Drawing 35 - Groovy Palm Sunday
Apr. 5th, 2009 05:20 pmIt was a tradition in the household in which I lived during most of my time in Canada that we'd come home from church and put on some loud choral music we could sing along with while we made brunch. Sometimes it was Carmina Burana, sometimes Mozart's Requiem, but during Lent, especially towards Holy Week, more often than not it was Jesus Christ Superstar. I realized last week how much I missed that, so on my way home from church I stopped in the CD store and found a copy – it wasn't the original cast, in fact I couldn't find a mention of the production or cast on it anywhere, but I got it anyway because it was the only complete recording they had, and might as well expand my horizons a little.
To my surprise, it wasn't actually awful. It was recorded in '96 which, according to Amazon, was only three years after the original recording came out on CD, which seems a bit odd. The orchestra was smaller but it was nice to hear different parts stand out a bit more, and the recording quality was excellent. I even liked some of the performances better than the original cast – Jesus sounded less like a petulant child on drugs, and Pilate was more human and much less camp. The biggest surprise (or possibly non-surprise) was that Alice Cooper made an excellent Herod. Overall it was performed more in a Broadway style and less as a groovy 70s rock opera, which has pros and cons. My biggest complaint was that a few lyrics were changed, including some lines in my favourite verse in my favourite song, in a manner that erred on the side of stupid. Some of the lyric changes in Sunset Boulevard, when it crossed the pond at about the same time as this recording was released, were equally dumb; I suspect someone in Andrew Lloyd Webber's camp suspects American audiences of being a bit thick. (I don't know where they would get that idea ...)
Has anyone else noticed that an inordinate number of Webber's musicals are about the ramifications of fame?
Anyway, it's been a long time since I listened to it, and it got me thinking again about how controversial it is in some circles. I'm not surprised, because I know people will get offended at anything, but ... see, my mom spent all of maybe five minutes explaining the premise to me when I was a child, and even though I've never seen a performance and I don't recall ever hearing the whole musical before college, just that explanation had a profound effect on my perception of the Passion. Even now it's still my favourite dramatic interpretation of it, and the focus on the power of the fickle mob probably predisposed me to René Girard's mind-bending theories. I started to write a point-by-point list guessing at what people might find offensive and then explaining why they're full of crap, but it started to get really long so I stopped ... might post it someday if anyone's interested but I don't have the time right now to finish it or to join the conversation it might start. Instead I decided to offend more people by illustrating a mondegreen!

A trick or two with lepers and the whole town's on its feet ... 'lepers' sounds like 'leopards' to me most of the time. Jesus probably could have done tricks with leopards! That would have been awesome! Maybe he did but the Evangelists were embarrassed by the blatant showmanship so left it out of the Gospels...
And that, I have declared, counts for Monday. Take that!
To my surprise, it wasn't actually awful. It was recorded in '96 which, according to Amazon, was only three years after the original recording came out on CD, which seems a bit odd. The orchestra was smaller but it was nice to hear different parts stand out a bit more, and the recording quality was excellent. I even liked some of the performances better than the original cast – Jesus sounded less like a petulant child on drugs, and Pilate was more human and much less camp. The biggest surprise (or possibly non-surprise) was that Alice Cooper made an excellent Herod. Overall it was performed more in a Broadway style and less as a groovy 70s rock opera, which has pros and cons. My biggest complaint was that a few lyrics were changed, including some lines in my favourite verse in my favourite song, in a manner that erred on the side of stupid. Some of the lyric changes in Sunset Boulevard, when it crossed the pond at about the same time as this recording was released, were equally dumb; I suspect someone in Andrew Lloyd Webber's camp suspects American audiences of being a bit thick. (I don't know where they would get that idea ...)
Has anyone else noticed that an inordinate number of Webber's musicals are about the ramifications of fame?
Anyway, it's been a long time since I listened to it, and it got me thinking again about how controversial it is in some circles. I'm not surprised, because I know people will get offended at anything, but ... see, my mom spent all of maybe five minutes explaining the premise to me when I was a child, and even though I've never seen a performance and I don't recall ever hearing the whole musical before college, just that explanation had a profound effect on my perception of the Passion. Even now it's still my favourite dramatic interpretation of it, and the focus on the power of the fickle mob probably predisposed me to René Girard's mind-bending theories. I started to write a point-by-point list guessing at what people might find offensive and then explaining why they're full of crap, but it started to get really long so I stopped ... might post it someday if anyone's interested but I don't have the time right now to finish it or to join the conversation it might start. Instead I decided to offend more people by illustrating a mondegreen!

A trick or two with lepers and the whole town's on its feet ... 'lepers' sounds like 'leopards' to me most of the time. Jesus probably could have done tricks with leopards! That would have been awesome! Maybe he did but the Evangelists were embarrassed by the blatant showmanship so left it out of the Gospels...
And that, I have declared, counts for Monday. Take that!
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:18 am (UTC)I love the motion picture soundtrack: the Herod and Pilate (and Judas) all had stronger voices, IMO. My mom always thought that the Mary from the film had a particularly beautiful voice.
I've always wondered why they don't revive this show: it should do very well. Alice Cooper as -Herod-?!? I'll have to see if his songs are on iTunes...
BTW, did you see my reply re: hiking behind Disney (http://twirlynoodle.livejournal.com/272661.html?thread=4142869#t4142869)?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 08:48 pm (UTC)If you do explore, LJ about it! I've walked a lot of the trails, but never crossed the L.A. River. Griffith Park isn't a great place to be after dark...
