It was Andrew Lloyd Webber week on American Idol (cynics can click away now), and the judges’ consensus choice for best performance of the week was Carly Smithson:
So, naturally, she got voted off this week. To generally amazed reactions.
I don’t know why people are surprised. The moment I heard that she’d chosen this song - before I even heard her perform - I knew she was gone. She picked the most hated song of the most hated Broadway musical of millions of right-wing Christians. By singing “Superstar” she made an enemy of everyone between Idaho and West Virginia, because for some goddamn reason, people hate Jesus Christ Superstar.
I’m actually kind of surprised more people aren’t talking about that. The worst part is that Sir Andrew himself encouraged Smithson to sing the song, and what are you going to do? Refuse to sing a song Andrew Lloyd Webber wants - oh, that’s right, he basically sucks. Still, he really shafted her on this one.
98 Responses to “Late Night Pandagon: Because if I wrote about this during the day, I’d be correctly fired Edition”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Yeah, I got into a bit of trouble on that one myself.
My mom’s a big fan of musicals, so it’s rubbed off on me too. One trip, we were listening to a ALW Greatest Hits album, which featured that song. It got suck in my head, so I was singing the chorus to myself when we visited relatives.
Very religious relatives.
With a younger cousin who hears a chorus from his older cousin about jesus christ, and sings it again and again and again…
Ah well.
Hey! I like “Music of the Night” and “Point of No Return”!
Did anyone sing “Sunset Boulevard”? Because that’s the only Webber song that I really go crazy for.
….I love ALW, unashamedly.
Did someone do “Any Dream Will Do?”
There are so many better ALW songs to do. That said, I lurve JCS. I am a dyed in the wool atheist, but I don’t even watch it to mock and sneer. I watch it because it is awesome, and the bad guys have hats comparable to MC Hammer’s crew during the “2 Legit 2 Quit” days.
I’ve never been much for musicals, but I saw JCS in high school in Virginia with the original London cast and it was friggin’ awesome. Also, the year before I moved to Austin (the 1999-2000 season, IIRC), the totally awesome (and now sadly defunct) Austin Musical Theater put it on at the Paramount with an all-local cast.
Absolutely nothing in all of popular music could ever beat the opening riff of “Heaven on Their Minds,” and Caiaphas is the single best role in all of musical theater.
ALW? ugh. Musicals I could handle, but ALW?
of course, no one would think to do much besides ALW anyway. 1776? no. never. of course, performing solo would exclude the ones I’d enjoy most anyway.
bah.
I’m surprised to hear this, because at least in the Philadelphia area, I often see fundamentalist churches put on their own productions of “Jesus Christ Superstar.”
I guess they’re a little looser here in the evil city.
I always get the two parts of the chorus confused, and the only way the meter fits is to make it:
“Jesus Christ, superstar, who in the hell do you think you are?”
which I like enough that I haven’t bothered to force myself to remember the real words.
Anything that humanizes Jesus scares the fundies. They like to selectively read the bible to make him less human, while parts of the bible are very clear that he was very human and made very human errors.
Hey! Back off Sir Andrew. He does fun riffs on Pachelbel and his shows are fun to watch with all that spectacle. His ex-, Sarah Brightman, gets a lot of shit, too. She can sing.
I grew up on JCS, both the theatre and movie soundtracks. I think Idol “singers” haven’t got a clue, but at least ALW isn’t hard to sing in the right key. Plus, he had top 40 hits in the 70s.
Bacharach–damn near impossible, but a good choice if you want to show off who can really sing. As is, surprisingly, Queen.
What confused said. It’s the humanization that drives them crazy.
But for most churches, once they got past the association of JC Superstar with the counterculture (hippie rock music they were fine with it.
I’m not sure how either of them was supposed to predict that, though. She’s from Ireland and he’s from England. In both of those cultures, people have a sense of humour about themselves and uptight Christian fundies are relegated to the lunatic fringe.
Carly is my girl, (along with Syesha, who was the other Performance Of The Night) and now I’m sad that I didn’t watch the results show because I was SURE they were both safe. I’ve learned not to watch the results show because it’s about 55 minutes too long.
On ALW, I can take or leave his shows - mostly leave. I loathe Cats, Joseph, and Phantom. I adore JCS. But I can’t help but like the guy. He has an obvious passion for musical theatre, and for sharing that passion with young people, and that really resonates with me.
huh. You’re probably right, “test” (who forgot to log in?), but as someone who was around for JCS 1.0 I’m a bit surprised, because back then it was widely said that the Jesus Freak movement started with people listening to JCS while smoking pot. It was, in fact, fairly effective evangelization — at least back in the dear dark 70s.
karpad, you are so right. The abigail/john duets in 1776 are marvelous, but for a solo there is always “Mama, Look Sharp” to make everybody cry.
