the de-butching of alison bechdel

something odd is going on with the fun home national tour. at first i thought only i had picked up on it, and that maybe i was being too critical out of love for the show, until i made a post about it on tumblr and received hundreds of responses agreeing with my concern. a lot of us are wondering, fun home, why isn’t alison bechdel being portrayed as butch anymore?

alison

i love you, beth “butch is a beautiful thing” malone

for context, let’s take a look at the original broadway costume for alison, which was consistent through the off broadway and broadway runs of the show. a simple red ringer tee, loose fitting black jeans (not pictured, i know), short and sensible haircut, no jewelry. a fine butch outfit, something bechdel and other butch lesbians would likely wear.

sad

what’s with those thumb holes, anyway?

and then, almost every aspect of the original costuming was changed when the show moved to tour. it seems that someone confused “butch” with “unfashionable,” two words with absolutely no correlation. they changed alison’s shirt to a weird, possibly chiffon vertical striped monstrosity, unbuttoned to show a camisole, covered by a weird athletic jacket type thing, gave her fitted jeans, and a necklace and earrings. in recent pictures it seems to me that she also hasn’t cut her hair in a while, which contributes to an even more feminine vibe overall. i guess some of these changes are insignificant on their own, but together the result is that the character is no longer really butch at all.

we’re left wondering what necessitated these changes. the same person designed the costumes for all three american stage versions of fun home, and all character’s costumes have stayed consistent throughout the different runs, aside from alison’s. alison’s costume was perhaps the most important costume in the entire show, as it represented her full realization of herself and acceptance of her butchness. now, she is being portrayed as a woman who grew up, accepted she wanted short hair, but maintained all other aspects of enforced femininity.

when kate shindle was first cast as alison in the tour, many of us expressed doubts regarding her ability to portray the character. not because she was former miss america, but because of the constant discussion of her status as former miss america spread around for the shock factor. this was coupled with her reluctance to cut her hair and attempts to persuade the show to allow her to wear a wig. we were concerned that she was not willing to fully and authentically take on the character she auditioned for, since it seemed she was constantly trying to distance herself from her character. unfortunately, it seems as though this may be the case. of course i can only speculate, but i must wonder if former miss america, who tried to persuade production to allow her to wear a wig, would also persuade them to change her costuming to be more typically feminine. it hurts, because beth malone was so full of joy to play a character that looks and feels like her. and it hurts because there are so many talented butch actresses out there who don’t have nearly as many casting opportunities to play someone who looks like them.

maybe it wasn’t kate shindle’s fault at all. maybe it was a result of the ever present need to make the show more palatable to an overwhelmingly straight public. the show is always marketed as a show about a family, a show about parents, a show about identity and coming of age, but very rarely is it publicly portrayed as a show about a butch lesbian. a butch lesbian just isn’t relatable to most theatergoers, but a short haired feminine lesbian might make the cut for tugging on those liberal heartstrings. i believe they have succeeded at making the show palatable to straight people, but they have alienated lesbians in the process.

regardless, it seems more research into butchness, its history and culture, is necessary from everyone involved in the show and bechdel’s portrayal. when portraying any oppressed minority group of people, research, understanding, and respect should be priority. i need the fun home tour team to understand that simply having short hair and wearing pants does not make a lesbian butch.

whatever the reason for these changes, many lesbian fans of bechdel’s writing and the show feel hurt, betrayed, and misrepresented. bechdel is a real person, a member of a real group of people, a group that is desperate for accurate and affirming representation in the media. fun home is a show for everyone, but it means more to lesbians than any straight person can understand. i wish that the tour production team was more conscious of that.

Advertisements

70 thoughts on “the de-butching of alison bechdel

  1. great post; i saw the original draft on tumblr and was so excited to see the issue actually being discussed. i really do believe shindle has a hand in the whole thing. when i saw the touring performance in LA, i had the good fortune to see understudy amanda naughton in the lead role, and she passed so much better as a masculine woman, if stopping a little shy of butch (because of that TRASH costume). anyway it’s near and dear to my heart thanks for talking about it

