London Beyond the Werewolves, Again: An Updated Travel Guide

All photos by Seth Arkin, except as noted.
Please do not re-post without attribution.

London is my favorite international destination, and I've had the pleasure of visiting the British capital 8 times, all except one in the 21st Century. (Several London stays have been brief ones on the end of other European travels.)

Back in 2011, a friend of mine was heading to London for the first time, which I used as a springboard to write something of a travel guide. (I've done likewise for San Francisco, Washington, DC, Detroit and New York theater.)

Upon hearing that another friend is soon going to London, I decided to reprise and--as needed--revise my recommendations and hopefully helpful links, having been there twice more since I initially wrote this.

But said friend has been to London before, and as my foremost travel tip is to "do what you want to do, or happily get lost on the way and do something completely different," I am aiming for this piece to be more universal than personally targeted.

Of course, my suggestions largely reflect my own proclivities--and those of many friends and relatives--and therefore represent a penchant for art, theater, music, sports and architecture more than, say, museums pertaining to science or natural history. (This also factors in attractions more unique to London than Chicago--where I live--or other major American cities.)

On my various visits, I've enjoyed nearly 30 full days in London and haven't even gotten to all the things I mention below. Plus, like New York, and even Chicago, London is a city where you could just pick any direction to walk--or a random Tube (subway) stop to exit--and discover untold pleasures, from the truly historic to the more modern and mundane, but no less enticing.

So take this for what it's worth (probably about what you paid;-), and blend it with your own inclinations, tastes, timetable and priorities. But I think my guide was valuable to the friend who inspired it, and perhaps anyone going to London--or considering it--may find something of value.

Before I get to a list of 20 things to see and do in London--and then some other options--here are a few websites that can be particularly valuable, before and even during the trip:

London Theatre Guide - londontheatre.co.uk
Official London Theatre Guide - www.officiallondontheatre.co.uk
TKTS Discount Listings (booth in Leicester Square) - http://www.tkts.co.uk/whats-on-sale/
London Walks (Great guided tours on various topics) - www.walks.com
London Underground (Tube) subway system - www.tfl.gov.uk
London Eating - www.london-eating.co.uk
Pollstar (concert listings; great for any city anywhere) - www.pollstar.com
National Rail - www.nationalrail.co.uk
Cheap Continental Flights from London - EasyJet.com and RyanAir.com
Rick Steves - My favorite travel writer, on London
Top 10 London - A great travel guide; new version only $2.99 for Kindle; older version can be perused on Amazon
Currency Converter - www.xe.com/ucc/

And as for other other tips that can prove quite helpful? Realize that the Tube can easily get you anywhere, is safe at all times (though wariness never hurts) and can easily save you over $100 getting to and from the airport. For tourists, I recommend the Oyster Card (multi-ride card), which allows you to add value online or at machines at Tube stations, and even refunds unused credit. Note that in terms of Tube "zones" only the airport will be in Zone 6; most other places tourists are likely to go will be in Zones 1 & 2.

Also, though they are ubiquitous to the point of being largely ignored by locals and repeat visitors, "Mind the Gap" and "Look Right" are two phrases that demand your attention and conscious thought. Anyone who's ridden a subway anywhere shouldn't have much difficulty minding the gap between the train and platform, but for American pedestrians, "Look Right" always seems perfectly quaint until the first time they're flattened by a bus coming from the right, not left, as they step into traffic. That's why it's written on the ground at every crosswalk; pay attention to it. And note that occasionally you're told to "Look Left."

OK, so here is a list of 20 things that I think anyone might enjoy seeing and doing in London. Some of these things could take all day; others probably just call for a few photos. A few are really just areas to walk around, which as I referenced above, could be the bulk of a great trip to London. (Hyperlinks below are to the most helpful point of reference I could find.)

1. Big Ben / Houses of Parliament - Probably the quintessential London sight; I find Big Ben to be one of the most attractive man-made structures in the world. Non-UK residents are restricted from climbing the Clock Tower, but can attend parliamentary debates. I've never timed it right to do so.

2. Buckingham Palace / Changing of the Guard - Completely touristy and probably only essential once, but fun and interesting to see. The Changing of the Guard takes place at 11:30am, on alternate days outside May-July, when it occurs daily. Check here for the Guard schedule and here for information on visiting the Buckingham Palace state rooms.

