High School Musical: The Musical: The Essay: A Musical of a Generation

By Remi Williams

“The music in those shows isn’t hip hop, okay, or rock, or anything essential to culture…it’s like show music.” Oh how wrong Chad Danforth could be when describing musicals while he performs in one! This semester, one of our main foci was togetherness and the culture expressed in different musicals. Seeing the characters from different backgrounds come together means a lot in our world, especially right now. Even better than seeing the characters of a musical come together during this pandemic? Seeing your favorite characters come together when you’re 7. High School Musical premiered January 20th in 2006, and I vividly remember it. As someone who played basketball, starred in musicals, AND read for pleasure (yes, 7 year old me was much more accomplished than I am now), this movie musical was made for me. I was torn between my identities, and director Kenny Ortega told me I didn’t have to be. I was sold! And so were so many other people my age. My friends who had never been interested in musicals before were obsessed with the story, the music, and mostly Zac Efron as Troy Bolton. High School Musical showed a generation of individuals how we need to support one another no matter how different we are. It broke generational boundaries of cliques through dance, song, and a high school musical.

As long as high schools have existed, so have cliques. Originally, Troy Bolton, a budding basketball star, and Gabriella Montez, a freaky genius played by Vanessa Hudgens, were trying to push these boundaries at East High by auditioning for the spring musical. Their respective friends, Taylor McKessie played by Monique Coleman and Chad Danforth played by Corbin Bleu, did not want this to happen. They set up a whole scheme just to make sure that Troy and Gabriella would stay away from one another. Whether an acting choice by Hudgens or a directing choice by Ortega, seeing Gabriella’s tear streaked face before her iconic performance of “When There Was Me and You” broke hearts, and it really emphasized that dividing ourselves between groups of people could hurt us and others. It made clear that sticking together and supporting friends’ choices will help us create healthy relationships with people that we may not have considered being friends with before. Expanding our circles and including others builds a community that works towards inclusivity and support. 

The choreography by Kenny Ortega, really shines in “Stick to the Status Quo,” written by David Nessim Lawrence. The lyrics of this song and the switch between soloists and chorus members separates the characters while also bringing them together. Each group wants the same thing: to stay true to their label and not branch out into another group’s territory. However, the choreography says the opposite. While the soloists from each group stand on their tables and act out their new found passion, the rest of the cafeteria partakes in the same exact choreography. Even though the camera angles still focus on the differences between the groups, a viewer can’t help but notice the similarities between the groups while they dance in unison. The togetherness emphasized by High School Musical meets here with the idea of individualism; everyone should take pride in all of their identities no matter what they are, and those identities should have support from others. Superiority between groups does not exist as they all sing the same notes and dance the same moves. 

High School Musical’s most memorable number “We’re All in This Together” comes as the closing song. The title alone should tell you how important community has become to the characters of this show. While walking through a tunnel made up of extras holding up her brother Ryan, played by Lucas Grabeel, Sharpay, played by Ashley Tisdale, sings the lyrics “we’ve arrived because we stuck together, champions one and all,” even though she just lost the lead spot in the musical to some new girl. These lyrics show real character development from Sharpay, who once used all of her power to ensure that Troy and Gabriella did not make it to callbacks. She realizes that supporting her fellow classmates will help her make it through; if she supports them, they will support her. The choreography of this number also speaks to how the community has changed at East High. As stated in the last paragraph, the choreography for “Stick to the Status Quo” mixed togetherness and individualism, but the choreography for the last song finally shows everyone as one entity. All of the high school students fill the gym, some on the bleachers and some on the floor, to celebrate the way that they all came together for a win in all departments. All of them move as one, their movements sharp and their faces ecstatic. They reach for each other’s hands, and you can tell that they fully support one another as they dance in celebration. Seeing this as a 7 year old (and as a 21 year old) reminds me that we should not have to choose between our activities or our friends; supporting everyone’s successes help bring us together as a community.

