Mary Rodgers passed away yesterday at the age of 83. The headline of the AP story about her death noted her as the author of the book Freaky Friday. And she was, and it might be her best-known credential to many of a more recent vintage. But she first came to fame as the composer of The Mad Show off-Broadway (in which she collaborated with, among others, Stephen Sondheim), and then most famously the hit musical Once Upon a Mattress. That show starred Carol Burnett, was done as a TV special (and repeated for many years), revived on Broadway with Sarah Jessica Parker and re-made for TV with Tracey Ullman. She wrote several musicals and children's books (and wrote the screenplay to the film version of Freaky Friday -- and the film The Devil and Max Devlin that starred Bill Cosby was based on her short story -- and also contributed songs to the landmark album, Free to Be...You and Me. While she's also known as the daughter of Broadway legend Richard Rodgers, what's less known is that she also the mother of Adam Guettel, who wrote the score to the Tony-winning The Light at the Piazza. How's this for a modest quote from someone who had a very successful career in several areas, and did wonderful, memorable work: "I had a pleasant talent but not an incredible talent....I was not my father or my son. And you have to abandon all kinds of things." Once Upon a Mattress began life off-Broadway, but soon transferred to Broadway, where it ran for 244 performances. But it's had a huge after-life, not just on Broadway and TV, but high schools, colleges and community theaters. I wasn't crazy about the recent 2005 TV movie version of Once Upon a Mattress. Part of why is because Tracey Ullman was too old for the part -- not that she herself wasn't wonderful -- she was -- but the casting forced Prince Dauntless to be much older in turn, and that made him seem not merely immature as written, under mother's thumb, but sad and pathetic. Also, in casting Carol Burnett as the Queen, they rewrote things and changed the focus. And in doing so, they cut my favorite song, "Very Soft Shoes." Rather than just a single song, I want to include a few numbers, because Mary Rodgers deserves them. (She wrote a great deal more than just Once Upon a Mattress, as I've noted, but I like it so much that that's what we're going with...) First, here's the original TV version with Carol Burnett recreating her Broadway role as Princess Winifred. (This is the black-and-white version, made in 1964. They remade it later in color in 1972, also with Burnett and some of the same cast.) The very smart and clever lyrics are by Marshall Barer. This is "Shy." Much as I didn't particularly care for the recent TV filmed-remake, there was one bit of casting that worked, Zooey Deschanel as Lady Larkin and Matthew Morrison as Sir Harry. And I particularly wanted to include their "In a Little While" to show that Mary Rodgers could write a ballad as lovely as her father. (And Mr. Barer has some particularly good rhymes here.) To those who don't know the show, the Queen wants to keep her son the Prince under her thumb, and she has declared that no one in the kingdom can marry until he does. And her standards for a match are impossibly high. This causes some problems, as you might imagine, particularly here for Lady Larkin and Prince Harry, who are deeply in love. Unmarried, of course. And...going to have a baby. So, she implores him to go out and find a princess who can meet the Queen's requirements, so that the Prince can marry. And then, they can as well -- before the baby arrives. In a little while. Finally, I can't leave "Once Upon a Mattress" without including my favorite song. As I said, it was cut from the TV movie, for which my teeth have only recently become slightly ungnashed. They included it in the two earlier TV productions, but I can't find footage of it. But here is Matt Maddox as the Jester singing an ode of love to his father, the greatest Jester of them all, from the Original Broadway Cast. I can't explain why I love, "Very Soft Shoes," but I think it's all wrapped in the music being wonderful, the lyrics tender, whimsical and funny, and the whole thing ultimately just so richly and exudingly affectionate, without a touch of maudlin in sight. Okay, I said "finally," but here's a bonus, because you deserve it. And so, as I said, does Mary Rodgers.
While this isn't my favorite song by Mary Rodgers (that's the one above), this song has my favorite passage of anything Mary Rodgers and Marshall Barer wrote. About as beautiful, wistful, whimsical and tender as a passage can get. It comes at the opening of the show, right after the overture, when the Minstrel (sung here by Harry Snow) tells the story of The Princess and the Pea (afterwords explaining that that''s not the whole story, which we then get in the show). So, this is largely just a straight forward narrative song, "Many Moons Ago." But within it, there is a passage -- sung twice here -- which is the heart of the evening, and transcends that. In fact, the passage is repeated at, literally, the very end of the show and is where the curtain comes down and how Once Upon a Mattress ends. I'll just give you a heads-up by saying that it begins with the words, "For a princess is a delicate thing...." For me, music and lyrics don't meld together a whole lot better than those few bars and words. And a testament to what you can do with simplicity. Besides, it also seems to right way to go out on a tribute to Mary Rodgers...