3. Tower of London - It's not really a tower, but an old fortress and castle dating back to the 11th century. I find it rather fascinating.

4. Tower Bridge - The most beautiful bridge in the world--and likely what the guy in Arizona thought he was buying in 1968. I've never gone to the exhibition inside, though I have walked across it.

5. National Gallery - I don't know that it's touted like the Louvre, Uffizi, Prado, Hermitage or Met, but the depth and breadth of its collection is as good as any I've any seen. And it's free. There's tons to see, but don't miss the roomful of Raphaels, Seurat's "Bathers at Asnieres" or some of many the great Reubens. Here's the museum's own guide to 30 of its highlights.

6. Westminster Abbey - Even if you don't care about royal weddings or funerals, the abbey is a must see for its design and all the famous souls who are buried within.

7. Theater - London's West End is the world's only rival to Broadway in New York. The two theater guides linked above, plus the TKTS listings for day-of-show discounts from a booth in Leicester Square, should help you pick a show (or five) you'll enjoy. I really enjoyed Matilda the Musical and seeing Les Miserables, still running in the city where it first did. Shakespeare's Globe theater is also a great option if there during the open-air season from April to October, though the facility now has an indoor venue as well. And in its 52nd year, Agatha Christie's The Mousetrap is always fun.

8. St. Paul's Cathedral - A bit separated from most other tourist sites, Christopher Wren's masterpiece is worth the effort to get to it, and even the walk to the top of the dome.


9. Piccadilly Circus / Leicester Square / Covent Garden - As I've mentioned, London has lots of great areas to just stroll around, but this is where I'd start. You'll be at the heart of the theater district (and not coincidentally, something of London's Times Square). Begin at the Statue of Eros and head west on Coventry Street to Leicester Square, and be sure to walk to and through Covent Garden.

10. Abbey Road - It's not all that easy to get to (St. John's Wood tube stop, not one called Abbey Road which is nowhere near the studio), the famed crosswalk has long been re-painted, the intersection is often busy and treacherous, and the studio is never open to the public. But for Beatles fanatics, a trek here is essential. You might consider taking a Beatles tour, which takes you to Abbey Road, and/or other London rock tours. Or perhaps even a day trip to Liverpool, less than a 3-hour train ride away. 

11. Imperial War Museum/ Churchill War Rooms - I found this museum to offer tremendously interesting insight to the great Prime Minister and Britain's actions during World War II. (For Americans not heading to London anytime soon, you may be interested to note that a fabulous Churchill Museum exists--within a Christopher Wren-designed church--in Fulton, Missouri, not far from St. Louis.)

12. Trafalgar Square / The Mall - Highlighted by Nelson's Column, Trafalgar Square is one of London's great public spaces. It is essentially the "front yard" to the National Gallery and National Portrait Gallery. Heading southwest from the square is "The Mall" which is actually a road that leads to Buckingham Palace. 

13. Tate Modern - London is filled with wonderful museums and the Tate Modern is one of the best collections of modern art in the world. Its location in a former power station is rather distinctive in its own right. Convenient to combine with a visit to St. Paul's Cathedral and...

14. Shakespeare/Dickens Walk / Globe Theater Tour - Even if you can't get to see a performance at the Globe, you can take a tour. And the guided London Walks tour on Shakespeare/Dickens is "not to be" missed, as it offers the best of times. It seems to operate on Wednesday and Sunday. Even if you don't go on a tour, try to get to The George, a medieval pub supposedly patronized by the Bard.

15. Hyde Park / Kensington Gardens / Marble Arch - Great cities have great parks and Hyde Park is one of the most famous anywhere. Look for Speakers' Corner near the northeast corner, the Serpentine lake and other sites of interest, including Kensington Gardens. Marble Arch is a monument, located near Speakers Corner, that will remind you of its Roman inspiration (and possibly the Washington Square Arch). 

16. British Museum - I haven't been here since my first London visit in 1993, but it is one of the world's great museums. Home to the Rosetta Stone and much else.

17. Courtauld Gallery - A fabulous and relatively intimate art museum, highlighted by some sensational Van Goghs and this notable Manet.