    Like

  2. Thanks for this perspective–really telling–as much as i loved Fun Home the book, and am sure i will see Fun Home the musical when it comes near me, i have felt cynical that, with all of Bechdel’s savvy and deep portrayals of lesbian consciousness and community, the work that put her on the map is largely focused on a man.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Depressing but unsurprising that the people who stand the make money off of Fun Home are choosing to do so by pandering to a heterosexual audience. Butch or bust!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I was lucky enough to see both Beth and Kate in the role of Alison and even more fortunate to have spent time with T-RAB on multiple occasions. In my opinion, Kate simply portrayed a different sort of butch. Beth and Alison have very similar super lean body types and Kate is much more curvy, perhaps that contributed to a costume change. I kind of resent your notion that a butch woman must have short hair and wear t-shirts and loose jeans. In my 50+ years of dykedom I’ve known many butch identified women with ponytails. As to the story about Kate and her hair, that has been so blown out of proportion it’s embarrassing. I asked her directly about this and she said she simply asked if she had to cut her hair, if maybe she could get by with a wig. I think that’s a reasonable question for someone who likes having their hair a certain way in their real life. When she was told that a wig wouldn’t be acceptable she readily agreed to cut her hair, because she wanted to play the role. She recognized the beautiful and important story and wanted to be a part of telling it. It’s art and open to interpretation. I don’t see the same ‘de-butching’ that you do, and I hope you don’t presume to speak for all lesbians, because you certainly don’t speak for me.

    Liked by 1 person

    • i’m still not quite getting why everyone thinks someone with a different body type can’t wear a t-shirt. they do come in all sizes. i think there were a lot of ways the designers could have gone while being accurate to alison bechdel’s real style, while accounting for a different body type, because thats a designers job. and no one’s going to convince me they needed to add earrings and a necklace because of her body type. the hair thing is a small part of this, for real. i’m not sure i agree that its open to artistic interpretation this way when its about a real person, and that interpretation takes away from part of the story. and no, i don’t presume to speak for all lesbians. i wrote this for myself (this was entirely a personal blog until two days ago), to air out my own frustrations and feelings that butch lesbians were being pushed into the margins again. i didn’t expect it to go anywhere, but suddenly i was getting comments and emails from literally thousands of lesbians thanking me for writing this and giving a voice to the issue that had been bothering them too. you’re entitled to your own opinion about the show, i’m not trying to speak for anyone who doesn’t want to be spoken for.

      Liked by 1 person

      • people say the phrase “we need to start a conversation” and usually they don’t mean anything. Your post/article, however, really did make some clear, specific arguments that brought people with opinions on the question together. I found it a very productive experience to read your perspective, express my own, and listen to that of others. So much is taken for granted and ignored or dismissed as inevitable, whereas your writing made a convincing case that we don’t have to accept the force of the market without resistance. My perspective is clearer thanks to conversations I had with people who were already my friends, but with whom I could not have had the conversations I did had it not been for your article. So thanks.

        Like

    • I don’t think this article is about blame. It’s a brilliant investigation of the forces at work when it comes to representation of a particular identity. The mutual forces of audience expectations and artists’ effort to satisfy them is one of the most magical of phenomena in the world. Interrogating how audience anxieties interact with creative choices is necessary cultural work, and I’m grateful to the author for doing it.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. the only point I disagree with is that they have successfully made the show more palatable to the heteros by doing this. All they’ve done is make Alison’s costume less authentic, more uncomfortable and kind of uglier in my opinion. To close-minded heterosexual people, the two costumes will scan exactly the same way, I think.

    Liked by 3 people

      • I’m a heterosexual person, though I aspire to be not closed-minded but in fact an ally. The new costume seems just plain weird — and far from anything that T-RAB would choose to wear.

        But an explanation has been offered. Whether it seems plausible or not, I respect and admire the explainer(s); they have standing to explain; and I’m not about to accuse them of lying.

        Like

  6. From a show biz perspective, I’d bet that this new costume was put in to suit the new actress’ body. The Broadway actress, who has a (fashionably) skin-and-bones type body, looks appropriately boy-ish, flat-chested, and butch. The new actress looks like she has more of a bust, more of a shape, more flesh. So a t-shirt probably didn’t work, but putting vertical stripes and an over-jacket on that body may’ve been deemed more essentially right, given the actress’s bodytype.
    While I recognize that the original cartoon-drawings of the protagonist were wonderfully captured in the body-type of Beth Malone, perhaps the skills and talent of the tour-replacement actress transcended that she wasn’t the same physical type and necessitated a different look.
    Anyway, that’d be my understanding of why you’d change a costume in a show’s design that’s already proven financially successful. The designer probably recognized that the t-shirt look didn’t work for the replacement actress’ body-type and interpretation.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ive heard this perspective a lot and can see it as a possibility, but the thing is, there are real butches with all different body types- overweight, large chested, muscular, etc. and all of them still dress butch & wear tshirts. my problem isn’t with them changing up the costume to accommodate a new actress with new proportions, but the fact that they changed it to no longer be an accurate portrayal of alison bechdel or butch lesbians is the problem. on top of that, the earrings and necklace were feminizing touches that have nothing to do with body type.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Yeah another big fat butch dyke here.