The availability of this show to the public also allows us to feel a larger sense of community. It originally premiered on Disney Channel, something that anyone with cable had access to. If you didn’t have cable, you could go to a friends house and watch, which most of my friends did anyway. They sold it in stores on DVD and Blu-ray (wow I feel old), making it even more accessible. When the hype died down, they eventually sold for about $5 and probably still do now; what a steal! It now also streams on Disney+, covering almost all bases of media platforms. You can find the soundtrack on a CD, on most music streaming platforms, and it used to play on Radio Disney, the children’s radio. The fact that almost everyone can enjoy this movie musical in one way or another allows individuals to come together over it and brings our community closer, especially those of us who grew up with it. High School Musical does a lot to bring communities together that would not usually interact with one another. The jocks can sing, the singers can play sports, the nerds can do pretty much anything, and each group should support the other. Having this premiere on a children’s network with a viewership of shapeable minds also helped their cause. As a 7 year old watching this, I did not consciously know that I would take these lessons with me after watching it for the 100th time, but it definitely allowed me to feel comfortable being the girl who did it all. I didn’t have to choose who I wanted to be; I got to be whatever I wanted all at the same time, and I had a lot of different friends because of it. High School Musical changed the way that people saw one another, and for that reason, it now is and always will be culturally relevant.

All (white) Men Are Created Equal

By: Remi W.

A thoughtful and wise philosopher once said, “We’re all in this together, and it shows when we stand hand in hand…”(High School Musical 2006). But, are we really? Is standing hand in hand the only thing we need to do to unite as a country, as people? I would argue that it takes more than that, and the Broadway musical turned streaming sensation Hamilton, which is written by Lin Manuel-Miranda, would struggle to agree. If you’ve been living under a rock and have not heard, it comes as one of Lin’s major hit shows, directed by Thomas Kail; it tells the story of Alexander Hamilton, an immigrant from the Caribbean who made a name for himself in the US of A, and if you’ve ever heard of him, you know it went pretty well. Behind the scenes, Lin made sure that the musical included a cast of majority POC to represent what America really looks like and to allow these groups of people to feel seen, to feel united in our country. However, this musical neglects to recognize the suffering that Black people faced in the late 1700’s and beyond; its arrival and portrayal on Disney+ does little to fix this problem. Although more accessible, Hamilton as seen on Disney+ ignores the idea of the ensemble and with that further ignores the suffering of POC which completely eliminates any possibility of unity.

Alexander Hamilton does not make unity an easy task. The show starts with a song that involves every single character in the musical telling the origin story of Alexander Hamilton. A whole cast together for one song and some details of personal struggle make us feel as though we will relate to this; unfortunately, singing a song that only relates other characters to the title character of the show doesn’t feel much like community. Audience members do not even learn who most of the character’s names until a few songs later. “Me, I fought with him, me, I died for him, me, I trusted him, me, I loved him, and me, I’m the damn fool that shot him…” Manuel-Miranda writes, solely focused on Hamilton (or quite literally himself in the case of the streamable version on Disney+) and ignoring the possibility that other characters have reason for living that does not involve him. Not only did Eliza Schuyler, John Laurens, Aaron Burr, and countless others make (read: were forced to make) sacrifices for Alexander Hamilton to succeed, but he fought against them all the way until the end. Hamilton’s interaction with Aaron Burr dominates most of the plot. Constantly back and forth, especially in songs like “Your Obediant Servant,” “The Election of 1800,” and “Non-Stop,” these two never cease to find something to fight over, not to mention that they eventually duke it out in a duel, and Hamilton ends up dying. Burr clearly pushes Hamilton’s buttons and vice versa as we can see through the facial expressions of Lin and Leslie Odom, Jr. who plays Burr from the close ups granted to us through Disney+. He fights almost as much if not more with his own wife, Eliza, in songs like “That Would Be Enough,” “Take A Break,” and “Stay Alive-Reprise,” and let’s not forget about the cheating scandal. Eliza’s pain comes through the screen during Phillipa Soo’s rendition of “Burn,” and viewers can feel the heartache she so beautifully portrays as she burns her letters. Hamilton will go on to fight with Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, Samuel Seaburry, Angelica Schuyler, and indirectly King George III (the list could go on, but for the sake of time, I will pause here). With a whole plot that involves one character fighting against the rest of the characters for various reasons, that task of building community or a sense of unity becomes much harder. Lin writes the characters completely centered around Alexander Hamilton which does not help to create the sense of togetherness that theatre goers look for in musicals.

