While that last line of your - ahem - “review” leaves me too tempted to make a helpful suggestion for your next vocation, I will say that your comments went far beyond “catty” and revealed that the reason you didn’t like the show is because you – an expert on the 1920’s – didn’t get what you were expecting. You should have known that the show is not a spoof or a tribute to the 1920’s, but a musical (re-written and reconceived in 1971 and set in the 1920’s) about people who fall in love, and who sing some of the most enchanting songs written for the theatre.
To imply that the production has no affinity for the 1920’s is utterly ridiculous. The costumes, sets and color pallet of the show were based directly on images and fashions of that wild, colorful decade. And the orchestra, which you mentioned, is not only – and expertly – playing the show’s actual orchestrations, but also include a banjo and a ukuleles to bring out the sound of the 1920’s, with a modern jazz sensibility. What kind of authenticity were you expecting? Would you have preferred that the show looked like a faded sepia photograph and sounded like a scratchy gramophone record complete with pops and skips?
What you failed to mention in your glib writing – nor would you have – is that this production has been greeted with praise from the audiences since our preview performance. We’re very proud of this show; the hard work (including months of preparations and rehearsals) committed to “Nanette” have resulted in laughter and standing ovations by *thousands* of enthusiastic patrons who aren’t leaving the theatre with “gas” as your daughter allegedly suffered, but with elation, happiness and – could it be – an actual song or two to sing on their way home.
“No, No, Nanette”
By Chris Shaw & Chris McCoy
download this issue
click here to see more »