JCS rocks, even though it is anti-Semitic. (We used to sing, “Blame the Jews, Superstar, What do you think they were put here for?”)
Evita, however, rocks to the 10th power.
People are offended by JCS? I’d have thought that if anything defines middlebrow taste of the American heartland that make up American Idol’s audience, I’d have thought that this would be it.
Isn’t offense at JCS, which might have been controversial 30 years ago, akin to claiming that the Beatles’ wild hair was Corrupting the Youth?
To understand how they want to see Jesus portrayed you need to see the various low budget “bible films” that these kids grow up on.
These people still live in the 50’s. They consider *Christian rock* to be devil music.
“I guess they’re a little looser here in the evil city.” = Them city-folk followers of the Whore of Babylon are all gonna burn in hell!!!
Don’t you realize that the only people who will be raptured and saved are the Real Genuine American Christians of The Heartland of America?
Unless you kick shit, are one generation away from kicking shit, look like you could kick shit, live in a trailer, or can pretend to be and all of these things, you’re going to fry.
God said it, I believe it, and that’s that…
How the hell is it antisemitic?“Isn’t offense at JCS, which might have been controversial 30 years ago, akin to claiming that the Beatles’ wild hair was Corrupting the Youth?”
They still believe it. And you’re skipping right over Elvis the Pelvis, who only later partially rehabilitated himself by recording some gospel hymns to offset the harm his “rock ‘n roll” did earlier. And don’t get them started on them Negroes and their “Jazz”, “Blues”, “Rock”, and other kinds of incredibly dangerous “race music”.
Besides, any music featuring electric guitars, bass, drums, saxophone (sexophone?!), and/or featuring any recognizable rhythm is enough to get God into a smiting mood…
What they need is the handy dandy Andrew Lloyd Webber Grill; Incinerates the scores to Cats, Phantom of the Opera, Evita, Chess or Annie… that’s right, the score doesn’t even have to be one of Webber’s, the grill annihilates them all!
Unless you kick shit, are one generation away from kicking shit, look like you could kick shit, live in a trailer, or can pretend to be and all of these things, you’re going to fry.
Wuuuuut?
*spits*
The best cover is of course by Laibach
Dang ol’ JCS, man, leeeet the sun shine, man, dang ol’ ain’t no Starlight Express, man, ol’ mammaries all alone in the moonlight, man…
Signed,
Boomhauer
You know, I’m pretty far from being a right-wing Christian, and I despise JCS. I mean, people here are defending the music of that show over “Godspell”? Seriously? Hell, I still find myself singing snippets from “Godspell” at random moments and I haven’t seen it it decades.
Of course, all of the best works about Jesus are based on the book of Matthew. Even devout atheist Pier Paolo Pasolini made a terrific Jesus movie when he made Il vangelo secondo Matteo (The Gospel According to St. Matthew)
I’ve been an atheist for decades, and I just cannot stand JCS. Mediocre songs, no feel for the story…
Of course, I hate musicals generally, so I’m not exactly objective.
Carly is my girl, (along with Syesha, who was the other Performance Of The Night) and now I’m sad that I didn’t watch the results show because I was SURE they were both safe.
And this is why I strongly suspect that the real political lesson of these results is: TURNOUT MATTERS.
My pet theory (not that Fox will ever give us the data to test this) is that most people don’t change their votes from week to week, at least not at this late stage. I suspect people pick their favorites and support those people, and what matters from week to week is how many of the fans of last week’s loser you can pick up. So Brooke wasn’t going home, because she was a natural to pick up anyone who voted for Kristi Lee.
The wild card variable is turn-out, including *how many times* people call in. When the judges praise your favorite to the skies (a la Syesha and Carly this week), the viewers feel safe and don’t bother; when the judges hate it or they obviously screw up (Jason and Brooke), viewers are motivated to call in.
The “blasphemy” probably did matter on the margins, since there was no way she was picking up Kristi Lee fans with that song.
(Sorry, I’m a recovering political scientist with too much time on my hands.
)
Oh, and JCS is totally anti-Semitic. I think there are ways to stage it that are less so - costuming matters a lot here - and you can make Simon Zealotes pretty sympathetic - but Pontius Pilate’s song is not good.
And this is why I strongly suspect that the real political lesson of these results is: TURNOUT MATTERS.
Oh, I should have clarified, I guess. I’m not in the US, so I can’t vote. I just watch the show and have my faves.
Not that that takes away from your overall point, with which I agree.
This was me, by the way. For some reason, whenever I start a new post it defaults to ‘test’ and I have to remember to change it before I even hit save, or I’m out of luck.