18. Madame Tussauds - Kitschy as hell, but this is the original wax museum, dates back nearly 200 years old and can be not only fun, but somewhat informative as well.

19. Chinatown / Soho - Sadly, Lee Ho Fook's, sung about by Warren Zevon in "Werewolves of London" is no longer--I really did once get a big dish of beef chow mein--but Chinatown is worth a walkthrough and perhaps a meal. Soho is a larger district, still a bit tawdry, but not too risque. I'd basically stroll up Shaftsbury Avenue from Piccadilly Circus; Soho is to the north; Gerrard St., which intersects with Wardour St. just south of Shaftsbury, is the main stretch of Chinatown.

20. Baker Street - Although Sherlock Holmes no longer lives a 221B Baker Street, there is a plaque above the door, the above statue nearby and even a museum at his supposed residence. The Baker Street tube station is one of London's oldest and decorated with Sherlock. The area is quite charming even beyond the Holmes' connection and Madame Tussauds is right around the corner. I imagine it also inspired this song.

Other Museums

National Portrait Gallery

Wallace Collection - Another outstanding art museum, in an old mansion. Great pre-Impressionism French and Spanish.

Victoria & Albert Museum - World's largest museum of decorative arts and design

Tate Britain - Turner, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Constable, Bacon, etc.

Royal Academy of the Arts

British Library - The main location is St. Pancras. Used to be part of the British Museum, so current library building is much newer than you'd expect.

Natural History Museum - Admission is free, as it is for the...

Science Museum

Saatchi Gallery - A contemporary art gallery, with free admission

Jewel Tower - There are no jewels, but an exhibition on the history of Parliament (no word on Funkadelic) 

Charles Dickens Museum - Arrive with great expectations; some may find Chuck's one-time home to offer a fine Twist.

The London Dungeon - A total tourist haunt, but may be fun in the spirit of Halloween. Offers discount tickets in combination with Madame Tussauds.

Snap Galleries - A rock 'n' roll photo gallery in the Piccadilly Arcade; basically a store but worth a look if nearby. (Map location)

Photo of Windsor Castle, not taken by me

Royal Residences (besides Buckingham Palace)

Kensington Palace - This one is within London, near the west end of Hyde Park; Wikipedia

Hampton Court Palace - Famed for its shrubbery "maze" this palace is southwest of London and requires taking a train from Waterloo Station; Wikipedia

Windsor Castle - To get here, take a train from Waterloo Station to Windsor. I've never visited the castle, but imagine it's pretty impressive if you're impressed by that kind of thing. Wikipedia

10 Downing Street - OK, this isn't really a royal residence, as it's the home of the Prime Minister. Although I've read that David Cameron actually lives at Number 11. But you can get a glimpse of if you walk south on Whitehall from Trafalgar Square. 

Quick Overviews

Double Decker Bus Tour - A bit pricey, but not a bad way to get to many of the sights in one fell swoop. Plus, I believe the regular double decker buses are largely obsolete, so a hop-on/hop-off tour bus may suffice in that regard.

London Eye - I've yet to go on this, as it's never really appealed to me, but I've heard it's rather enjoyable.

Spectator Events besides Theater

Soccer Game - Chelsea, Arsenal, Fulham, Queens Park Rangers and Tottenham Hotspur are all London-based English Premier League teams. Find a league schedule here. In 2011, I saw Chelsea play at Stamford Bridge stadium, having bought tickets from a "tout" outside. It was a lot of fun. 

Rock Concerts - Given England's great musical legacy, it could be fun to see a band in the capital, with something at Royal Albert Hall a real treat. Pollstar.com is the best way to check who might be in town. 

Ronnie Scott's Jazz Club - Located in Soho, London premier jazz club has operated since 1959.

Other "London Walks" of Note (see full schedule here)

The London of Oscar Wilde
Jack The Ripper Haunts
The Literary London Pub Walk
The Blitz
Rock & Roll London
The Beatles' Magical Mystery Tour
Secret London 

Modern Buildings

The Shard - Designed by Renzo Piano, it is the tallest building in the European Union and has an observation deck.
 

The Gherkin - Designed by Norman Foster and so nicknamed due to its pickle-like shape, it kind of looms over the Tower of London

City Hall - Designed by noted architect Norman Foster and opened in 2002.

Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park - Site of the 2012 Summer Olympics.

Wembley Stadium - Opened in 2007 on the site of the old Wembley, dating back to 1923. Primarily used for football (soccer), rugby and concerts.

Neighborhoods not yet mentioned

Chelsea - Once was bohemian and later swinging, now seems largely upscale. Kings Road was the epicenter of its fashion district and the Sex Pistols were formed at Malcolm McLaren's SEX shop at 430 Kings Rd., but it's long gone.

Notting Hill - I've never been here, but I did see the movie. The area is said to be affluent & fashionable, but where in London isn't?

Butler's Wharf - The area at the south end of Tower Bridge, just to the east has abundant dining options and is a pleasant place to stroll.

Oxford St. / Carnaby St. - Oxford is one of London's major streets and Carnaby, a 3-block pedestrianed stretch in Soho, was once the center of Swinging London. Both have been fun to stroll along and do a little...

Shopping

Harrods - Probably the most famous department store in London, with origins dating back to 1824

Liberty - A really beautiful building near Oxford Street.

Savile Row - Famous for all its tailor shops. The Beatles' Let It Be rooftop concert took place atop 3 Savile Row.

Fortnum & Mason - Old and swanky. On Piccadilly Street, close to...

Hatchards - The oldest bookstore in London, dating back to 1797.

HMV - The closest thing to Tower Records and the Virgin Megastore, which no longer exist.

Eating & Drinking

Pubs - There are supposedly over 7,000 pubs in London, offering a culture far different than typical American bars. Hanging out and chatting with locals in a pub should be part of any London visit. Here's a list of six notable pubs. I don't have a favorite, but like The George Inn for its history and have had a fine Pub Roast Lunch at the Porcupine, near Leicester Square.

Afternoon Tea at the Cavendish - Many other "high tea" options abound, but I've only been here and it seems rather quintessential.

Hard Rock Cafe - This was the chain's first location.

Indian Food - I don't remember too many thrilling meals in London, but know I got some great Indian food, and purveyors are easy to find. Sitar on the Strand near the Somerset House (the Courtauld Gallery is located within) was pretty good. 

Gordon Ramsey - I've yet to splurge on a high-end meal in London, but hopefully will one day try one of the establishments of this popular TV chef

Etc. 

See Red - They may still seem somewhat ubiquitous and obvious, but be sure to acutely note the red double decker buses, phone booths and mail boxes, as these are things largely evaporating from London, and in basic essence, everywhere. Also enjoy the old style taxis.

Wimbledon Grounds - I tried to get here on my last trip to London, but was precluded by rain and some Tube closures. There is a museum and tours are conducted.

Stroll Along the Thames - There is no shortage of wonderful places to walk in London, but walking west along the Thames River, from the Tate Modern to the Houses of Parliament was one of most enjoyable things I've done there.

Where The Kinks Began - Ray and Dave Davies grew up at 6 Denmark Terrace (along Fortis Green) in North London. I don't think there's any commemoration of the home itself, but a pub across the street--The Clissold Arms--is where The Kinks played their first show, and their last. The pub has a Kinks Room with band memorabilia.

Tube Randomly - I've never really done this, but it seems it could be cool to randomly select a Tube stop, get off and explore.

Ideally, this guide will provide any visitor to London with abundant options of intriguing things to do, see and experience, though I imagine one could really do very little of this and still have a great time.

Magic in the Night, 30 Years Burning Down the Road: Remembering My First Springsteen Concert

It was the summer of 1984.

I was 15 and heading into my junior year of high school. Although I had a close circle of good friends--some of whom I still maintain--I was never part of the in-crowd, a jock, popular with girls or even involved in any school groups, such as student government, theater, Mathletes or chess club.

I wasn't an unhappy kid, but back then--as now--I frequently filled in the blanks with rock 'n roll.

I had already become a pretty heavy fan of The Beatles, Stones, Who, Kinks, Led Zeppelin and David Bowie, but also around that time relished several (quasi-)heavy metal acts such as Ozzy Osbourne, The Scorpions, Def Leppard, Rush, Triumph, Sammy Hagar and AC/DC. (My tastes haven't changed all that much, though I've long since embraced artists like R.E.M., The Ramones, Husker Dü and Metallica, who I wasn't hip or adventurous enough to care about at the time. In fairness, none were played on radio stations I listened to.)

