top of page
Expanding Themes & Social Change
The 1960s
“The Broadway musical started the 1960s with a roar and ended them with something akin to a nervous breakdown” (Kenrick, 1996).
The 1960s were a time of intense social transformation, defined by emotion, division, and a growing demand for reform. The Civil Rights Movement dominated the early part of the decade, challenging racial injustice and inspiring hope for equality. But the optimism of progress was soon overshadowed by national tragedy, as the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King left the country grieving and questioning the future. At the same time, the Vietnam War escalated, dividing generations.
Musical theatre started the decade on the coattails of the 1950s' golden age, with new voices and fresh ideas contributing to an already vibrant scene. Many early ’60s musicals came from seasoned creators like Rodgers and Lerner, but also from rising talents. While the musical seemed to start the decade strong, it soon encountered mounting cultural and financial pressures. In fact throughout the decade, “...approximately one-half of the money being invested in the theatre was being lost” (Workman, 1968).
Though some hits like Hello, Dolly!, Cabaret, Funny Girl, Hair, and Fiddler on the Roof emerged, most shows struggled financially due to rising production costs, increasing unionization, and a national audience growing more interested in protest and pop culture than polished stage stories. Broadway was now competing with the raw emotional social movements, and the immediate availability of television and film.
In addition to economic instability, Broadway faced a growing identity crisis. The romantic musicals of earlier decades no longer matched the tone of the outside world. Audiences began changing and questioning what they believed in.
“The days of the frankly romantic “operetta,” with its soprano heroine and its baritone hero, or with those fine, free-singing creations of the 1940s and 1950s, the Broadway soprano and her Broadway baritone, seemed to have disappeared” (Gänzl and Findlay, 2022).
By the mid-1960s, the classic Broadway sound which was full of sweeping melodies and picture-perfect endings felt outdated. Though some shows still played with those elements, audiences were leaning towards stories grounded in realism, irony, and grit. Yet in the midst of this uncertainty, Fiddler on the Roof emerged as a rare example of a musical that both honored tradition and embraced change, becoming one of Broadway’s most enduring successes.
Can somebody cue "Aquarius?"
Fiddler on the Roof was a groundbreaking musical that started the 60s trend of new voices and subject matter as it achieved success not through star power or extravaganza, but through its authentic portrayal of Jewish life and universal themes. When Broadway producer Jerome Robbins was given the script for a musical adaptation of Sholem Aleichem’s Yiddish stories, he was bored of the typical Broadway musical. Fiddler seemed to speak to him on a personal level, and he was intrigued by its premise of Jewish life in a Russian shtetl.
When speaking to Ruth Mitchell, his stage manager, he exclaimed “It’s our people... it’s the only show since West Side Story that has me really excited” (qtd. in Lesser 107). Robbin’s excitement reflected not just his personal connection to Fiddler, but also his belief that the material would lead to something greater. He was dedicated to the show’s authenticity and spent hours interviewing his father on shtetl life, attending Hasidic weddings, and researching Jewish culture.
What started as a passion project turned into a phenomenon because of Robbin’s pursuit of emotional truth. While most musicals of the 1960s dazzled audiences with grand performances, Fiddler stood apart. Instead, it offered something more understated and grounded, a heartfelt portrayal of tradition, identity, and change.
“It was a musical which had neither the zingy humor nor the glamour and grandes dames of its most successful contemporaries: where they were a vibrant red and green, or glittering lamé and tinsel, this musical was a deep brown” (Gänzl and Findlay, 2022).
This contrast made Fiddler’s success even more exceptional. It proved that Broadway’s usual formula was not the only one for success. It perfectly blended resonance with strong storytelling. It spoke to real-world struggles, and sent a message that shows with heart could triumph.
"...I DO BELIEVE, SITTING THERE, WATCHING FIDDLER ON THE ROOF AT THE AGE OF TWELVE, THAT THE ENTIRE COURSE OF MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE WAS CHARTED IN THAT AFTERNOON." - DAVID ROCKWELL, ARCHITECT AND DESIGNER
On the flop side, Kelly was a musical with a gritty tone that failed commercially when it broke with Broadway’s conventions. It failed to resonate with audiences, lacked strong storytelling, and while it may have spoken to some real-world struggles, nothing stood out to the audience.
The show followed the dark and odd story about a man planning to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge. Its creators, Eddie Lawrence and Moose Charlap, saw the musical as a satirical, avant-garde commentary on modern life, but that vision did not translate to the stage.
“The problem is that the show’s premise, about a guy who plans to jump off the Brooklyn bridge, and ultimately does so, is just a really bad idea for a show…This off-putting premise, combined with the fact that both the book and score were going for an authentic Brechtian grit that had never really gone over well in America…resulted in a fascinating and unique piece that absolutely no-one wanted to see” (Deaver, 2022).
American audiences, especially those of the mid-1960s, were not accustomed to Kelly's experiential tone. Its use of Brechtian techniques (relating to the work of German playwright Bertolt Brecht), such as commentary songs and a detachment from its emotional storytelling, may have worked in theory, but failed in its execution and left audiences perplexed and unengaged.
The creative process was riddled with conflict even before the show’s Broadway debut. The show’s creative team was constantly butting heads, with multiple scenes and songs being reworked up until opening night. According to TheaterMania, Herbert Ross (the director) said, “There isn’t a page of dialogue that works, not a line” (Filichia, 2003), while the composer and lyricist had difficulty defending their material and maintaining any artistic control.
“In the end, nobody loved Kelly. It ran one performance, the night of February 6 at the Broadhurst Theater, and closed at a $650,000 loss amid universal critical pans. The sets were buried in the muck of a New Jersey dump a few days later” (Rhodes, 2011).
The show’s failure was not gradual, but rather immediate and total, as it appears Kelly was doomed from the start. Despite having a strong creative team, Kelly was plagued by internal dysfunction and a lack of focus. Its lack of cohesion and clarity made it impossible to salvage, and its one-night run has become a case study for how a quickly a production can unravel.
bottom of page