What, no “Molasses to Rum”?
Sounds like you’ve got an evil cookie haunting you.
In IE, you might try clearing your temporary internet files, in Firefox it’s Tools->Clear Private Data. Be warned though, clearing your cookies may lead to the loss of some login info for some sites, if you have allowed the browser to save that type of information.
I never got the feeling it was anti-Semitic, and I listened to JCS a couple hundred times in my mis-spent youth, and saw the Starlight theater version with David Cassidy. (yeah, I have no taste, I admit it. ;-0 Since just about everybody in the cast (except Pilate) are supposed to be Jewish, I don’t see where the anti-Jewish stuff comes in.
One of my friends watches JCS every year, as part of her Easter duty. But she’s a converted Wiccan, which doesn’t help JCS’s case.
Perhaps Carly would have been better off if she’d sung “I Don’t Know How To Love Him” instead of Judas’ song. IDKHTLH always makes the fundies weep. I know, because some religious types caught me listening to JCS and thought I was one of them.
I remember growing up with that album (my dad had it) and I was pretty suprised that the Jehovah’s Witnesses, of which he had become a part of for a few years, frowned upon it. At the time I thought it was a great version of the christ story. Course, now I’m an atheist, but I still love the music.
It’s followed me over four computers plus Augustienne’s, then.
Since just about everybody in the cast (except Pilate) are supposed to be Jewish, I don’t see where the anti-Jewish stuff comes in.
I think it really depends on the staging. In the movie version, the Caiaphas and the other pharisees are cast and dressed/made up to look like the most stereotypically Jewy Jews ever. In a way that is actually not that interesting; I’d put them in suits and ties, making them the “squares” to Jesus & Co’s hippies.
I got to play Caiaphas in a local production when I was in high school. I think it was mainly because I was androgynous looking and had the right vocal range, but hey, maybe the director wanted to make sure to buck stereotypes by casting a Shiksa?
In high school, my parents took me and an extremely religious friend to a showing of JCS. My friend enjoyed it a great deal, but he told me on the way home that his parents had warned him to beware of bad messages in it.
I have to wonder - like I did when there was that whole fuss around Dogma - how many fundies have actually seen the shows they hate so much. Both seemed to me like perfectly reasonable and reverent (at least as much as View Askew can be reverent) in their treatment of Jesus. Admittedly, the Now-You’ve-Seen-God-In-A-Prom-Dress joke in Dogma probably doesn’t count as reverent, but it doesn’t seem insulting either.
Does humanization bother these people so much? I’m an agnostic now, but I’ve always preferred the more realistic depictions of Jesus - the roughneck carpenter who was good with kids and treated women like human beings in a time and place that didn’t. I love the moment in Dogma where Rufus tells Bethany how much Jesus enjoyed listening to people talk - “Whenever we were going on about unimportant shit, he always had a big smile on his face.” I think I would have liked to meet that guy. As for JCS, I don’t recall anything in it that isn’t in the Bible account, except perhaps slightly less mercenary motivations for Judas.
Do they really need their Jesus to be whitewashed and “robed in the Sun”? And does this vehement-to-violent denial turn up every time they even have to think about the fact that he, well, wasn’t?
It sure would be bucking stereotypes to cast a shiksa as Caiaphas. You’d think they’d at least cast a shegetz.
It’s pretty much the whole history of Christianity where the anti-Jewish stuff comes in. You know, “Christ-killers,” being officially damned by the Catholic Church, the Inquisition, all that stuff. It’s one of those things that hangs around in even the most seemingly innocuous Jesus story unless the artist makes a concerted effort to weed it out.
The logic generally seemed to be: everyone was Jewish -> Pilate handed Jesus over to the Jewish authorities -> the Jews killed Jesus!
That’s my favorite too. And I would just like to say that when I saw 1776 on Broadway, Brent Spiner AKA Data from Star Trek was playing John Adams.
Pilate handed Jesus over to the Jewish authorities -> the Jews killed Jesus!
My recollection of JCS is that it makes perfectly clear that only the Romans had the legal power to order capital punishment (which indeed was how the law worked at the time)
I grew up pagan. My best friend as a kid was Jewish. And I was introduced to JCS when the album first came out - at her house…she stuck the headphones on me and said “Just listen all the way through.”
I’m still pagan and she’s still Jewish but JCS was as close as either of us ever came to understanding the pull of Christianity for some folks - and it was *because* of the very humanizing quality that’s been commented on above.
I should also take a moment to confess a secret love for Les Miserables. Nobody did “On My Own”, did they? Because that would probably make me want to watch AI for once…
“Molasses to Rum” is, I grant you, a very POWERFUL song, redolent in its smackdown of everyone in the room, characters and audience alike. Which probably means it would never go over well on AI, if that is still the benchmark in this thread.
