so about last night ....

Live theater...the usher shows you to your seat, asks you to turn off your cell phone and hands you a Playbill...you read about the cast in order of appearance, then the musical numbers, and Who's Who in the cast, their backgrounds, other roles ...

And there's no mention of Laura Benanti, not in the Playbill, not on any of the slips of paper tucked into the Playbill with updates and substitutions...."At this performance the role of Lord Boxington will be played by Tony Roach..."

And then the director,  Bartlett Sher walks out onto the stage and introduces himself to the audience.  He tells us that it feels just like opening night, because this is the first performance  with Laura Benanti as Eliza Doolittle.  He tells us Laura has been rehearsing the part for the last 5-6 weeks.   And then he tells us that our leading man, Harry Hadden-Paton, has been away from the production for the past 5 weeks, he was off filming some movie called Downton Abbey, so that Laura and Harry didn't rehearse together until the day of the performance. 

When he leaves the stage, the house lights go done, the orchestra starts to play the familiar overture, the curtain goes up, and the magic begins...

"Wouldn't It Be Loverly"..."The Rain In Spain"..."With A Little Bit of Luck"..."On The Street Where You Live"..."Get Me To The Church On Time"...the Lerner and Loewe score is amazing...

And then...

sigh....

It has become the trend on Broadway to impose 21st century sensibilities on 20th century musical comedy: revive the play but change the ending to make it more "modern".  I saw a production of Fiddler On The Roof where a subtle change was very effective.  But more often the alterations leave me shaking my head; I saw productions of Sweet Charity and Thoroughly Modern Millie where the producers did this, and it really didn't "work". 

This production of My Fair Lady changes the ending.  And it doesn't work.

If you've seen a production ofthe show, or the 1964 moive with Rex Harrison and Audrey Hepburn, upi know how it's supposed to end.  After an argument where Eliza throws Higgins' slippers at him, she runs away.  Higgins finds Eliza at his mother's house, where Eliza tells him off in no uncertain terms, making it clear she is leaving him and starting her own life.  He walks home, sings "I've Grown Accustomed To her Face" as he realizes he loves Eliza.  He's in his living room listening to a recording of Eliza's Cockney accent when she comes back to his house.  He asks her for his slippers ... and the curtain comes down.  It's a somewhat ambiguous ending, but the implication is that they will continue some sort of  relationship, perhaps even a romantic one.


Here's how it was done in the movie:






Sher says he didn't "change" the ending for this production, he just "interpreted" it. 

The ending of the Lincoln Center Theater production does not add or omit any lines, but — spoilers ahead — sees Eliza walk offstage after tenderly patting Higgins on the cheek. Sher won’t go as far to say that Eliza walks out on Higgins, nor that she will never talk to him again, but rather that she is now free to pursue her own path.
“I see it as her going into the future,” Sher said.

I read Pygmalion many years ago.  George Bernard Shaw's play ends quite differently than the Lerner and Loewe musical.  After Eliza tells Higgins that the world would keep spinning without him, she and Higgins' mother go to Alfred Doolittle's wedding, leaving Higgins alone to ponder Eliza's future.  Shaw resisted any attempt to graft a happier, less ambiguous ending onto his play.  

I think that's what Sher was striving for in this production, a self-actualized Eliza out to chart her own destiny.  But ...no.  It wasn't horrible, but it was subtly disappointing. 

Overall, though, it was a wonderful production, and I'll be singing that score for the next few days.

Anyhow, this is the Benanti nsert to the Playbill.  We picked it up on our way out of the theater.