Ben Shapiro Reveals Lack of Understanding About Musicals: A Shocking Commentary

Curiosity often leads us down unexpected paths, and my recent exploration of Ben Shapiro’s video on the “8 Best Musicals”was no exception. Initially, I intended to critique his opinions on the Oscar nominations but ended up captivated—albeit perplexed—by his take on musical theatre.

As someone who holds a Performance Theatre degree, I bring a wealth of knowledge and personal insight into the world of musicals. Although my views may not always align with conventional wisdom, my understanding of the history and evolution of musical theatre is rooted in academic study and practical experience. Yet, it was difficult to digest Shapiro’s assertion that Rodgers and Hammerstein define the “modern”musical landscape. In reality, their impact was pivotal, marking a significant era known as the “Golden Age”of musicals, rather than what one might consider “modern.”

Throughout his presentation, one glaring realization struck me: Shapiro’s perspective on the genre seems fundamentally flawed. He expressed admiration for certain beloved musicals, yet his reasoning undermined their significance. For instance, his affection for “Ladies in Their Sensitivities” from Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street was particularly confounding; it’s hardly a favorite among fans of Stephen Sondheim. His interpretations often revealed a misunderstanding of the very works he claimed to enjoy.

Moreover, Shapiro’s commentary on well-established classics like South Pacific failed to grasp their thematic complexities. While he celebrated Fiddler on the Roof, it was telling that one of the most remarkable aspects of Sondheim—the depth and critique inherent in his work—apparently went unnoticed by him. Shapiro’s admiration for Sondheim is particularly ironic, considering the composer’s progressive beliefs that would likely clash with Shapiro’s views.

Engaging with Musicals Beyond Surface-Level Enjoyment

A striking feature of Shapiro’s selections is their thematic incongruence with his own viewpoints. Take Sweeney Todd as a prime example; I suspect he would misguidedly rally behind Judge Turpin rather than grasping the character’s moral ambiguities. Additionally, Shapiro’s analysis of Into the Woods demonstrated a troubling lack of understanding about its narrative structure and Sondheim’s lyrical intricacies.

His enthusiasm for West Side Story made me further question his appreciation of the genre. While it’s an adaptation of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, it also serves as a profound critique of the racial disparities embedded within American culture. Ignoring such critical social commentary reveals a simplistic view of musicals as mere entertainment.

Interestingly, all of Shapiro’s listed musicals were plucked from a bygone era, failing to include works from what he seemingly considers the “modern”phase of musical theatre. It’s essential to recognize that while Hammerstein changed the game with Show Boat and contributed to the concept of the “book musical, ”both composers passed away long before the 1980s. Their legacy shaped musical theatre but should not dictate its current landscape. A nod to this fact might enlighten Shapiro’s understanding.

Ultimately, this curated list of musicals revealed not just a lack of depth in Shapiro’s taste but also an indication of his creative limitations. While some musicals might have challenged societal norms of their time, many of his selections verge on the traditional, often colored by racial underpinnings—a reflection of Shapiro’s own uninspiring sensibilities.

Source & Images