        There’s a whole world of attractiveness out there that doesn’t have to do with screwed up body and gender norms.

        Butchness has zero to do with your very suspect definition of ‘masculine.’

        Liked by 2 people

  7. You’re a brilliant writer. Thank you for articulating these points so clearly, and for providing so much context and thoughtful examination of the phenomenon of de-butching. It happens on television, of course, and it’s sad to see it even in the theatre. So necessary to name it and question the impulses behind what’s happening.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. I thought I was the only one who had noticed the hair length and t-shirt change! Bring back Beth Malone! She wouldn’t have sold out!

    Like

  9. “I saw the tour in Los Angeles, and I had been anticipating seeing it for a long time. I purposely did not listen to the music before, so I went in fresh. I expected to be emotionally moved. Although I thought the show was very good and the production itself was outstanding, the show did not move me. As a gay man, I am ashamed to admit that I missed this vital detail. The Butch factor was nowhere to be seen, although it was talked about. I did not see it in the performance at all. Looking back, I realize the show would’ve been much more moving to me if it had been there, unapologetic and specific. It’s like trans identity. It must be portrayed accurately, or it could come off as offensive to the community. I am old enough to remember depictions of LGBT people in the 70s and 80s on television or movies. Many times those portrayals were offensive or stereotypical, but we were just so happy to see ourselves portrayed that we took it. But times have changed and we have reached a point where we demand to be seen accurately and fairly and more humane. Thank you for writing this piece. It has made me check my own awareness of how we are portrayed. I know the intention of the creators of “Fun Home” would not have intentionally allowed this to happen, but perhaps the producers pushed a more mainstream presentation, since this first national tour is going in large theaters since it is a best musical Tony award winner. Theyve got to sell tickets. But instead what they’re doing, is watering down Alison Bechtel’s life story into a “made for TV” version. We want to see ourselves represented to the rest of the world. But the subtle or not-so-subtle changes are presenting a watered down version of who she is. The “Hedwig and the angry inch” national tour did not water down the queerness of its main character, and it seems to me that the producers and actors in that tour made it very clear that they were committed to not deemphasizing Hedwig’s queerness. And they absolutely did not. I left that show in tears. I wish I had for “Fun Home”.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Personally, I know several lesbians who dress like this. I saw the National Tour, with the lead dressed from the 2nd picture above. So tell me, how does being less butch and more fem alter the dialogue and message of the performance?

    Like

    • lesbians can dress however they want, im sure there are lesbians who dress like this. the problem is that this show is about a butch growing up and embracing her identity, and has an entire song dedicated to her younger self seeing a butch woman and having a moment of self realization. it 100% changes the dialogue and message because we’re watching the story of a young butch growing up but….. she doesn’t grow up into a butch anymore. it’s also about a real person, her real story and identity, and i think the tour should have stuck to accurately representing her the way broadway did.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Alison doesn’t dress like this. Her character in the book does not dress like this. The play is about Alison – a butch lesbian. If Alison’s body were different, she would still be a butch and still wouldn’t be caught dead in that outfit. Alison wrote DTWOF – lots & lots of lesbians all along the butch/femme continuum. Her butches didn’t dress like this. (Neither did her femmes – this is a grotesque costume regardless of orientation)

      If you have no respect for the author of the source material, there is no point in addressing your question.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Let’s go for an obvious example so Ken understands…Hedwig. Portray Hedwig without the wigs and you have now altered the performance.

