you are quite funny.

no serious musical theatre scholar thinks Wicked the musical is any good.

and while the novel has its problems its a much better tale. more developed, more intellectual, more thought provoking and more rounded a tale than the 3rd rate msuical adaptation.

Ah, Salome, we can tell just from the later statement that this person thinks "normal" readers cannot appreciate an "intellectual" book that their opinion is going to be terribly lightweight anyway. It was four years ago, and I suspect they have long since gone dancing through Life. I have resigned myself to the influx of fangirls, and only hope that perhaps the shallow baptism will lead them to immersion later on.

i just hope they liked the book!!

no serious musical theatre scholar thinks Wicked the musical is any good.

[/quote]

how come? the play is REALLY good, even though I'm not a serious musical theatre scholar or anything, but really tell me why..i want to know

^ Everyone has their own opinion. Some love it, some don't.

yeah i guess.....i think we all know mine xD lolz

Actually most recognise the distinction between a subjective opinion and an objective opinion. Whether one 'loves' something should not entirely serve as an indication of whether it is any 'good'. To use such declarative phrases conerning quality as 'good' and 'bad', there is an implication that the person in question has analysed the work according to a set of criteria, whatever these may be. Obvious examples in this particular field include lyrics (e.g. 'Are the rhymes contrived or natural in impression?', 'How are superficial meaning and subtext constructed through linguistic and literary techniques?') and music (e.g. 'Is it overly repetitive?', 'How are various meters implemented to intriguing effect?'). Contrastingly, the verb 'like' signifies a simple, emotional reaction of positivity regardless of objective reasoning. Of course complete objective thought is impossible because of the nature of human psychology, but most professional critics are rightly expected to offer their thoughts from a somewhat more detached and rational standpoint. Barristers in the UK legal system are a good example of a profession encouraged to work under such a mindset.

To provide situational examples to contrast the two, let's say I am leaving the cinema after seeing a film and my companion wishes to know what my reaction to said film was.

Scenario 1 -

Friend: 'So Dan, did you like the film?'

Me: 'Oh yeah, I guess I did. Not completely won over, mind you, but it was enjoyable enough.'


This is a simple, subjective opinion since all the other person wishes to know is whether I 'liked' or 'disliked' the film. Now let's say he wishes to me to offer more substantial feedback.

Scenario 2 -

Friend: 'So what were your thoughts of the film overall?'

Me: 'Well, the action scenes were quite skilfully directed and captured the motions well, maintaining a hurried atmosphere. However in places the dialogue did not entirely sound like natural human speech and several plot developments seemed rather contrived. The characters were also two-dimensional and there seemed little in the way of any thematic underlay to the picture.'


This is an objective opinion. In other words I have now offered thoughts concerning specific elements within the film itself, evaluating them accordingly. It is not longer a simple case of 'Did you like or dislike the film?'. Of course I cannot offer a completely logical evaluation as artistic appreciation requires the presence of some emotional reaction by nature, but I am certainly being more impersonal and have begun basing my assessment on tangible points.

A prominent example of this distinction would be films with nostalgic attachement or other emotional bias. Let's take one of my personal favourite films, 'Solari's (the 1972 Russian film by Tarkovsky, not that later version with George Clooney), which I first saw as an adolescent. Now let's take a film from my formative years that I have an attachment to like 'A Goofy Movie'. Now I personally love both of these films, but my partiality to the latter comes predominantly from having viewed it several times in my childhood and I understand that if I were to watch it today without having ever seen it before, I would probably be less forgiving towards its faults and less commending towards its strengths. Although I 'like' both of these films with comprable intensity, if I were to construct a step-by-step comparison between the two accroding to a set of cinematic criteria, I almost certainly would find it near impossible to justify calling 'A Goofy Movie' an on-par piece of craftsmanship to 'Solaris'. Another example would be finding oneself attached to a film because it reflected the mood one was in at the time of first viewing or reminded one of a childhood memory rather than being particularly impressed by the script or acting.

Wicked was what got me into musicals about 5 years ago. Due to technical reasons, I was without if for the past 3 years. Last night, I re-dowladed it and was completely bored. While I appreciate it for opening my eyes to other amazing material, I don't enjoy it that much.

And believe me, situations like that are very common in regard to 'gateway' artistic pieces. There are plenty of literary and musical fields I've become engrossed in over the years where the works that introduced me to the style or genre end up paling in comparison to those I went on discover through my experiences. Sometimes we can be fortunate and begin with a work that remains in high standing as our knowledge of the field increases, but cases like yours are nevertheless quite typical. I suppose I could be considered a member of this demographic (intially enthusiastic fan who became disillusioned as time went on).

So what you're saying is that you saw Wicked, and you loved it, then you downloaded some stuff, and you suddenly get bored with it?

Well here's what I say to that, I think that after you see a play and buy the script, the play suddenly becomes less interesting due to the fact that it is all black and white, no color, if you know what I'm saying. And if you don't, the point I'm trying to make is that the difference between see it preformed live vs reading it is great. Trust me, I keep copies of my old scripts sometimes, and when I reread them I say to myself "Why did I love this play so much? No it seems like a load of crap." but then I remember the feeling AROUND the storyline and think differently....if that didn't help then I guess me trying to have a teaching moment was an epic fail....lol