As a future educator and a member of the Peabody College here at Vanderbilt, I have learned my fair share about white washed history; this musical only perpetuates it. Although Lin and casting directors Bethany Knox and Bernard Tesley made the conscious decision to cast many POC in roles where white people would usually stand to represent what America really looks like, he lost the sense of community by continuing the narrative of the white, rich, and snobby founding fathers. He continues to center the white voices of history by telling a story we all hear in high school and adding a few tweaks. Not only does this center white voices by telling exclusively their story, but it completely disregards the story of Black people at this time. At the end of the musical, George Washington, who is played by Christopher Jackson, solemnly hangs his head while Phillipa Soo sings “I speak out against slavery…” as if this erases the years of suffering endured by slaves due, in part, to people in Alexander Hamilton’s life, including George Washington. For the rest of the musical, the only person who speaks out against slavery is John Laurens, played by Anthony Ramos, who dies early and never gets to fulfill his wish of abolishing slavery. Lin writes Hamilton’s response to Laurens’ death and claims he needs to get to work in terms of slavery, but then mentions it only once after the fact. This mention of slavery comes in “Cabinet Battle #1” where Hamilton really only says it to get a dig in at Thomas Jefferson, one of his biggest foes. “Keep ranting, we know who’s really doing the planting…” writes Lin in an attempt to expose Jefferson for claiming that he does all the work in the South. This does not condemn slavery in any way, just stabs at Jefferson for stretching the truth. The ensemble members can be seen in “What’d I Miss” scrubbing the floors of Jefferson’s home in Montecello, and they come to attention when he enters the room. “Sally be a lamb, darling, won’t you open it,” he says to a presumed slave as he hands her a letter found in his office, referencing one of the most submissive animals known to man. And no one says anything about this being wrong. Intentional? Maybe not. Uncomfortable? Absolutely. When you ask “What is one thing that could unite Americans in 2020?” the answers that come to mind do not include slavery. 

There is also a clear divide between the ensemble members (slaves) and the historically white founding fathers. The ensemble costumes are all white, shabby, and minimal, much like anyone who did not have money during these times while the upper class individuals have exquisite gowns and fancy suits. These costumes explicitly show viewers the difference in class status and further separates the characters from one another. Their costumes change to something more “suitable” in the song “A Winter’s Ball” as only those who had power and money (and we most likely white) were invited to this affair. Viewers can see this divide between characters, and it certainly does not foster any sense of community. Lin, director Thomas Kail, and costume designer Paul Tazewell made these lyric, blocking, and costuming decisions possibly hoping to bring the masses together over the abolition of slavery and came up short. Seeing slavery almost dismissed in this musical gives POC (or anyone who cares about POC) no reason to come together over this show, and once again, destroys the idea of unity.

The choreography of the show, created by Andy Blankenbuehler, mesmerizes audience members, and the precision in the movements amongst the ensemble members shows how united a country can be in the face of a revolution. Unfortunately, due to the filming and distribution of Hamilton on Disney+, the ensemble completely disappears from most shots. In favor of close up angles of the main characters and famous actors, ensemble choreography gets tossed to the side, which makes community seem useless and nonexistent. The only thing important to Disney+ is every action the main characters produce. Understandably, many non theatre goers would be confused to be watching a “movie” where the camera angles do not change and the actors seem a mile away. However, when you eliminate the ensemble, you eliminate the community. Each ensemble member has a role to play, whether assigned to them or by them. These roles allow us to feel as though we can interact with the set, the time period, and the story. They make audience members feel like part of the musical, and this makes the musical easier to enjoy. The Disney+ version of Hamilton completely disregards the need for these actors, and makes all their hard work purposeless. It makes viewers feel as if they should only care about the main characters and does little to bring them into the community on stage.