0 Comments
I was having a conversation with a friend a couple weeks ago, and he mentioned something that surprised me. He reads the website, he says, and tends to check it out when one of my Facebook postings comes to his attention with a link to the site. He said he checks out Elisberg Industries a few times a week and was stunned to learn that I have around three postings or so every single day. (I said he's a friend, not observant...)
I was a little surprised, I must acknowledge, since every post is dated, with...well, the date. So, it's not terribly difficult to see what was posted when. On the other hand, I guess if you're not looking for it, there's no reason to pay attention to dates. He suggested that I let people know that I write as much as I do. And that way, they might check things out more often. I do suspect that most people do grasp the fact, so that it's not necessarily, but then if a friend was blissfully unaware, perhaps others are, too. I suppose I could have also said to him that since he does seem to enjoy the site, checking in a few times every week, he could also just bookmark the page and check back without the Facebook prompting, but there's certainly no need for him to do that. After all, as long as I'm going to go around dropping little bread crumbs all over Facebook and Twitter, he and others might as well take advantage of it. That is the point of doing so, after all. By the way, I should note that I'm as stunned as my friend that I write all these postings every day. I didn't know that there was that much folderol to yammer about. Or that there were that many hours in a day -- although it does seem that the more yammering, the fewer hours exist. Odd how life works out like that. Anyway, whether I end up filling up these hallways with even more or less each day as time passes, the point is moot, since the larger point is the "each day" concept, which my friend now grasps...since I told him. And as he requested, since I've now told you. Even though I think you know it already. I'll add that if anyone would like to get any of these mystical little Facebook or Twitter updates, feel free to click on those "Follow" and "Friend" thingees. There are links at the top of this page -- but as a public service to make it even easier for those who hate to scroll upward, you can get to my Facebook page here and Twitterland here. (On occasion, I even post extraneous things there randomly that don't make it here onto Elisberg Industries. Side Note: If you'd like to know the definition of frivolous information, that might be it.) Anyway, I've now made my friend happy. Though I'd bet cash money he doesn't see this and therefore doesn't know... I've long been a fan of Zoe Kazan. She's never quite broken through yet, but with wonderful performances in small but terrific films like Happythankyoumoreplease (written and directed by Josh Radnor of How I Met Your Mother), Me and Orson Welles, and Ruby Sparks, which she also wrote and directed, and deserved a much better fate. By accident while looking for something else, I just came across the trailer for an upcoming movie for the Fall, titled What If”. It not only looks charming, thoughtful and potentially quite good, but it could help finally make her a bigger name, co-starring in a romantic comedy opposite Daniel Radcliffe. Side note for screenwriting fans: she's the daughter of writers Nicholas Kazan (Reversal of Fortune and Matilda) and Robin Swicord (Little Women, Memoirs of a Geisha and Matilda). Bonus note: and granddaughter of Elia Kazan. Here's the trailer. "This is not the party of Reagan. Today the conservative movement took a backseat to liberal Democrats in the state of Mississippi."
-- Chris McDaniel (R-MS), defeated candidate in the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate Chris McDaniel was the candidate of the Tea Party (tm) corporation and is quite upset at having lost the primary election to sitting senator Thad Cochran. He is right to be upset at losing -- just as anyone is right to be upset at losing. He's also right that the Republican Party today is not the "party of Reagan." It's far more conservative. Much as Mr. McDaniel would like to hide behind the shadow of Ronald Reagan in TeaPartyland, the truth is it's likely that Ronald Reagan could not have gotten past most any Republican primary today and gotten elected in today’s GOP. Consider a few realities. Ronald Reagan raised taxes 11 times. Ronald Reagan voted to raise the debt ceiling 18 times. Under Ronald Reagan, the national debt went from $700 billion to $3 trillion. Under Ronald Reagan, the federal bureaucracy increased by 60,000 government jobs. Ronald Reagan bailed out the Social Security program with $165 billion. As governor of California, Ronald Reagan oversaw the largest tax increase in state history. As governor of California, Ronald Reagan oversaw the expansion of Medi-Cal (the state's Medicaid program). When he was governor of California, Ronald Reagan vocally opposed the Briggs Initiative, which would have blocked gays from teaching in public schools, helping defeat the proposition. Ronald Reagan supported stronger emission laws. After an assassination attempt, and when his press secretary James Brady was shot, Ronald Reagan supported stricter gun control laws. Ronald Reagan signed an amnesty that granted citizenship to over one million illegal aliens. In today’s Republican Party, Ronald Reagan would likely be dismissed as a RINO. A former union president and member of the Hollywood elite. By the way, it's not just me who says Ronald Reagan wouldn't be acceptable to today's Tea Party (tm) corporation or the deeply far-right Republic Party that it's become. Consider -- Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) has