Fiddler On the Roof is
one of my favorite musicals. I have seen
it three times, every production identifiably unique. Here now are my “Three Fiddlers.”
“Fiddler” Number One:
Broadway – 1964.
Fiddler On the Roof was
a revelation to me when I saw its original production. As with most out-of-town aficionados of
Broadway musicals, I was introduced to Fiddler
via its original cast record album.
And I did not care for it.
The songs were individually undistinguished. This disappointed me because Fiddler’s composer/lyricist team of Bock
and Harnick had previously written Fiorello!,
the first musical I ever saw on Broadway, and I loved it. (They have a minor character in Fiorello! named Mrs. Pomerantz. Although it is possible they changed the name
when I was not in the audience, replacing it with somebody else’s who was.)
Unlike musicals I greatly admired, like My Fair Lady and West Side
Story, the Fiddler On the Roof
melodies lacked individualized impact. It
was only when I attended the live production that I realized they were supposed
to.
Fiddler On the Roof
was the most totally integrated musical I had ever experienced, the story, the
show’s songs and its dances blending seamlessly, delivering a colorful collage
of imaginative wonderfulness, evoking the ethnic cohesiveness and imminent
danger in the fictional turn-of-the-(20th)century Russian village of
Anatevka. Hearing the songs in their
appropriate contexts washed away the inherent difficulty I had found missing in
the album. They embedded impeccably into
the production.
The original Fiddler
On the Roof starred Zero Mostel, an inimitable “Force of Nature”, whose
natural instincts got the most out of the show’s “book”, written by Joseph
Stein, a respected alumnus of Sid Caesar’s Your
Show of Shows, arguably the greatest comedy/variety television series of
all time.
“Funny” wrote it. “Funny”
understood what they were going for. And
“funny” played the comedic “moments” to the hilt. That’s “Funny Cubed”, spelling a hilarious
evening (or matinee) in the theater.
I could say more, but I’ll move on.
No, wait.
The “Final Bow”, when the dancing “Circle of the Community”
opened up, revealing Zero Mostel, gyrating toward the audience in ecstatic “If
I Were A Rich Man” exuberance, elicited roars of approval, and, for a few of
us, tears of exultation and delight.
Goose bumps. And I
can still feel them.
“Fiddler” Number Two:
Michigan City,
Indiana - Mid-1990‘s
The “Canterbury Players” were doing Fiddler On the Roof, and our family, visiting in the summer, dutifully
attended, along with a handful of local members of the theatergoing community,
the less-than-“sold out” audience – tops – thirteen people, outnumbering the
cast, but just by a little.
Comparing the two “Fiddler” experiences:
You can’t.
Small town productions must be forgivingly evaluated. (Although a Michigan City presentation of The Pirates of Penzance was as rewarding
as any show I had seen anywhere.) This
production’s list of cast members included – according to the program – an
optometrist, a schoolteacher and the assistant manager at the Michigan City Denny’s.
And they acted their hearts out.
I am a sucker for people putting on shows because they love
to, not because there’s a William Morris agent sitting in the
audience. This “Canterbury Players”
production would be no steppingstone to glory.
It was a limited run in a beloved musical and then back to reality,
testing for nearsightedness and ushering customers to their tables.
They knew that and they didn’t care. Tonight, they were in show business.
Complete with the inevitable “glitches”.
One of Fiddler’s recognized
highlights is the exhilarating “Bottle Dance”, in which, during a Jewish wedding
celebration, the male villagers of Anatevka – at least the more coordinated
ones – place empty liquor bottles on tops of their ceremonial black hats, the
participants lock arms, executing a sequence of synchronized movements, the
bottles remaining unbelievably on their heads.
In Michigan City…. they did it their way.
To avoid the inevitable “accidents” certain to plague non-professionals,
the bottles were glued to the tops of the dancers’ hats. The hats themselves were kept in place with
the help of visible rubber bands fastened tightly under their chins.
And then they danced.
Unfortunately as they proceeded, the bottles slid
progressively towards the sides of their heads, winding up hovering above their
ears, at a forty-five degree angle to the floor. The bottles should by rights have fallen off. But the glue and the rubber bands kept them
incongruously in place.
We bit hard on our lower lips, applauding appreciatively at
the finish.
They were trying so incredibly hard. And being only Jews in the audience, they appeared
desperate for our approval.
“‘L’ki-yim!’ Was that right?”
“Perfect!”
What else could we tell them? This “Fiddler” was all they had.
“Fiddler” Number Three:
Broadway – June 3,
2016.
A longstanding criticism of Fiddler On the Roof is that it is an essentially lightweight
confection, its smattering of “significance” providing the obligatory “weight.”
I don’t agree.
At the center of Fiddler
On the Roof is a reverberating question:
“How much can you compromise your deeply held beliefs before
it’s ridiculous and there’s nothing?”
This question is so universal Fiddler On the Roof has played to enormous success in dozens of
countries, including Japan, hardly a hotbed of Jewish… I mean, do they have any
there at all?
Every culture experiences longstanding traditions threatened
by “modernizing change.” With that
conundrical issue at its core, Fiddler On
the Roof is determinedly more than sitcomical fluff.
To combat this shadowing criticism and bury its maligned “Borscht
Belt” ancestry, the current production of Fiddler
opts for a conceptual ambiance that’s intended to be “darker” and “more
consistent with reality.”
At the steep cost of the majority of the “funny”.
The Michigan City
version was funnier. (Ba-dump-bump! Without any apologies. I shouldn’t even have used brackets.)
The acting was polished and professional, the choreography
injecting an entrancing mystical quality.
The show’s jokes, however, now embedded in the agony of Jewish
oppression provide emotional resonance but quieter laughs.
The Result: A Fiddler On the Roof dramedy. With an emphasis on the “dra.”
Consider “Tevya’s” curtain call bow:
No emerging triumphantly from the “circle.”
No jubilant cheers from the audience.
No appreciative tears.
Delivering a skilled but unspectacular “Tevya” (played by
Danny Burstein), less a dominating superstar than a simmering potato in a
communitarian stew.
A Humble Warning:
When you add “depth”, keep an eye on what you’re giving up.
Oh well.
I once saw an iconic performance.
And watched bottles riding sidesaddle on the “Bottle
Dancers’” heads.
That’s enough, isn’t it?
4 comments:
Is it fair to ask how you rate the movie compared to these or is that not a fair question? I saw the touring company for Man of La Mancha and preferred it to the movie. But the only version of Fiddler on the Roof I've seen is the movie. I loved it but have nothing to compare it to.
Regarding the movie: my Zaida, who came from there, as he liked to say, was a big fan of Sholom Aleichem and the musical, Fiddler. He didn't love the movie version.
When he returned from seeing the film, he told us all...."If it had looked so good in real life, we have never left!"
Thank you, Earl. My Mother and I also saw the recent Broadway production last Christmas - my first time ever seeing this show (though having been familiar with it for years) - and we were both very disappointed...
a) by how unfunny it was - Yenta, especially, and...
b) by how how few people shared our opinion.
Interestingly, I thought the "modern-ish" dancing was terrific - perfectly physically expressive of the characters feelings. And wouldn't you know, the choreography was one of the nits most lovers of the show picked.
Post a Comment