Aside from all of the things that the show itself does poorly, Disney+ does not  make community among the American people any easier to achieve. If you can afford a subscription to Disney+, which is $6.99 per month, Hamilton streams at the click of a button. Most people who would benefit from seeing Hamilton may not be able to afford a subscription to Disney+, however, it eliminates the need to buy a ticket to Broadway or to a touring show which costs more than a whole years subscription. While it does unite people who are able to watch online or on a SmartTV, it does nothing to bring individuals into the theatre. If anything, it pushes people away from buying tickets to see shows, and away from the theatre community as a whole. Before it aired on Disney+, many people who never had the desire to step into a theatre had reason to go. Having to go to the theatre to see Hamilton brought theatre goers and non theatre goers together at last. With the pandemic, everyone now watches from the safety of their own home, but the streaming of the musical will change how we interact with others in the theatre forever. Non theatre goers will have no reason to step into a theatre no matter how amazing the musical because they can just wait for it to come out on some streaming platform. While this may have minimal impact, this only further tears the audience in two. 

Hamilton has phenomenal music, actors, sets, costumes, and lyrics; even with all of those things, it still fails to bring Americans together. With its dismissal of slavery, its centering of white voices, and its arrival on Disney+ which ignores the ensemble and the need for in person theatre, it falls flat in its ability to be what the American people need for inspiration in this time of national divide. Not only does it fail to provide what we need to be inspired to come together, but it actively tears down the idea of unity. If you want a sing-a-long musical to enjoy on your Saturday night, this one was made for you. If you want something to make you feel better about the state of our country, this one you can skip.

The Downfall of Feminism in Theatre

by Remi W.

The first time I saw The King and I live, I was seven. I fell asleep before intermission. My sleepiness had nothing to do with the talented performers playing Anna, the white, British school teacher, and The King or the engaging storyline from 1860 Siam; the musical included themes that went right over my head: slavery, international relations, and the idea of a “white savior.” Now that I am older and have watched it again under the direction of Bartlett Sher and Gary Halvorson, I understand these themes and how they continue to make this musical a huge hit in the United States for all the wrong reasons. The Miss Saigon revival directed by Laurence Connor is a musical set in South Vietnam during the Vietnam War that also deals with some of these same themes and narratives. Another white savior (a United States soldier this time), more international relations, and the prostitution of the main character, Kim, somehow give this musical another special place in American’s hearts despite its stereotypical narrative. Why do we continue to love and cherish these musicals? They are definitely not furthering us as a society nor are they culturally appropriate. As a woman watching these, I felt disappointed in our need for the patriarchy. Miss Saigon shows no sign of feminism for the women of Vietnam in 1975 while The King and I problematically displays it as easy to attain for white women in Eastern countries in the 1860’s. Although women living in Asia occupy the lead roles in each of these musicals, the lives they live and stories they tell differ prominently. We want our musicals to reflect our experiences and our lives; feminism must be part of it.

 Anna’s journey to and through Siam allows us to see how her whiteness and westerness affect her view of feminism. Anna came to Siam in the 1860’s on a boat with her son to be a school teacher for the King of Siam’s children. At the very beginning, we witness her speaking to the wives of the King, and she asks why they continue to call her “sir.” Lady Thiang, the King’s “head” wife, says, “because you scientific, not lowly like a woman.” Anna replies by saying that all women are smart and important. She says this with ease as someone who comes from “Western” culture. Her character immediately imposes her whiteness and ideas of feminism on them, and while inciting feminism, she does it in the wrong way. Completely ignoring their culture in favor of her own, she begins to sing about “true love,” a concept they are unfamiliar with, pushing her western ideals onto them as a white savior does. 