And l’opoponax,
Caiaphas’ range is low enough to require that you not look androgynous, but have throat cancer as well. Of course, I feel the same way about “I shall marry the Miller’s Son” from A Little Night Music, so I am biased.
1) You’re a female (shiksa is female) and you can sing Caiphas???? I mean, that’s like LOW bass.
2) CARLY!!!?? W.T.F!? and why the hell was Syesha there beside her!? The two best performances and rated the two lowest?????
3) Jason, buddy, don’t play any card games: you done used up all your GOOD luck. (He knows it too.)
Which movie version? The 1973 one had them dressed in black pants, black capes, bare chests with medallions, and huge black hats, which I thought was heavy handed when I was a kid (might as well wear big pasteboards saying “WE’RE THE BAD GUYS”) and kinda sexy now.
The 2000 version has a more scifi Battlestar Galactica feel. They all look like Cylons or fill-ins for Pinhead in their long black robes. You can see them here..
LOL! BTW, the Caiphas guy in the 2000 version is an AA, and he’s got an incredibly deep voice. If you can sing in his range, you’d break a lot of stereotypes!
If you can sing in his range, you’d break a lot of stereotypes!
Maybe it was a different arrangement or a re-conceptualization, because ours was on the high end of tenor, really almost alto.
Unless I’m totally flaking and thinking of the wrong character, which would be sad because while this was over 10 years ago, we’re talking about a character I actually played…
Carly was a lesser talent that escaped the axe for far too long. Maybe it was the oh-so-trendy tats or the plus size she portrayed on TV. But compare her uninspiring ‘me have big mouth’ to the two Davids and she loses.
I’m referring to the ‘73 version, by the way.
black pants, black capes… and huge black hats
Yeah, my point exactly - you’ve seen Hasidim, right?
The casting was also key. Pale, dark haired, small-statured guys with hooked noses and high-pitched kinda whiny voices. The stereotypical Jewy Jew. Of course, I haven’t seen the movie in ages and might be remembering it as more heavy handed than it really was. But it was apparent even to my then-clueless self even when I first saw it that they’re TEH JOOOOZ.
And OK clearly I am thinking of the wrong character since like 3 people have now chimed in talking about the low bass…
WTF? Where did I go wrong? Did I do too much acid in college? What character did I play, then? Crap…
*I think it was maybe Caiaphas’s sidekick, Annas?*
Though now I am afraid to go out any further on this limb than ‘pharisee with a biggish part and a highish voice’.
Caiaphas had a sidekick - Ananias? Something like that? - who had a very, very high voice in deliberate contrast to Caiaphas’s bass. Could that be it?
Blue Jean:
Whoa. Thank you so much for that link. That is a totally bad-ass production.
Oh, please, Carly “minor”? Gimme a break.
Even letting that go, JASON over Carly? That’s just stupid. He can barely sing at a campfire.
“But compare her uninspiring ‘me have big mouth’ to the two Davids and she loses.”
Okay, I’ll ask this here with the sane people. Why would anyone every vote for the little kid David for anything? I really can’t fathom the appeal. I mean, I’m tone deaf and I think American Idol and all the people on it suck by definition, (I’m the guy who listens to Pantera while doing the dishes) but my wife doesn’t hate the music and is a musician and she can’t understand why anyone likes him at all, either.
Can you imagine any track by him playing anywhere but the elevator at a Christian Music Corporation’s Corporate Headquarters?
The other David, I get, though he already had a very commerically successful career as the lead singer of Creed, so I’d have thought he wouldn’t be allowed on American Idol.
I agree with Mnemosyne. The New Testament is anti-Semitic to the extent that Gentile Christians used it as a rhetorical platform against Jewish neighbors.
Probably the most outlandish example is the obvious lie of the Barabbas story. “The unconverted Jews hated God and His Son so much that they not only chose an eternity in Hell rather than accept the new covenant, they were even willing to free a known murderer among them to kill again, in exchange for being allowed to murder the Messiah.” The notion is outrageously implausible, but the authors deliberately attribute this kind of blind rage to the Jews, thus portraying them as bloodthirsty and filled with irrational hatred.
I don’t remember if Superstar mentions the Barabbas story, but it does have a swarming crowd of Jews around Pilate, screaming for the blood of Jesus.
The 2000 movie? I’d be interested in hearing what others liked about it. I just don’t know how to love that acting.
As GRWA points out, it’s hard to avoid anti-semitism in a show based on the New Testament crucifixion story. On the other hand, JCS tries to minimize it at least a little by having the Pharisees be afraid of the wrath that Rome would bring down on Judea if this radical was allowed to run around and gather public support for too much longer. Not an unreasonable fear.