      Like

  11. As a femme who loves butches… she definitely looks more like a hipster than a butch. I’m not sure if it’s entirely the costume or if part of it is that the actress is obviously not butch and wouldn’t read as butch no matter what she did.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Hi. Costume designer here. Gay man…been in the costume industry for three decades designing theater and television. I saw this blog being discussed on a FB group called “costume people” and really found it timely and interesting. Costumers were discussing the reasons behind this very distinct costume choice. As a costume designer, we are often called upon to make changes for various reasons. I can say, with almost full certainty, that this costume was redesigned to look more feminine to appeal to a broad audience across the country. Marketing and selling tickets to this show are challenging. Appealing to a…how shall I say this…appealling to a less informed audience is challenging. The original costume may seem simple but it really is a very powerful image. The costume designer for this show, David Zinn, is very talented and accomplished. As costume designers, if a new costume was needed to address Shindle’s more curvy body than a new costume should have been designed to maintain the identity of this character. This striped blouse, cami, and necklace combo does not do that. A simple shirt with a butch masculine look could have been used. The sporty jacket was probably added to “butch” it up a bit. The thumb holes are common in fancy yoga clothes these days…its consdered hip and edgy. Go figure. I was also chatting about this costume issue with a trans friend who reminded me of the notorious bathroom legislation and how these could relate. Its a fear thing…people were taught to fear women and men who didnt look “normal”. Now…we know a woman looking butch isnt a threat but the producers had to weigh that issue. Another friend wondered what Alison Bechdel’s reaction to this change was. I responded that she probably had to really consider the big picture. It really sucked that it was an issue but to still get her story out to audiences, she would have to accept a compromise. It sucks. Something interesting is that most costume designers werent really aware of the impact of the change and the concerns of the message the change made. I had to explain to them that the change was yet another issue where our community was told “no…you cant be yourself and live equally”. The change meant that our honest identities are not okay. I design full time on a tv show now and I fight bias daily. I fight bias towards plus size women, I fight bias towards body judgement in general. I fight bias towards age. I fight bias towards myself being a gay man! But I educate and help people accept and learn and grow. This issue with Fun House is important…keep talking about it!!!

    Liked by 4 people

  13. I also wish that “Young Allison” was portrayed in a less feminine manner. I’ve seen the show multiple times and only found one of the actresses to be convincingly tomboyish. Why so many really cutesy little girls that could easily be cast in Annie?

    Like

  14. Some of this is about acting too–I keep thinking that a competent actor could play the part whether they are butch (or something less defined that i identify as “dykey”) or not–see Cher in “Silkwood”–I think you are spot-on in identifying the actor’s unwillingness “to fully and authentically take on the character”–the production seems unsure of its commitment to the character as well.

    As to the costume points–maybe this is the price of mainstream success–all of a sudden your focus goes from an authentic portrayal of an experience and a moment in time to a search for what will appeal to an audience. Bechdel’s story comes out of a 1970s and 80s lesbian feminist awareness, and i can tell you, our choice of clothes in those days was very purposeful and subversive in challenging gender norms and promoting androgyny, as well as butch and femme identities–this reduction of traditional feminity is lost in the fashionable layered look.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. Acting is made up of so much more than appearance. The role and performance should stand on their own without sets, costumes, or makeup. Do you take offense at the entire cast of Hamilton being portrayed by people who do not resemble their real-life counterparts in such exacting detail? You cannot have it both ways.

    Like

    • costuming is a big part of theatrical productions too. broadway shows can’t rely on acting over everything else, especially when portraying a show that is in part, about identity and presentation and therefore relevant to costuming. but if we wanna go there, i saw the show last night and the acting did not make up for what the costume lacked in terms of portraying the character.

      hamilton is also about.. people who have been dead for hundreds of years. not a living, breathing person who wrote down her story and identity right in a book that the shows based on. the two aren’t comparable.

      Like

      • That’s your impression on her acting; I thought she was fantastic. And the two ARE comparable. This is why we can’t have nice things. And by “we”, I mean gays.

        Like

    • I dont think you understand theater. This show is about identity and the costume of the Alison character is directly tied into the show. Hamilton was designed in a stylized manner. The costumes are stylized. The sets are stylized. And let’s not forget that the style of music used in this musical is…stylized. I dont think those Hamilton dudes sang in rap verse. But we’re okay with all of that because we suspend disbelief and accept the stylized portrayal. The new costume on Alison completely changes her character. Its a simple fact.