In another moment of expressed whiteness, Anna sings “Getting to Know You.” This song’s lyrics, although most likely written unironically by Oscar Hammerstein II, make it sound like she actually took the time to get to know them. Unfortunately, the things she teaches them will change their culture forever, and the things she learns from them, she will most likely forget. Through dancing, she teaches them how to “properly” sip a cup of tea and how to shake hands. When she tries to teach Tuptim, the slave of the King, how to shake hands, Lady Thiang interrupts her, which surprises Anna. Kelli O’Hara, who plays Anna, makes a choice here to be overly confused by the disappearance of Tuptim, emphasizing her misunderstanding of their culture and their use of women as slaves. After the song, things get carried away, and the King and Anna end up fighting about what the King promised her, and he refers to her as his “servant.” She advocates for herself in front of all of the children, the wives, and Tuptim, which startles them. The staging of this scene makes it clear how important this white woman and her culture has become to them. Boldly, she showcases her ability to speak her mind as a woman, something that the people of Siam are not used to doing, especially not to the King. Although this could be a good thing for her to do in order to teach them, she does not value their culture which in turn teaches them to not value their culture. Women do have value, but do not act like a white “Western” woman needs to tell anyone that.

On the other hand, Kim’s views of feminism in Miss Saigon do not even exist. She quite literally has no choices to make for herself or her life. It all starts when the Engineer, a strip club owner, pulls Kim in and forces her to work for him as a stripper. During “The Heat is on in Saigon,” Kim stands on a chair to introduce herself to the strip club regulars while wearing a traditional white dress, emphasizing her innocence and therefore ignorance. In “The Movie in My Mind,” Kim and Gigi both sing about wanting a better life; both of them explicitly state that a man will make their dreams come true. The lyrics, written by Alain Boublil and Richard Maltby, Jr., continuously emphasize “he,” implying that they need a man to survive, completely erasing any agency that they had in their lives. After Kim finishes singing, a drunk man tries to grab her, and Chris, the American soldier she eventually falls in love with, fights the man off of her, emphasizing in movement her weakness to defend herself and creating his image as the white savior. Kim then sings “Sun and Moon” after spending only one night with Chris where she describes him as the sun which also happens to be that thing that humans cannot live without. Interesting. More white saviorism and less feminism. Classic. As quickly as he arrived, he left, leaving Kim lonely and suffering in Vietnam. During “Too Much for One Heart,” the musical choice to have Kim sing full of hope underneath two men, the Engineer and John, who both sing of her probable downfall, highlights how the men in the show have manipulated her and continue to use her to get what they want. The patriarchy cannot be trusted. This whole show exudes anti-feminist energy, and poor Kim, in comparison to Anna, has absolutely no power. 

Both women live in Asia.  One is white, and one is Vietnamese. Both women are working for men, yet the white one has more agency. The only difference between the two women is their race, yet the white one is more “Westernized,” so that somehow makes her better and more capable of feminism; it makes Kim the “other,” incapable of standing up for herself. Both of these musicals portray feminism in a poor light. They make beautiful statements about love and loss, but say very little, and when they do, it isn’t good, about any sort of social justice for women in the world. Both women make sacrifices, but the white one one has a happy ending and the “other” only dies. Directors need to add more feminism and female agency in musicals we see on Broadway and in the right ways. White women should not force their ideals onto others; these others should just have agency in their own stories. These two musicals are near and dear to American’s hearts because of their heartbreaking love stories, so lets make some different casting choices, some different acting choices, and some different staging choices. The book and lyrics and story may remain the same, but that does not mean we have to let it destroy our progressive social movements towards women’s equality.