Learning to Not Entirely Hate Musical Theatre

Hi. My name is Scott. I'm in Utah State's theatre department. And I hate musical theatre.
But not entirely.

OH, THE THEATRICAL MAGIC!

In my time, I've acted in 3 musicals and done backstage work for 2. I grew up with Rogers & Hammerstein on VHS and I've seen a few live musicals in the past few years. Compared to most theatre folks, I have a limited knowledge of modern musicals. And I wouldn't want it any other way.

This week, my University will be performing the Bonnie & Clyde musical. I know nothing about the musical in itself, but I know some historical facts on Bonnie and Clyde and I've seen the first 15 minutes of the 1967 movie. Knowing the performers for this show, I can imagine this being entertaining. However, I have a feeling the music will be underwhelming. I feel this way about most musical written in the last 20 years. Take for example, Disney's Tarzan musical. I might have loved it if it wasn't for the plot-dragging songs with 0 lyrical or innovative value. Who's fault? (see below)

Anyways, my personal experiences with being part of musicals aren't bad at all. They were all fun experiences [yet I was always surrounded by unnecessary cast drama (except for the tight-knit, mature cast of Sondheim on Sondheim)]. My singing voice aint bad and it's constantly changing. I did plenty of acting in my latter teen years. The plays I acted in were all from the classic Broadway era-- Guys & Dolls, Annie Get Your Gun, Kiss Me, Kate. I'd say musicals like these come with a nostalgic aura. As for modern musicals? There is no justification.

I've seen audition sign-ups for musicals where they recommend the audition piece to not be from an overdone play. They list some: Thoroughly Modern Millie, The 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee... I legitimately don't know any music from either of these musicals. It's sad to live in a world where I have to give a crap.

Wicked sucks.
Cats sucks.
Even the kinda good musicals have super annoying audio recordings.
Rent.
Hairspray.

EVERYTHING SUCKS.

Some people out there may think my hate for musicals is due to being uncultured or having a lack of artistic taste. I dare say it's the opposite. I'm extremely picky about the world of cultural arts. It's not even a matter of not enjoying occasional flamboyance... OK, so maybe it is. But I think that people using their vocal talents to express what's happening in the plot (with an unmemorable melody to boot) is a waste of time and talent. As for the big numbers, they all sound the freaking same. There are some impressive/unique chords peppered about, but that's just all for show. By Act II, you'll be wishing the show had more than one song with jazz elements. You'll also be checking your watch because you know how the plays going to end and the plot is just incessantly dragging (and sucking). The musical outline has been copied and pasted repeatedly for the last 40 years. Because that's how musicals work.

There are some good musicals out there, don't get me wrong. And "Show Business" can be fun. I had fun with Guys & Dolls, although I openly admit- unlike most shows I was in- all my acting techniques were literal crap literally pulled from my literal butt.

(sigh) But in spite of the false sense of community that can come from being in a show, there's also a real sense of community. You can learn a lot from performing. You can see a play and technically consider yourself "cultured." My family and I watched this opera singer perform "Bring Him Home" and I purposely joked around through the whole thing to keep myself from crying. I don't hate musicals entirely. But I hate listening to music from musicals and the majority of modern musicals are terribly written. So... yeah.

You should all see USU perform Bonnie & Clyde this week!

EAT YOUR HEART OUT, IRVING BERLIN

girl complexes VII

Haven't written one of these things since November! I may never have to write another one after this one. This answers any questions that may have arisen from my earlier "girl complexes" posts (which, by the way, combine for an impressive 202 views). This post isn't commentary on sexism or dispelling gender misperceptions. This one's about ME.
Here's everything you need to know about my dating history:

2007-2010
I could probably count how many dates I had on one hand. Never got into a relationship. Served a mission from April 2010- April 2012 where I wasn't allowed to date. This cut no ice with me.
Fall Semester 2012
Went on a lot of dates. Although I must admit, I was going through a rough patch of my life as a recent returned missionary. I recall going on dates weekly and I legitimately can only remember one or two girls' names. I remained single the whole time.
2013
Pretty low key. I had my interests, but rarely acted upon them.
Spring Semester 2014
Went on a lot of dates. Unlike my 2012 dating spree, I sometimes romanticize this semester as The Greatest Days Of My Life. I was only taking 12 credits, I didn't have a real job and I was living off a huge scholarship. I took advantage of my free time. The dating? None of my attempts were successful and I didn't always have fun with it. But the experience as a whole was plenty enjoyable. One of my dates was a double with Ryan Burt & Becca Graham, who are now engaged. I was with them on their first date. Heck yes!
April 2014-Current
Meh.