Thank you Seraph, yes, that’s the character I played. Annas.
I’m such an idiot.
That this Wonderbread-awful and decidedly un-hip show attracts real interest from all you hipsters is a real head-scratcher. Oy.
The New Testament isn’t anti-semitic, but the RCC Latin Rite Mass is. That’s the one that goes on about asking god to open the hearts of the Jews and convert them.Well, Pat Doyle, this is the “Boggles the Mind” selection/
Archie is the Young Guy Who The Teenyboppers Power-Vote For Because They Think He’s Cute.
It’s a well-established AI “type”, and Archie is actually one of the better singers in that bunch *cough*Covais*cough*Sanjaya*cough*. But, I doubt anyone over 15 is voting for him.
I don’t hate Jesus Christ Superstar. I love it, actually—the 2000 version.
I do hate American Idol though.
I respectfully disagree, Caren. What is the Barabbas story if not anti-Semitism?
I always figured the barabbas story pointed out how much of a threat the jesus character was to the status quo; barabbas was a known quantity but that jesus guy turned the temple into a riot zone earlier in the week and deserved to be offed.
Sure. And “the status quo” were the non-Christian Jews.
It isn’t just the Jewish priests who are calling for the death of Jesus and the release of Barabbas. It’s a crowd of Jewish citizens.
A crowd of citizens who are then supposed to have said, “Let his blood be on us and on our children.” Right.
Grammar RWA,
WTF?!
It was jerusalem for the love of all that’s holy. who else but Jews would have been in the mob 2000 years ago?
I’ll grant you some of the gospel retellings of the passion can be construed as antisemitic; once the romans were no longer persecuting the christians they (the christers) had to find someone to be persecuted by, even if it meant inserting fiction into the storyline.
but to call it antisemitic because there were israelites DURING THE ROMAN OCCUPATION who were not amused by the riot on the temple mount?
give me a break.
But compare her uninspiring ‘me have big mouth’ to the two Davids and she loses.
Not to me. The Davids, to me, are “World Vision Telethon” and “Late 90’s Dudely-Whine-Rock”, and I think everyone can suss out which is which. I mean, objectively, I think they’re both good. At what they do. But “what they do” and “what I might ever voluntarily listen to” seem to be in completely different universes.
Add that to the fact that Cook is a smarm (though not as bad as Michael, I’ll grant), and Archuleta is a personality void, and they’re both bathroom-break material. I can see that a lot of people disagree with me, though. Oh, well. Just a TV show.
The Barabbas story DID NOT HAPPEN. It has all the signs of a blatant fabrication. So it’s there to make a rhetorical point about someone.
Let’s review:
1. Barabbas is either a murderer of Jews, or an insurrectionist against Rome (or both; it’s not too clear).
a. It is preposterous that the Jews would choose to release a murderer of Jews just because they can. Even taking for granted the dubious notion that Pilate “traditionally” commutes an execution every year, the Jews don’t have to accept the offer. They could say “kill them both” if they really want Jesus to die. They did not ask for a murderer of Jews to be released. That reading of the story is clearly a lie.
b. It is also preposterous that Pilate would offer an insurrectionist against Rome for release. The story has Pilate arbitrarily offering “Jesus or Barabbas.” If he really did traditionally release someone, he could have made a less preposterous offer. If there was no one else to offer besides Barabbas, he didn’t have to offer anyone. This is supposed to be a tradition, and the governor of Palestine can break a tradition if he pleases. Pilate did not release an anti-Roman terrorist. That reading of the story is also a lie.
2. The story fits too perfectly into the narrative of “the Jews rejected the new covenant; the Christians are the new chosen people.” Like the New Testament’s retro-fitted fulfillments of prophesies, it’s way too convenient to be true. And even that hack job wasn’t obvious enough for the author of Matthew. Just so no one would miss the point, he puts these words into the mouths of the assembled Jews: “Let his blood be on us and on our children.” No one chooses to place an eternal curse upon their descendants. This did not happen. But as a rhetorical device, it’s obvious why the NT authors would introduce this lie.
So the problem is not explained by “of course the crowd was made of Jews, who else could it be?” The story didn’t happen in the first place. Now, why else to invent this story if not to pin the murder of Jesus explicitly upon the Jews?
this is ridiculous. part of me wants to say iwnftt and yet I am compelled….
Grammar RWA, I consider myself a christian. Hell, I preached at my UCC church 2 weeks ago, and will again in 3, so listen carefully when I say this:
THE ENTIRE GOSPEL NARRATIVE IS A FABRICATION.
If you want to read antisemitism and oppression into it, be my guest.
