Loverly:The Life and Times of My Fair Lady (Broadway Legacies) by McHugh, Dominic (best ereader for pc .TXT) 📗

seats). So successful was the London incarnation of the show that Columbia decided to record the British version, even though the four principals were the same. The introduction of two-track stereo recording equipment had taken off since the mono recording of the Broadway cast was made, so the opportunity to make a stereo version was irresistible. The recording took place on February 1, 1959, again under the direction of producer Goddard Lieberson. In general, the vitality and spontaneity of the original is not quite present on the London cast album, no doubt because the stars had performed it so many times, but Julie Andrews has recently declared her preference for the stereo version (which she describes as being “light years better than the original”).25

RUSSIAN TOUR OF 1960

The international distribution of My Fair Lady was extraordinary for its time. Although it was by no means the first show to travel beyond the English-speaking peoples, it achieved an unprecedented success in important cities all over the globe, the only major exception being Paris. Australia was the first of many countries to follow the West End production in replicating the Broadway original in January 1959, and it was followed by locations as diverse as Germany (1961), Iceland (1962), Vienna (1963), Japan (1963), Italy (1963), and Israel (1964).26 By far the most curious, though, was the ten-week tour of Russia undertaken in 1960. Never before had a musical been the subject of international diplomacy in the way that My Fair Lady became at this time. On May 6, 1959, the New York Times published an article indicating an interest in seeing the show travel to Moscow. Nikolai N. Danilov, Soviet Deputy Minister of Culture, had issued an invitation to bring the production to Russia as part of an ongoing series of Soviet-American cultural exchanges designed to foster better relations between the two nations during a difficult period of the Cold War. Levin had not been involved in the talks at this stage, but he was eager to be in charge of the tour, which he viewed as the beginning of a European tour that would then visit major cities all over the Continent.27

Initially, these plans were delayed as Lerner and Loewe objected publically to a separate Russian production of the show, to be given in translation, for which the authors would receive no royalties. The mastermind behind the production was a thirty-year-old Russian called Victor Louis, who thought nothing of requesting the orchestration from Lerner and Loewe while openly admitting that they would receive nothing in return.28 This was front-page news in the New York Times, but instead of bringing the Russian Fair Lady to an end, it encouraged Danilov—only a few days later—to go ahead and invite the Broadway company to take their production to Russia. Taking a production of Fair Lady’s complexity (including the two turntables for Oliver Smith’s set) to Moscow, Leningrad and Kiev, each with very different theaters, caused numerous logistical problems for Jerry Adler and Samuel Liff, the stage manager and production supervisor respectively. Ironically, Lerner and Loewe waived their royalties for the tour, in order to offset spiraling costs—a sign of how important the tour had become to them.29

But it became a triumphant success. The eighty-one-person company was greeted enthusiastically by the Russians, and all fifty-six performances were sold out. Franz Allers went with them to conduct the orchestra, which was drawn from the Bolshoi Theatre, and both the show itself and the cast (including Edward Mulhare as Higgins, Lola Fisher as Eliza, and Charles Victor as Doolittle) all received a rave review in the Soviet Culture newspaper from Grigory M. Yaron, a leading actor and director of the Moscow Operetta Theatre. The New York Times deemed it a landmark event in Russian-American relations, representing a new step in the development of Fair Lady’s growing international reputation.30

NEW YORK REVIVALS AT CITY CENTER IN THE 1960S

My Fair Lady had the longest consecutive road tour in musical theater history up to that time, crossing the continent five times since its launch in March 1957 and earning an estimated $21.5 million in its six years around the United States.31 It finally ended its North American run on December 14, 1963, in Toronto. But the show had not been absent from Manhattan for eighteen months before plans were underway for its return. On January 30, 1964, the New York Times announced plans for a revival at City Center in May of the same year.32 The revival opened on May 20 for a six-week run. It starred Marni Nixon as Eliza, a role that she sang in place of Audrey Hepburn’s vocals in the movie version of the show, due out in October of the same year. Ironically, given that he had appeared in the putative Henry Higgins role in the spoof My Square Laddie, Reginald Gardiner played Doolittle in the City Center revival, while the part of Higgins went to Myles Eason, an Australian-born actor of Shakespearean pedigree. John Canaday in the New York Times said the opening-night performance got off to a “hesitant start” but took fire during “The Rain in Spain,” and went on to praise Gardiner in particular. Nixon and Eason got more mixed notices, but overall there was enthusiasm for the production, which used the original settings and costumes.33

Four years later, the production returned to City Center with an all-new cast. In the lead roles were Inga Swenson and Fritz Weaver, who had been seen playing opposite each other in the 1965 Sherlock Holmes–themed Broadway musical Baker Street; Doolittle was played by the British character actor George Rose, and it would later become his signature role. Richard F. Shepard in the New York Times raved about the entire experience, describing it as “delightful,” referring to Swenson as “marvelous,” Weaver as “splendidly vinegary,” and Rose as “magnificently earthy.” He concluded: “The style of the Broadway production has been kept, and who is to complain? … [W]e’ve grown accustomed to her face.”34 This statement is part of an