      Liked by 1 person

      • If the entirety of the character hangs on her clothes, it is not a good show. Period. Can’t you suspend disbelief? I’m glad you know so much better than everyone involved in the production. What I don’t think YOU understand is that I am a lifelong theatre professional with a fancy degree to match. While I hear that you may feel marginalized because you don’t see yourself reflected in the play anymore, this isn’t a show about you.

        Like

    • just a note that I’m a gay man so your assertion that I feel marginalized because I dont see myself reflected in the look of Alison is actually…kinda funny. I’m actually an Emmy winning costume designer who cut his teeth in NYC working for various costume designers on Broadway and regionally. I now work on a television show in LA and have a fairly good grasp on character and show concept. So…I think you’re overeacting and taking on a very defensive attitude which doesnt help move this conversation forward in a positive manner. Nobody has declared that the entirety of the character and the success of the show is fully dependent on the clothes. What is being discussed is the obvious change in the visual presentation of the Alison character and the fact that her identity has obviously been changed. So yes, that does make a difference.

      Liked by 1 person

      • An Emmy?! I wonder if I voted for you to win. Looks like we both made wildly incorrect assumptions about each other! Funny how that happens on the Internet. Perhaps the real lesson here is that none of our opinions matter or help the course of conversation and we should all keep our thoughts to ourselves.

        Like

  16. i’m grateful for this article. i saw the original production and was so moved to see a distinctly butch woman on stage, to hear a musical homage to the beauty of butch women. Not every butch woman dresses like that, but almost no straight women do – there’s no mistaking the original beth for a hipster, or midwesterner, or suburbanite with bad taste. That’s where this new costume fails. The de-butching is real and it makes me a little bit sick to see it go down.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Pingback: It’s Pride Month. We’re still being erased. | dana astmann

  18. Pingback: Facebook Has a Problem With Dykes | Listening to Lesbians

  19. Hey Sinisterwoman, Thanks for writing and thinking about the show. I wrote a response that you and your readers can find at this link: http://funhomebroadway.com/blog.php
    Great to see you’re working at LHA!! I was there a few weeks ago. It is indeed a magical place.
    (I remember when it was still on Joan Nestle’s living apartment!)

    Liked by 1 person

    • i really appreciate your response and the fact that our concerns weren’t just brushed aside. a lot of people brought forward the idea that the costume was changed because of kate shindles body type, which perplexed me and many of my butch friends, because butches of all shapes and sizes can be found wearing t-shirts and loose jeans. that along with some of the changes that have nothing to do with body type (like the jewelry) made me doubt that explanation initially. i can understand changing a costume to accommodate a different actresses presentation, it’s just concerning when the changes have resulted in many people feeling a very different vibe from the character, and when hundreds of butches have responded saying that they also feel alienated by the changes made in the show.

      anyway, thank you for all of the work you’ve done writing and creating fun home. i know i’ve been super critical of some aspects but it really is a very important show to me and i love it overall. and yes, i’m very excited to be working at the archives this summer! it’s a great place and i’m very glad it exists and i get the opportunity to work there.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Lisa, I am super grateful for this show’s existence, too. Also, this is an opportunity to listen and learn from the people and their feedback. The show gets many things right. Her costume isn’t one of them – but it’s fixable, and it make the show so much more powerful if a correction were made.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Did you just say “learn”? This show is Ms. Kron’s vision, not yours. You aren’t very grateful if you still feel the need to explain to her like a fifth grader. Be happy that she provided an explanation; she certainly didn’t owe you one. Please stop exemplifying why the Internet is a bad idea.

        Like

      • Renita…any creative person worth her or his salt will always say that they continually learn from listening to their audience. As per your form, you’re being so very aggressive and combative…what gives?

        Liked by 2 people

    • Hi Lisa–I read your note about the costume and don’t doubt your good intentions–however, when the costume just feels wrong to the group of people the play is in some way representing (butch dykes), and you have to explain each choice, it clearly isn’t working–once again, as a fat, big-breasted woman, i reject the idea that women of my body type can’t rock a tshirt and look like a butch. As for the sports bra, I haven’t worn a bra of any kind in 45 years, even though i’d probably be a double G cup or larger if i did. I say this to show there are numerous choices for making a “curvy amazon” look like a swaggery butch. I totally disagree that “a butch woman with that build would not wear that outfit,” especially in the time period of the play–that’s exactly the outfit a butch woman would be likely to wear.