As for me, I am doing my level best to use the story IN ITS ENTIRETY to explain a philosophy (religion) concocted in the first century CE to make sure the afflicted are cared for and to remind people they are not alone in their despair. I use it to explain to rural middle-class white folks(because that’s where I live thanks to my partner’s job) that christianity is more than sitting in a pew on a sunday morning feeling superior because you’re there, and in fact that stuff about social justice and giving voice to the voiceless is still relevant.
/rant
Cowboy Diva, I’m not the only one here saying the NT is at least partly anti-Semitic, and each of us is an established commenter here. None of us are trolls. Tell yourself what you need to tell yourself to enjoy reading this blog, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes your fellow progressives don’t agree with you on every little thing.
Now, if you grant that the gospels in general are made up, then you just add strength to the argument that every word is specifically calculated to some rhetorical purpose.
I’m happy to hear that you can bring people to social justice work with Matthew 5, 6 and 7. Honestly, I am not trying to piss on that. But I don’t think that precludes me from pointing out that Matthew 27:25 is an anti-Semitic passage. If you have some other explanation for it, share.
If you don’t have any excuse for it, so what? Liberal Christians are already accustomed to tossing out Paul and the OT. The Barabbas story takes up just a few more chapters.
As for giving voice to the voiceless, are you sure you’re not ignoring the voices of Jews who trace some of their persecution directly to this passage?
Cowboy Diva:
THE ENTIRE GOSPEL NARRATIVE IS A FABRICATION.
So is “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and yet decades of anti-Semitism came out of that. Arguing that the Gospels are fabrications is not an argument that there is no anti-Semitism in them.
The Bible has been used for centuries to justify Christian mistreatment of Jews. As Caren pointed out above, the Catholic Church only recently stopped officially blaming the Jews for Jesus’ death. It was one of the biggest features of Vatican II, especially when Pope John XXIII publicly prayed for forgiveness for the way the Church had treated Jews over centuries.
This is pretty non-controversial stuff — I’m surprised this is the first you’ve ever heard of it. Don’t you remember anything that was discussed when The Passion of the Christ came out?
The story isnt antisemitic & people with a atheist hard-on are just as boring as fundies. if you cant get a handle on the politics of the time & see it on a historical level or as literature, then blarrgh.
and stop fucking threadjacking!
I think the status quo hated JCS at the time because damn dirty hippies with their noise were co-opting the telling of the story. and the swearing (”damn”). I think the southern god contingant hates it because it gives a voice to Judas, & theyre used to everything being straight-jacketed down into LITERAL meanings of everything (which must be a brain disorder) , that they break out in hives when they are faced with ambiguity. they just see blasphemy everywhere, but in their own houses.
i dont see many northern peoples having trouble with JCS (it was the play in my catholic school; hardly progressive),
what people (catholic church, christians of any stripe, etc) do with the story can be antisemetic. the story itself is not.
Because only atheists would ever suggest such heresy.
When eight commenters participate in a discussion, accusations of threadjacking are tantamount to censorship.
On the subject of Barabbas, I think that there’s some theology being injected into the portrayal. “Barabbas” means, IIRC, “son of the father”. Not to far from some of Jesus’ titles, come to that. but another way to think of it is “Everyman”. If you believe that Jesus suffered and died to forgive the sins of, or release, the entire human race, then releasing “Everyman” isn’t so much anti-semetism as symbolism. Of course, I’ve also been encouraged to veiw the crowd as representing a sinful humanity, clamoring for the destruction of that which dares call it sinful…
Sarah Brightman, gets a lot of shit, too. She can sing
No she can’t. Hideous voice with no color or character. Repugnant tone to that screech. Curse Lloyd Weber for ever unleashing that disgusting instrument on the world.
More honest Christians than you have disagreed.
Okay, I’ll ask this here with the sane people. Why would anyone every vote for the little kid David for anything?
Ask a 12-year-old girl with a cel phone. They–the ones waving their arms during slow song in some weakly choreographed motion that just looks stupid as shit–are the fan base for Archuletta and Castro.
Jeff, you haven’t been posting (at least not here). I certainly hope you’re okay…
bluebonnet:
Actually, it’s the other way around. The story is self-evidently antisemitic, in exactly the same way that all religious texts are inherently and necessarily polemical, and some (I won’t even say “many”) modern people choose to ignore it because it doesn’t jive with their sense of social justice.
Or, as the case may be, some people just deny it completely, thus avoiding the whole problem and making it into little more than a twee feel-good story entirely devoid of even the slightest shred of historical or social context.
Jeff, you haven’t been posting (at least not here). I certainly hope you’re okay
Thanks….I’m fine. Just concentrating on dissertation and withdrawing from most online life.
