Ethel Merman- who else?
In days gone past, the front row was the place to be- the most expensive tickets, the most exclusive tickets, the ticket that showed that you had power and position in the world. In short theatre seating hierarchy was simple. The closer you were to the front, the higher you were in the hierarchy. I guess this has something to do with not only being closest to the stage (and so supposedly having the best view) but also being closest to the stars of the show (and we are talking some big names, it hasn't just been recently that star names have been required to sell a show- imagine being front row to the opening of a new Ethel Merman
show- WOW).
So what has changed? Most front rows are now taken up by loudmouth teenagers with no knowledge of dressing up for the theatre (I even once saw a girl just wearing a t-shirt and not much else). I think this progression is twofold (or maybe three if I can think straight!) and its results also give the appearance of ouroboros; that of a snake biting its tale- or in theatre terms, well we'll get to that later.
Over the years, set designs have become more vast if not more imaginative. During the sixties and seventies we saw some of the most amazing designs such as the set of Grind that completely rotated between scenes to show the inside and outside of a club. A pioneer of outlandish set design was Eugene Lee, one of my favourite set designers if only for the way his sets encumbers all and perfectly set the atmosphere of a play. Among his craziest ideas were a production of Candide in which the Broadway Theatre was broken up into small stages connected by walkways and seats ripped out in favour of wooden benches and stools. This closed pretty soon after opening. His other famous attempt at completely demolishing the Broadway was Dude! by Ragni and Rado (who else?) The stage and seats were separated into different areas such as forest and sky with different areas also representing different price ranges (clever Mr Producer always knows how to get more money out of theatregoers without them realising). The floor was strewn with chicken feathers and soil. Needless to say this closed even quicker than Candide.
But sets did continue to grow, especially through the 1980s when recession meant people wanted more for their money and so wanted huge extravaganzas with sets to match. Into the nineties and to the present day we have looked towards huge automated sets that look pretty, change within the blink of an eyelid, and have the potential to decapitate a poor unsuspecting ensemble member with one blow. So what does this sort of set mean for sight lines, especially for the front row elite?
For the cheap seats, things got better, big sets mean you can see more of it from away and there tend to be larger ensembles hence more to see if you sit far back. For the first class front rowers, things got worse. A large set means more will be played upstage meaning you can't see jack all. The stage will be further above the seats to accommodate all the mcgubbins controlling your swanky automated set and the larger ensemble will mean more feet for you to stare at! Two friends of mine recently found themselves in the front row of Hairspray where the view was so bad they had to move back a few rows just to see any of the show. In short, only foot fetishists and those who like peering into the orchestra pit would ever pay full price for these seats.
I blame Rent, well Rent and John Barrowman- everything's always his fault!
Another reason for the decline in popularity can be traced back to Rent
This author would willingly straddle these two, wouldn't you?
And finally to the ouroboros moment- audience interaction. I guess Hair
But we have now come full circle. The new production of Hair has brought back the thrill of being in the front row. People are now willing to pay as much money as they can to have Will Swenson sit on their lap or Gavin Creel molest them. (I would.)
No comments:
Post a Comment