Anyways, my dating life is uneventful (as you can see above). I usually bust out a "girl complexes" blogpost when I feel a lack of appeal to the dating scene. Instead of analyzing other people's thoughts, I'm talking about mine this time.
Here's everything you need to know about my recent inquiries:

My Life Was A Big Fat Lie
Of course it was. Yours probably was too. What I'm referring to is mindset. People often think they need something when in reality, they don't. For starters: Toddlers. They're so convinced they need a Hershey's Cookies & Cream bar, their world is destroyed when they don't get one. Then high school; every teenager thinks they need some new hot item all the cool kids have. As we grow older, our irrational desires can lead us to self-doubt and social disillusion. My idea of what eros (or "intimate love") should be changes every year, because I'm usually wrong. I am 24 years old and I still want my Hershey's Cookies & Cream!
Never Favorites, Always Lists
I've used this quote before and I use it again: "How we interact with art is a microcosm of the way we interact with the world" --Carl Wilson. I don't literally talk about music very often. Yet I think about it all the time! And I write about it often. I make music lists all the time. I've made lists my entire life. Looking back, I remember listing my favorite songs, countries, cartoons, etc. Does this mean I have lists for people too? Friends? Enemies? Love interests? The answer is no. But every time I ever choose what's #1 on a list, that thing becomes less enjoyable because I glorify it too much. 
I'm talkin' about music. My #1 favorite song. My #1 favorite album. I love it and enjoy doing so until I reach a point of realizing how much I love it. Then I plate it in gold and the listening experience is suddenly never the same. This is my microcosm to my social life. I've never had a best friend. Ever. In my life. I've also never had a girlfriend. In fact, every time I get interested in someone, the feeling just fades into an underwhelming fatigue. Every time. Sure, this is an excuse for being single. But it's a darn good one. 
I Am LDS
I belong to a church that talks about marriage a lot. So I think any of my dating spurts were influenced by some impression of trying to get married- because it's important and crap like that. Don't get me wrong, it is. I wouldn't feel comfortable currently marrying any person I currently know. Man, I did a great job wording that.

I have a lot of other things to say, which probably means I'll write another "girl complexes" in a couple months. As usual, I'm trying to write music in my spare time and I second guess everything I write. So I'm eternally at the drawing board. Asking me what I look for in a girl is like asking me what I look for in a song: I listen to lots of genres; I don't have just one type. And in either circumstance, I hate wasting time with sell-outs.

The Future of Music! (acc. Rolling Stone)

Perhaps the title is misleading with the word "future." Listed below is every artist Rolling Stone has given an initial perfect score (5 stars) in the last 10 years (2005-2014). The number aside their name shows how many 5-star albums they've released in that timespan. So these are artists they are calling the best of our time. In this generation, music progression included, these are apparently (ahem) the modern greats. Feel free to laugh.

Leon Russell (.5)

Leon Russell

Elton John (.5)

Elton John w/ U2's Bono

U2 (2)

U2

Kanye West (2)

Kanye West w/ U2's Bono + The Edge (+ uninvited Lenny Kravitz)

Bob Dylan (2.5)

Bob Dylan w/ U2's Bono

Bruce Springsteen (3)

Bruce Springsteen w/ U2's Bono + The Edge

So these people are the artists of the future! That's the point of being a music magazine, right? With this, one might think praising a musician is based on:

• Being a male over 50 years old
• ^particularly if you made your best music 25-50 years ago
• How close of a friend you are to Bono
• If your name is Kanye West

Despite these high rankings, Rolling Stone has (respectively) been known to change their minds from year-to-year. All music critics do this. Below are the albums that were given 5 stars.

2005 Kanye West Late Registration**
2006 Bob Dylan Modern Times**
2007 Bruce Springsteen Magic
2009 U2 No Line on the Horizon*
2009 Bruce Springsteen Working on a Dream
2010 Kanye West My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy**
2010 Elton John & Leon Russell The Union
2012 Bruce Springsteen Wrecking Ball*
2012 Bob Dylan Tempest
2014 U2  Songs of Innocence*
2014 Bob Dylan The Bootleg Series Vol. 11: The Basement Tapes Complete^

* Album of the Year
** Addition to their 2011-revised "The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time" list
^ I count this album as a .5 on my list because Bob Dylan's "Bootleg Series" releases are often set aside as reissues, which don't count as initial releases. Vol. 11 is the only "Bootleg Series" album to get 5 stars and it was considered a reissue (*cough cough* because it IS). However, The Bootleg Series Vol. 8-- Tell Tale Signs: Rare and Unreleased 1989-2006 was actually counted as a non-reissue (dude, it's a rarities album) in 2008 and was even their #2 album of that year. So Dyaln gets half a point for this release.

I admit, Rolling Stone did a lot for me in my mid-teenage years. I was introduced to tons of great classic artists some new music. But if you want to know what the future of music will look like, this is what you'll get from Rolling Stone:
Everything great has already been done before. Why respect new artists when you can just stick with new stuff from the old guys? Apparently there's no hope for future music.
Unless your name is Kanye West.