Glad to hear you’re okay. I just got concerned when I realized I hadn’t seen any posts from you for a while (this was weeks back). And then I saw your posts today and was glad you were alive and typing.
Just worried about one of my fellow human beings…
:)
Scott the Obscure, you offer an intriguing interpretation (without whining that anyone bringing this up is a “fundie atheist”; thank you sincerely for that).
It’s bolstered even more by the fact that some early manuscripts of Matthew refer to the criminal as “Jesus Barabbas,” so the parallel title may be deliberately calculated.
This interpretation at least confuses matters enough that one may say the release of Barabbas is not clearly intended to portray the Jews as irrationally hateful.
I don’t see how it can account for the words “let his blood be on us and on our children,” though. This line still seems to invite the wrath of God upon the Jews. John 8:42-44 and 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16 remain problematic as well.
you just add strength to the argument that every word is specifically calculated to some rhetorical purpose.
I think I learned in Catholic school (though it could have been somewhere else) that each of the four gospels was basically written as a proselytizing pamphlet, explaining to a particular audience why Christianity is the way to go.
Some parts of the gospel were written to convince fellow Jews that Jesus really was the fulfillment of messianic prophecy. Other parts were written to convince gentiles that there was a place for them within this little sect that had been previously considered a part of Judaism. Still other part were written to sell people on how miraculous and therefore obviously divine Jesus was.
Very few biblical scholars with IQ’s in the triple digits think that the gospels are a literal account of actual events in the life of Christ, or at least that their biblical depictions match the reality to any degree.
It is therefore highly probable that the Barabbas episode was thrown in for the express purpose of implying that Jesus was betrayed by “the Jews”, therefore requiring a passing of the torch to gentiles. Or really for any number of propagandistic reasons that have been lost in the intervening 2000 years.
er, what The Opoponax said (politely and without screaming). I will add that knowing that the christian sacred texts have been poorly applied in the past makes me think it that much more important for those who continue to use those texts to read them critically to ensure such persecution in the name of a god ends as fast as possible.
apologies for any threadjack; ALW has just never excited me as much as other composer/lyricists for staged musicals, and for Starlight Express there needs to be much rending of garments.
Do you think that covering up anti-Semitism in the gospels is the best way to do this?
Are you sure it wouldn’t be better to confront the anti-Semitic passages head-on while explaining what is wrong with them?
sigh.
Grammar RWA, Yes. You’re right. Thank you.
I’m just trying to have a conversation. I’m not trying to wear you out or “win” by attrition. I am sorry if it’s exasperating to talk to me; you wouldn’t be the first to think so.
How about we let this one rest between us, as it’s clear enough what each of us thinks. We don’t have to agree.
Just letting you-all know that I’ve reached a breaking point and can’t comment at Pandagon any more. See Holly’s post at Feministe or my blog for details.
Let me know where you’re hanging, ok?
yours wretchedly,
Doctor Science
The judges weren’t watching the same thing I was, because I found her to be washed out by the backup vocalists. And what I heard was one shouted note. The one in the leadoff death slot was the best of the night, anyway.
That she’s a has-been who couldn’t even sell 400 records when given $2 million might also have been a factor in her early exit.
Well, I hope Sir Andrew gives her a part in one of his shows to make up for it.
l’opoponax
We weren’t doubting you or making fun of you; I’m sorry if it seemed that way.
If you think I doubted you, I’m sorry. JC and Judas are usually tenors to show their youth, so that’s why Caiphas has a deeper voice, for contrast. Caiaphas and Annias aren’t household names, even to most Christians; that’s why they’re usually swathed in black, and Caiphias usually has a deep, Darth Vader like voice, so even the most ignorant theater patrons will know they’re villains right from the start.
Obviously, you and your casting director decided to go in a more innovative direction, and that’s great. You must have an amazing voice and acting talent, because that not an easy part. There’s nothing that says Caiphas has to have a deep voice; just like there’s nothing that says JC has to look exactly like the Bible pictures. JC is clean shaven in the 2000 production; he’s been played by an AA woman, and one of the Indigo girls. Obviously, if JC can be a woman, so can Caiphas. We weren’t doubting you or making fun of you; I’m sorry if it seemed that way.
Pat Doyle;
I can’t speak for everyone else, but like I said, I never claimed to have taste.
Dan, (or perhaps I should say “Your Bannananess”),
Thanks. Glad you liked the link! You can find most of the production on YouTube. Hope you check out Pilate’s songs; he plays it as a cross between a Nazi and a tough drill sergeant on the verge of a nervous breakdown. In “39 Lashes”, he looks like he’s about to pop a blood vessel.