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:21 am (UTC)From a serious standpoint, I think many people have a problem with the premise of the musical being Jesus telling Judas to go betray him when Judas doesn't want to. (Lol I think some find the way Judas's love for Jesus is presented to be offensive as well.) From a less serious standpoint; they're all singing...
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:29 am (UTC)Isn't that the premise of the Gospel of Judas? Which is one of the gospels that was supposedly rejected when the New Testament was being put together, and discovered again much later?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 02:13 am (UTC)But they have that argument at the Last Supper, after Judas has (basically) sold him to the chief priests. My interpretation, as a somewhat arrogant pragmatic know-it-all, is that Judas is a somewhat arrogant pragmatic know-it-all who sees the situation getting out of hand and tries to take control of it ... he keeps saying he's acting for the good of the disciples or Jesus or whoever but his actions have consequences he didn't intend. So the moral of the story is, to some degree, 'don't presume you know what you're doing' or something along those lines... I've got the idea as a shape in my head but am having a hard time with words today. :(
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 02:29 am (UTC)JUDAS: Cut the dramatics! You know very well who.
JESUS: Why don't you go do it?
JUDAS: You want me to do it!
JESUS: Hurry, they are waiting.
JUDAS: If you knew why I do it
JESUS: I don't care why you do it!
JUDAS: To think I admired you. Well now I despise you.
JESUS: You liar. You Judas.
JUDAS: You want me to do it! What if I just stayed here and ruined your ambition. Christ you deserve it!
I interpreted that as Jesus having his "master plan" and Judas betraying him was part of it all along. I completely agree with you on Judas trying to take hold of the crumbling situation, but I don't think Jesus was an innocent victim either.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 05:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 07:41 pm (UTC)Very true. Lol look at all the debate this musical can start. XD I agree with you, I think for those who have never seen the musical before, that would be the thing they would object to most.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 07:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 08:45 pm (UTC)I've always been fascinated by close relationships that go bad-- the above is a famous one, but the God-Lucifer relationship is less spoken of and more intriguing because of it. The how's and why's of two people who need each other falling out.
Now that I think of it, there is a pivotal fall/betrayal in both the Old and New Testament. I wonder if there is anything like it in the Quran? If there is, I wonder why the theme repeats?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:08 pm (UTC)My guess is the theme repeats because a)it tends to happen all the time in real life and b)it makes for good storytelling. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:49 pm (UTC)I believe both Lucifer and Satan are mentioned in the Bible, but I don't think there's anything to suggest that they are the same person. Also, the snake in Eden is just a snake--Milton was the one who decided it should be the devil in disguise.
Gospel of Judas--from what I've heard, the story goes that Judas was Jesus's closest disciple, and they actually planned the "betrayal" together, because it had to happen for man's salvation to take place.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 05:23 am (UTC)Milton (in "Paradise Lost", which I have -never- been able to slog through: epic poem/blank verse=augh!) tried to extrapolate the event from the Biblical references. Steven Brust's "To Reign in Hell" is his version as a fantasy novel (very nicely done). Michael Michetti did a fantastic play that was a twist on Paradise Lost (called, "Paradise Lost: Shadows and Wings")-- an amazing blend of costuming, anime and martial arts.
I am looking forward to anything about the Gospel of Judas-- whether it's validated or not. I think he is a complex and interesting personage.
Ironically, there is a show on Discovery Channel right now called, "Lost Gospels" (about the gospels of Mary Magdalene, Peter, and Judas). A bit dramatic, but still interesting.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 06:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-08 04:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:26 am (UTC)I don't recall being offended by it at all. I think I was mainly confused. It's just a fact of life that some people will indeed be offended by anything.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 01:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 02:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 05:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 09:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 03:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 05:30 am (UTC)Now I'm curious. What were the lyrics and the change, if you don't mind telling?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 05:36 am (UTC)In 'Heaven on their Minds,' the original verse goes:
Listen, Jesus, do you care for your race?
Don't you see that we must keep in our place?
We are occupied – have you forgotten how put down we are?
I am frightened by the crowd,
For we are getting much too loud
And they'll crush us if we go too far
The line I am frightened by the crowd/for we are getting much too loud is replaced by and our conquerors object/to another noisy sect which, okay, it's kind of staying in the political sphere, but it eliminates the reference to mob psychology and the disciples' misgivings about the movement getting out of hand, which are principal themes of the musical and much more important to the story and characters than just an objective establishment of the broad socio-political situation in Roman Palestine. Similar Messianic sects (which did exist) are never mentioned again in the story so it's been downgraded to a more or less throwaway line.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 08:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:08 pm (UTC)Good one.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 01:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:34 pm (UTC)My eyes just zeroed in on this phrase and try as I might, could read no further, continually coming back to that.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-06 09:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-17 09:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-15 12:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 12:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 01:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 01:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 01:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-07 01:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-04-08 12:21 am (UTC)(it purports that disney has, ah, several tropes of animation that they like to use a lot)
no subject
Date: 2009-07-15 12:49 am (UTC)Therefore when I watched this version for the first
time I cried like a baby and actually felt something for the characters, appreciating it more. I think a lot of people who disapproved of how Judas was portrayed didn't like the "humanisation" (oh look... I created a word) of him because it meant we could identify with him, and who wants to empathize with the man who helped Kill the Son of God?
Also, I agree with the thing that Steve Balsamo tended to go mad with the rhythm in Gethsemane, but it was one of the best emotional and vocal performances IMO. The fact that he's also not too bad to look at didn't hurt either ;)
essay over :)