Talk:Hair (musical)/GA1

GA review

What an interesting article! I love musical theater, so this was very enjoyable to read. For the article to pass GA, the first bullet point needs to be resolved, regarding broad coverage, so I am placing it on hold. The other details are just things I noticed while reading.

• My only concern is that this article might be missing information on some important aspects of a musical. I would like to suggest a slight rearrangement of some of the material:

• Would it be possible to describe the various sets and costumes of some of the major productions?

Robin Wagner based his set design on the authors' ideas. The stage was completely open, had no curtain and the fly area and grid were exposed to the audience. The proscenium arch was outlined with climb-ready scaffolding. The set was painted in shades of grey with street graffiti stenciled on the stage. The stage was raked and a tower of abstract scaffolding upstage at the rear merged an American Indian totem pole and a modern scupture of a crucifix-shaped tree. This scaffolding was decorated with found objects that the cast had gathered from the streets of New York. These included a life size paper mache bus driver, the head of Jesus, and a neon marquee of the Waverly movie theater in Greenwich Village (Horn pp. 61-62). The costumes by Nancy Potts, based on the hippie street clothes at the time, were made more theatrical with enhanced color, texture and inventiveness. Some of these included mixed military uniforms, bell bottoms with Ukranian embroidery, tie dye t-shirts and a red white and blue fringed coat (Horn p63-64) - Mblaxill (talk) 20:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking the best idea might be to create a new section "Dramatics" that could include the info on sets and costumes, talk about the non-linear plot and how it was a new idea for the concept musical, as well as talk about the music itself. —  MusicMaker5376 22:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

The material is in the Broadway production info. That should be OK for GA, although you can certainly move it to a Dramatics section if you want to expand further and feel it helps the article's structure. Was the same set/costume concept carried forward for the West End, LA and other major productions? An alternative thought is that the most important of the productions could each be fleshed out a bit more. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

All the US productions used the same set and costume guidelines. The international prods were different though, depending on what was happening with young people in that country at the time. From what I hear the Paris prod was very different, as was I'm sure the Japanese, German, etc. If I can find some specifics in the books i have i'll add them when i get a chance - Mblaxill (talk) 17:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice to add at least a statement that the designs were basically repeated in the other early US productions, if you can find a cite. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I checked the Horn book and she doesn't get into specifics about set and costumes for regional and Int'l, although she does write about how O Horgan directed most major city prods and that the authors would revise the script after getting new ideas during rehearsal for the regionals, esp LA. She also writes a good deal about the different international directors like Bertrand Castelli and how each international cast and local community responded to the nudity, drug refs etc. - Mblaxill (talk) 22:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done -- by everyone else.

• Would it be possible to describe the musical style of the show? There is one quote alluding to the importance of Hair's style: "The same hard rock sound that had conquered the world of popular music made its way to the musical stage with two simultaneous hits – Your Own Thing [and] Hair." - Surely more could be said about this?

 Doing... —  MusicMaker5376 19:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you use this?: "The first act is full of carefree energy. The songs are lite Classic Rock.... In the second act, a darker turn in the book creates a purposeful chaos, both exhausting and effective, with a score to match>"[1] -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Not bad, but fitting it into the music section now might be difficult. The bit about the 2nd act being darker would work great if we ever get a dramatics section going. —  MusicMaker5376 14:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

 Done —  MusicMaker5376 15:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• The themes of the show are alluded to in passing, but a concentrated "Themes" section might make these more apparent to a reader who knows nothing about the show. Some of the material in "Social and political significance" would make more sense in a "Themes" section, I think. (This seems to have been discussed at the peer review as well.)

 Done —  MusicMaker5376 15:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• The "Media" section is a prose list. This needs to be rewritten as flowing paragraphs and some of the examples removed.

The media section has been broken up with the 60s stuff in with the music and the later stuff with the later stuff. Should the later stuff be broken into the individual decades? -- MM

Reviewer, does it seem OK to you now? I think the "listy-ness" of it has been resolved by working the info into the relevant sections. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:15, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• The second paragraph of "History" is a little stilted and repeats the phrase "improvisational and experimental" and its variants quite often.

 Done, but I don't know if it's any better.... —  MusicMaker5376 18:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

• Rado and Ragni brought their ideas for the show to producer Eric Blau, who connected the two with Canadian pianist/composer Galt MacDermot through mutual friend and music publisher Nat Shapiro - syntax is a little awkward

 Done —  MusicMaker5376 19:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

• Eventually Joe Papp, who ran the New York Shakespeare Festival, decided he wanted Hair to open his newly titled Public Theater in New York City's Greenwich Village. - "newly titled" or "new"?

 Done —  MusicMaker5376 18:43, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

• The Off-Broadway book, which was non-linear to begin with, was loosened even further, and 13 new songs were added - "non-linear" is unclear

This might best be clarified with a section on dramatics, no? —  MusicMaker5376 19:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think it IS more or less linear, as there is a progression of events up through the death of Claude. Do we mean to say "episodic", or that the plot is focused around a series of vignettes? Or simply that there isn't much of a plot? This article says it is "revue"-like: [2]. This one says it is more or less plot-less: [3] -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

In that respect, yes, it's linear. Perhaps "unfocused" might work? Or "sprawling"? -- MM

 Done — -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

• The New York Theatre League ruled Hair ineligible for consideration for the 1968 Tony Awards - Why did they rule it ineligible?

 Done —  MusicMaker5376 18:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

• You might need a better fair use rationale for Image:London1lowres.jpg

 Done -- by Ssilvers (talk · contribs)

I think that this article can become an FA after just a little bit more work. I'm very impressed! Awadewit (talk) 15:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all of the suggestions, and I'm glad you enjoyed the article! —  MusicMaker5376 19:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm impressed with all of the work that the editors have put into the article in the past few days. I think that the article is markedly better. Before taking it to FAC, I would have one more copy editor go over the article and I would spend a day checking it against the MOS. Nice work, everyone! Awadewit (talk) 01:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)