertaining ways. They just sit solemnly -- at times, on very high notes, they clutch one another in awe.

I know that this is a nod to the film "Trolls" -- when the Justin Timberlake song came out, we were all treated to video footage of Anna Kendrick lip syncing with a hairbrush. But at least the hairbrush was interesting. It was sort of funny. With "Ragtime," you just see unshaven Astoria residents (Broadway actors) in sweatpants -- sitting in folding chairs and silently admiring their own work.

Enough already. When "Ragtime" wins Tony Awards, there should be an asterisk. (And the footnote should say this: "Bear in mind that the main competition in this odd, dispiriting year was....a revival of Chess.")

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to Host a Baby

-You have assumed responsibility for a mewling, puking ball of life, a yellow-lab pup. He will spit his half-digested kibble all over your shoes, all over your hard-cover edition of Jennifer Haigh's novel  Faith . He will eat your tables, your chairs, your "I {Heart] Montessori" magnet, placed too low on the fridge. When you try to watch Bette Davis in  Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte , on your TV, your dog will bark through the murder-prologue, for no apparent reason. He will whimper through Lena Dunham's  Girls , such that you have to rewind several times to catch every nuance of Andrew Rannells's ad-libbing--and, still, you'll have a nagging suspicion you've missed something. Your dog will poop on the kitchen floor, in the hallway, between the tiny bars of his crate. He'll announce his wakefulness at 5 AM, 2 AM, or while you and another human are mid-coitus. All this, and you get outside, and it's: "Don't let him pee on my tulips!" When...
3 comments
Read more

The Death of Bergoglio

  It's frustrating for me to hear Bergoglio described as "the less awful pope"--because awful is still awful. I think I get fixated on ideas of purity, which can be juvenile, but putting that aside, here are some things that Bergoglio could have done and did not. (I'm quoting from a survivor of sexual abuse at the hands of the Church.) He could levy the harshest penalty, excommunication, against a dozen or more of the most egregious abuse enabling church officials. (He's done this to no enablers, or predators for that matter.) He could insist that every diocese and religious order turn over every record they have about suspected and known abusers to law enforcement. Francis could order every prelate on the planet to post on his diocesan website the names of every proven, admitted and credibly accused child molesting cleric. (Imagine how much safer children would be if police, prosecutors, parents and the public knew the identities of these potentially dangerous me...
1 comment
Read more

Raymond Carver: "What's in Alaska?"

Outside, Mary held Jack's arm and walked with her head down. They moved slowly on the sidewalk. He listened to the scuffing sounds her shoes made. He heard the sharp and separate sound of a dog barking and above that a murmuring of very distant traffic.  She raised her head. "When we get home, Jack, I want to be fucked, talked to, diverted. Divert me, Jack. I need to be diverted tonight." She tightened her hold on his arm. He could feel the dampness in that shoe. He unlocked the door and flipped the light. "Come to bed," she said. "I'm coming," he said. He went to the kitchen and drank two glasses of water. He turned off the living-room light and felt his way along the wall into the bedroom. "Jack!" she yelled. "Jack!" "Jesus Christ, it's me!" he said. "I'm trying to get the light on." He found the lamp, and she sat up in bed. Her eyes were bright. He pulled the stem on the alarm and b...
1 comment
Read more