Classics versus new writing… No contest?

There is a lot of rose tinted glasses IMO because I imagine for every classic, there is about 10 duds which time has forgotten.

It's hard to predict what the future theatregoer will be watching in 80 years time because taste change with every decade. I suspect DEH or Heathers will look like museum pieces to teenagers in 2102.

I often think about this.

Anything that is new will always be compared to what came before and that makes it really hard for new writing to be held on the same level as the classics.

I often prefer the writing of newer musicals but can’t help but generally enjoy the classics overall more just because they hold memories to me that are special. New shows just won’t be able to do that.

It’s so hard for new writing to be heard, with so many revivals, jukebox shows etc. the classics never had to compete with these.

I can see Hamilton being around for a while. That is the only one I would say.

I hope that Operation mincemeat and Come from away become classics.

I'll be interested to see what happens to Hamilton, Heather's, Legally Blonde and DEH.

I'm no fan of pop and rock music and I do think by writing in those formats then it instantly dates a show

I find it funny that 1 of the classics you've listed has gone through so many rewrites that it may as well be a new show. Anything Goes is almost unrecognisable from when it premiered nearly a century ago in terms of both its book and its score. Singin' in the Rain is in a similar boat with a number of songs both put in and excised willy-nilly, but as a stage show I don't think it can even really be called a classic considering it was first put on in the 80s. And South Pacific may have a gorgeous score but, much like a lot of R&H shows, its book is not so airtight. Now Gypsy you won't hear many complaints from me about, but these "new classics" you've listed here I cannot say the same for.

I love a bit of Les Mis as much as the next person, but that doesn't mean it's not an overstuffed show full of unmotivated reprises and a decent number of thinly drawn characters. Sure Phantom of the Opera might have been a mega hit but it's pretty much the equivalent of a Marvel movie, it's a musical blockbuster, full of spectacle but just don't think about it too hard. And Chess? The show you can't see the same way twice because it's rewritten every new production? That doesn't suggest to me a very solidly written show. And neither Sunset nor Evita are without their problems.

But I'm not trying to berate fans of these shows, in fact I'm a fan of a lot of them. All I'm saying is that not all of these shows are these infallible critical-darlings that it was clear from day one would run and run and run and everyone knew would become classics. I mean look at Chicago, another show I think most people would consider a "new classic", and yet it received pretty mixed reviews originally and while it ran for a respectable 2 years, I doubt anyone would think it would be the second-longest running Broadway show today. So while you might not be able to point to a new show right now and say, "That'll be a classic in 80 years," I doubt most people who lived while the classics you've listed premiered could do the same for them.

I think another thing easily forgotten when we get all doom and gloom about the state of modern musical theatre is how many terrible shows were made in the past as well. The shows we remember today were surrounded by such shlock that have rightly been left behind but it's easy to look back at all the classics and think that era was better. But the ratio of good to bad musicals made today is probably not so different from what it was decades ago, in fact I'd argue the majority of musicals are bS, it's just survivorship bias that prevents us from realising it was always this way.

I think the real difference between the past and present is that a lot of the best musicals in the past were also some of the biggest, whereas today the real artistry is found in the smaller productions, like Fun Home or The Band's Visit (or if we're talking new British writing, then like Islander or Operation Mincemeat), because that's where risks can be taken. Yes you might get the occasional commercial, long-runnng hit that's equally critically acclaimed, like Hamilton, but most of the big spectacle shows are left for the lazy adaptations of popular films nowadays because they are safer investments. It's like how in the 20th century many of the Best Picture nominees/winners were also some of the highest grossing films of the year, but now that usually couldn't be further from the truth (but also do not take this as me suggesting the Oscars are the best indicator of quality because that couldn't be further from the truth, it's just an interesting pattern I noticed between the 2 mediums).

Sorry for this massive wall of text response haha. I just think it's easy to be all doom and gloom about the state of modern musical theatre but really today's not so different to the past century, good art is always being made, you just need to know where to look for it.

One thing that helps the old musicals I think is that there was no option to use synthesisers.

If you listen to Friday Night is Music Night you often get an overture or entr'acte. I'm not convinced anybody is going to bother to arrange some of the newer overtures for a full orchestra (if an overture actually exists!). Although I suppose it could mean audiences are better behaved nowadays? (Although looking at the bad behaviour thread I'm not so sure!) I know overtures were traditionally written with a big dramatic start to get the audience to be quiet.

I just mentioned those four because I happen to have seen them in the last few weeks. 

But doesn't that go for every kind of musical? The "classics" were also a product of their own time and songs written for them by the likes of Cole Porter big mainstream hits on the wireless or played on a gramophone.

My personal beef with modern musicals are the often utterly dire, clunky and forgettable lyrics compared to older songs. Take, for example "You never walk alone", a song written so beautifully that it stands on its own and has been used in countless different situations where some form of comfort was needed - and has been adapted by football terraces all over Europe. Simply because it was written so well, that it speaks to so many people.

In modern musicals, however, very few songs stand on their own, when taken out of the context of the show. And songs that could be wonderfully meaningful... just aren't. My example: Waving through the window, which could have been a wonderful anthem to speak to every outsider everywhere in the world, but is a clunky pop song with ham-fisted lyrics that leaves me completely cold (as does the whole of DEH, but that's another subject).

Right now, for reasons too convoluted to explain, I have fallen in love with Hadestown again, simply because of the sheer brilliance of the lyrics (and Anais Mitchell has published a wonderful little book in which she explains her writing process for each song, which shows just how much time and thought has gone into it). Whether it's something sweet and fun like the Wedding Song or something deep and dark like the songs towards the finale when it all goes tits up ("Men are fools, men are frail, give them the rope and they'll hang themselves...")

So I think it will be those shows that will stand the test of time, because they're smart and well-written and everyone can find something in them and which music they employ is really secondary. We still love to sing the hippie anthems of Hair, although the 60s are a long time ago, because their message of peace & love still speaks to people today who weren't even born back then and we still love the hits of the bombastic mega-musicals of the 80s, because Grizabella's feeling of abandonment or Marius' grief for his dead friends are general emotions that everyone can get behind.

I don't think there's anything wrong with using rock and pop for a musical and indeed many modern classics like Rocky Horror and Rent have that sort of sound.

Amen to that! Music can sometimes be firmly rooted in its time but the quality of the composition transcends like Les Mis & Blood Brothers. They both contained some of cheesiest synth sounds ever committed to (the 1980’s) stage, but have either been re-orchestrated or frozen in a time capsule that involuntarily tours the country. I think that Hamilton and the Disney musicals will enter canon, and the teen shows will become fun things that junior companies alternate on a loop so that ‘insert’s name of the good one in your am dram’ can play the lead.

The point has already been made but every ‘classic ‘ was new once. Having said that, the new shows that work all seem to be very niche. Jamie, Six, Heathers, Hanson…all these are catering to individual tastes. There hasn’t been a huge, mega crowd-pleasing hit in a very, very long while. Maybe not since Wicked. Even Hamilton is quite divisive.

Only Fools and Horses is really enjoyable and safe.