      Liked by 1 person

  20. Gosh, this label-game is getting tiring. Who decides what a butch lesbian looks like? Just you? I’m pretty sure if we polled self-defined butch lesbians and asked them how a butch lesbian dresses, we’d get a variety of answers. I’m not so sure “unfitted tshirt” would be the defining characteristic.

    If you’re going to doubt an actor’s ability to play a role based on his or her hesitation to garner an extreme haircut, you’re showing that you don’t have the understanding of what it’s like to make a living as an actor to even begin making these types of accusations. An actor’s livelihood is hugely dependent on his or her ability to land roles – and looks are a major part of that. The hairstyle required to play this role will undoubtedly make the actor have more difficulty finding work until the hair grows in. It’s not uncommon at all for actors to be hesitant to take on extreme hairstyles, whether those hairstyles are tied to stereotypical homosexual looks or not.

    Like

    • who decides what a butch lesbian looks like? id say butch lesbians do. hundreds of them at this point have responded and said that this is not something they would wear. alison bechdel is a real person with her own style as well, it’s very easy to google and see what she actually wears.

      the haircut is like 2% of the issue.

      Like

      • Hundreds?!? Gasp! That’s like… EVERY butch lesbian on earth. I can’t believe they all weighed in!

        Like

      • Why do you always have to fight? You are as closed-minded as the rest of the Internet. Your “It’s My Way or the Highway” attitude will only serve to keep you as an outsider rather than accepted by everyone else. But perhaps that’s what you want. After all, it is more fun to sit and complain that the world is against you than be a part of it. When you fight, you get all the attention; when you’re accepted, you are part of the background like everyone else.

        Like

      • The classic I Know You Are But What Am I defense! I am defeated!!!!!

        I will accept your views on butch lesbianism when you accept the use of capitalization like an adult.

        Like

  21. Renita, I don’t think you are arguing in good faith here, just being aggressive and thereby shutting down the thread (perhaps that’s your intention, it sure seems like it).

    I’m a femme lesbian, the same age as Alison Bechdel, and I can confirm with all my heart that the dismay I feel about the presentation of her character in Fun Home– a character that for all intents and purposes IS Alison Bechdel herself– is real. When Alison in Fun Home is feminized with jewelry and other signifiers, that something important has been lost. It’s not like, as a marginalized population, we aren’t used to things being lost. But when the experience of seeing a representative figure onstage–finally, finally!– is degraded by the casual discarding of things important to femme and butch lesbians– things that are part of our language, our code, our identifiers– then there is bitter disappointment. It’s not just the mangling of queer identifiers; it’s the mangling of queer women’s identifiers. The way we state who we are. Anyone who knows anything about clothing, and gayness, and how identity is communicated past the closet should recognize this; it’s inarguable. Putting a necklace, and rings, and a feminized shirt and jacket on Alison in Fun Home *changes* stuff. So much that my heart breaks a bit to see this muffling, this downplaying, this *erasure* even here. Even in this much-awarded play about a lesbian and her childhood. Ever here, there is the urge to make her look pretty. It’s a kind of betrayal.

    Liked by 1 person

    • And I’m just chiming in here as a followup. Since I left my previous comment, I have seen the touring production, in Seattle. I get that Lisa Kron had her reasons for “softening” the character presentation in Fun Home. But what could be the reason for cutting “Al for Short” from the show? Am I wrong? Did I miss it (I doubt it)? Was it, being the fantasy of young Alison rescuing and then driving away with a woman she’d rescued from a bully, a little too much for the producers? Eagerly awaiting comments.

      Like

      • al for short was cut in the broadway production as well, but i’ve never found a solid answer as to why. i’ve seen people speculate that it was too hard to stage in the round, or that it might have been cut to give a better song balance between the three alisons. i wish it wasn’t cut out either though, it’s such a great song and reminds me of myself as a kid.

        Like

      • Thank you for your reply! I figured out a little while after commenting that the song didn’t appear in the Broadway show, so my criticism of the touring company was off base. But I agree that it’s difficult to understand why it was cut, and I can’t believe it’s because it’s too difficult to stage…. song balance is I suppose the likely culprit but it’s a shame, because that song is great.

        Liked by 1 person

  22. ( little extra note: I should have reread for grammar, etc., but was feeling upset and just went ahead and posted)

    Like

  23. Pingback: Read This #6: Video Game Lore, Greek Food, Heath Ledger, and more | Shakespeare And Punk

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s