The Barrabas part isn’t included in JCS, so I think the charges of anti-Semitism are a little thin. More relevantly, JCS isn’t about “Oh, some people killed a nice man. Isn’t that awful?“ It’s more universal than that, and reflects more about the current culture’s obsession with building up celebrities and tearing them down. Think about it; a young, charismatic leader comes to town. He seems to have solutions to every problem, and his popular following disturbs the local power structure, so they plot to bring him down. He disappoints his most radical followers, he finds he can’t heal everyone, he upsets the big money boys, and then he betrayed by someone he trusts, so he’s destroyed. Change a few of the names, and it could be “Bill Clinton, Superstar”. (or a few years down the road, it could be “Obama, Superstar”.) The Clinton impeachment obviously influenced the 2000 version, as you can see here.
Good thing that version was never shown on “American Idol”; it’d be kicked off the air forever. Like Clinton, combining the sacred with teh Sex is blasphemy that must be punished. (Yeah, yeah, the costume designer has obviously seen Victoria’s Secret fashion shows too many times.) If I were producing the show, I’d steal l’opoponax’s excellent idea and put everyone in suits, maybe cast Caiaphas as Jerry Falwell and Annia’s as Ken Starr, and so on. And wouldn’t that make the fundies beat the erasers over their heads?
Joe Queenan once said that rock is to the left what religion is to the right;
a way to connect with others, to feel the same power, excitment and joy. That’s another reason the fundies hate JCS: they don’t like to admit that a good sermon and “devil music” can touch the same nerves.
Granmar; I liked both versions, in completely different ways, though I don’t think 2000’s Judas had the same vocal skillz as 1973’s. The 1973 one is more fun and colorful, as well as more subtle. The 2000 version is darker and more menacing; it’s got a hipper, more urban feel. I would have liked to see Tony Vincent do Judas here like he did on Broadway. (He plays Simon Zealotes in the 2000 movie). He’s got more charisma and he’s got more of a rock star look.
Jesus Christ Superstar was my favorite album when I was in sixth grade. I listened to it at least a gazillion times. It wasn’t long after that I graduated to Tommy for my messiah fix, but that’s a different story.
Anyway, as a huge fan of JCS back in the day, I was horrified by Smithson’s recital on American Idol. That was the worst desecration of a song since the dreadlocked little guy butchered Hallelujah, which was truly a sin, if there actually is such a thing.
Regarding the Gospels, the academic debate among New Testament scholars is about what percent of them between 97 and 100 is total fiction. Of course the fact that Christianity is at least 97, if not 100 percent bogus doesn’t mean that there isn’t an invisible super being who knows your every thought ruling the universe in a sickeningly god-awful manner, but it’s probably another pretty good clue.
@10, yes, I hear the song the same way (”who in the hell do you think you are?” and I also listened to it a gazillion times as a kid.
Okay, Blue Jean, I guess I have to grant that Fred Johanson rocked Pilate.
I don’t see a particular influence from the Clinton trial on the 2000 movie, though? What am I blind to here?
OMG. If you could get Monica Lewinski herself to play the part of Mary Magdalene, I’d bankroll that shit.
LOL! The only problem is that Monica can’t sing. Except to Ken Starr, that is.
I don’t see a particular influence from the Clinton trial on the 2000 movie, though? What am I blind to here?
You’re not blind to anything. I see the banks of photographers, microphones and reporters as a new addition, taken from the Great Feeding Frenzy of 1998, when Monica threw the chum into the water. I remember how they all followed Clinton around “Do you intend to resign, sir? When? Are you going to apologize? Confess? Blah, blah, blah, etc.”They were far less interested in his plans for health care than they were about his upcoming political destruction, just like those who watch Passion of The Christ are less interested in the message then in his bloody death.
But maybe that’s just me.
I agree; Fred Johanson does indeed rock, even in Nazi gear.
what laura said.
at this point in ai, it’s less about the individual performances week to week and more about the fan clubs that have formed out in america the first part of the season.
i thought carly would have been gone long ago. i’m surprised that brooke “carly simon” whatshername wasn’t sent packing after tuesday’s flub (”i’m sorry can i start again?” wow - that’s professional!).
i heart ai, because, being in show biz myself, i am glad that america gets a chance to see how, from beginning to end, a person needs to be 1000% brilliant every time they get up on stage to perform.
that’s the mark of the professional.
and i too used to hate alw, till i actually saw one of his shows (”phantom” at her majesty’s theater in london…the theater it was written for).
alw is actually harder musically than one would think.
and i’m taking david cook over david archuletta this year. or, if cook loses, watch for him to pull a daughtry and do better professionally than anyone who passes him in the actual contest.
Gah, I hate Sarah Brightman. She’s got a freaky tremble in her voice that I just hate and I’m afraid to watch her for fear her eyes will pop out when she screams a high note.
Argh.