said, “Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting elected as a Republican.” Former presidential candidate and governor Mike Huckabbee (R-AR) commented that “Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult, if not impossible, time being nominated in this atmosphere of the Republican Party.” Or this from someone who knew him well -- “If you look at my father and you just knew him as governor — raised taxes, signed an abortion bill, no-fault divorce, and a few other things — today, the argument against him would come from the right, not from the left." That was said by his son, conservative talk show host Michael Reagan. So, yes, Chris McDaniel was correct. The Republican Party today is not the party of Ronald Reagan. It is significantly more conservative. And yet Mr. McDaniel still couldn't win his state's primary. Because apparently it's not off-the-wall, over-the-edge radical right conservative. In his petulance at losing, Chris McDaniel has not yet conceded that he did, in fact, lose. "Before this race ends," he said on Tuesday night, "we have to be absolutely certain that the Republican primary was won by Republican voters." Actually, no, we don't. It's completely understandable that the candidate of any party would be upset when voters from another party cross over and vote for his or her opponent. Who wouldn't be upset at that?! But even assuming that it did happen in Mississippi this week...here's the pesky reality: registered voters in Mississippi have the right to vote for whoever they want. No matter what the party. Even if they're black. While it would be annoying if voters cross over party lines to vote against someone, they not only have the right, but they might be doing so not out of "dirty tricks," but rather to legitimately protect their own best interests. Consider that in a state like Mississippi, it's so red that whoever wins the GOP primary is likely to be elected in the general election. So, it is completely reasonable that a Democratic voter might prefer to vote for the Republican candidate they feel will better represent them, should that person most-probably win. After all, it was this very thinking that got Rush Limbaugh to create his "Operation Chaos" effort in 2008, trying very publicly to convince Republicans to switch parties in the Democratic presidential primaries (since the Republican nomination was wrapped up by that point for John McCain) and vote for Hilary Clinton over That One, Barack Obama. And as a result, huge numbers of Republicans did indeed switch and vote Democratic in such states as Pennsylvania, Ohio and...oh, Mississippi. Go figure. No doubt Chris McDaniel was outraged by this, especially in his own state. But outraged or not, it turns out that Chris McDaniel was wrong about that one thing. No, we don't have to be certain which voters voted for which candidates. We only have to be certain that people who have the right to vote, voted. It's interesting how that works in America. Then again, for the past couple of years, Republicans have been trying to block even that from happening. So, in the end, despite all his concerns, maybe Chris McDaniel has something in common with the Republican Party after all. Here's another entry for the mythical Orange Film Board, on behalf of the very real British mobile company, Orange. In this one, the company head Mr. Dresden and his minions interrupt a recording session with Snoop Dogg over the end-credit song for a film Orange has financed. So, when the powers-that-be want the rap song changed just a bit, artistic integrity might take a back seat... There's a new Alexander in town.
I've posted several things here from the Maven of Happiness, Valerie Alexander, in the past. But this comes from her sister, Carol Fox, who works in business recruiting. It's an interesting, real-world look at ageism in the real-world marketplace. From a real-world perspective. (Did I mention this is about the real world?) What's intriguing is that she lays out not only the reasons why some companies might not hire an older worker, but the legitimate reasons why not. However, she then points out a number of very specific suggestions an older, prospective applicant can take to break past the barriers. (Apparently the Alexander sisters love giving advice to others... Family get-togethers must be an experience. The good news is that they're all from a nurturing stand-point, so I suspect there's a lot of hugging.) It's a bit long, and some of the suggestions are bluntly specific (and many are very interesting, explaining for example what you should leave off your resume...and why), but again, it's the real world being discussed, not a feel-good seminar. After all, there are biases and preferences in life we come in contact with all the time, and the trick is dealing with them. What the piece offers is well-considered advice from someone who does this for a living and talks with others who do it for a living. So, when people like that say very bluntly, "You should be sure to dress this way, not that," it comes from a life of experience doing the job of interviewing. You can say in return, "Sorry, this shouldn't be about outward,surfaces appearances, I'll dress how I feel comfortable because it's who I am," but it's always good to listen to the person who is hiring -- because if they disagree, no matter how comfortable you feel, you're not getting the job, Mainly, what I found interesting is not so much it's advice on applying for a job -- because if you're not in the market, who cares? -- but the general psychology of how we view people different from us, and dealing with that in return. You can read it here. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|