Other than babysitting a couple times, I hadn't ever worked prior to that summer, but my Aunt Mickey, who was a longtime secretary in a large downtown law firm, helped me get a job in the firm's mailroom. This largely entailed serving as an on-foot messenger, delivering packages throughout the downtown Chicago area from the office at 208 S. LaSalle.

Along with indoctrinating me to the Loop's streets--from a geography perspective; I was only 15--the job was fantastic for expanding my experiences well-beyond white, Jewish, teenage suburbia.

I worked with men, not boys; mostly African-Americans who made skin color, age, social strata and much more forever immaterial in terms of comfort, camaraderie and assumption.

That summer was wonderful for Cubs fans, many whom had never before witnessed a winning team. I was taken by my boss--Wallace Winburn was his name, if I remember correctly--to a couple games, with some lawyer-donated seats in the first row behind the Cubs' dugout. I especially recall being at a game where the Cubs beat the Mets and Dwight Gooden (which I mentioned in this Wrigley Field 100th Anniversary post).

But in terms of singular events that summer, one stands out above all others.

On the first leg of his Born in the U.S.A. tour, Bruce Springsteen came to the Rosemont Horizon on July 15, 17 and 18, 1984.

I was already a big Boss fan--since The River album in 1980, from which I scoured backwards and forwards, buying Born in the U.S.A. (on cassette) upon its release in early June '84--but had been too young to attend any previous concerts of his.

And though I had already gone to some concerts the year before with friends, and even Rush at the same venue just a few weeks prior, no one else I knew was into the Boss and I, of course, was too young to drive, let alone own a car.

Tickets had long since gone on sale and sold out, but I really wanted to see Bruce.  

I can't recall why the Sunday night show on July 15 wasn't the one I targeted--now I would attend all three--but for whatever reason I focused on the second of Springsteen's 3-night stand, on Tuesday, July 17.

(I still vaguely recall this Chicago Tribune article from July 15 previewing the shows, as well as a review of the first concert, but can now see them anew due to the paper's graphical online archives, released just this week.)

So one day at lunch--it may have even been the Monday before the Tuesday night show--I walked to a hotel on north Wabash Avenue called the Oxford House, which had a ticket broker office inside.

I paid $35 for a single ticket that had a face value of $15. My folks weren't thrilled about this, but I was spending money I had earned.

On the 17th, I worked downtown, but upon getting home that evening my mom and dad drove me to Rosemont. (Then called the Rosemont Horizon, the venue is now dubbed Allstate Arena.)

And after the show--which lasted nearly 4 hours, past midnight or close to it--they picked me up. I think they even took me to the nearby McDonald's afterwards.

Touring with the E Street Band--with Nils Lofgren having taken over for Steven Van Zandt--Bruce was every bit as good as I could have hoped.

And more.

You can see the setlist from that night here, but the only songs I explicitly remember being played are "Born in the U.S.A." (which opened the show), "Jungleland" (which I knew but didn't instantly recognize, hence why it's stuck in my memory) and a cover of the Rolling Stones' "Street Fighting Man."

But however much my memory may have eroded, I instantly knew that I was seeing someone absolutely incredible and unique.

And, to me, a hero.

Perhaps even a god. 

I've now seen over 600 concerts in my life--by at least 300 different artists--many of which I've found fantastic.

Yet since July 17, 1984--and reiterated 43 more times, including the following summer but mostly within these past 15 years--there has been one truth:

In terms of live rock 'n roll performers--or really, those of any ilk, IMHO--there is Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band, and then there is everyone else.

This isn't my jersey, as I don't know what became of it,
but I had one just like it.

Who knows how much that night changed my life?

Perhaps I still would've become as much of a Springsteen fanatic, and seen him just as often once the internet made tickets easier to buy, tours easier to track (leading to numerous Thunder Road trips) and concerts easier to get to. (See this post for my Springsteen show stats and cities.)

It's possible that my tendency to turn to art--including not only rock music but eventually a much broader spectrum of entertainment and culture--rather than alcohol, drugs, self-pity or depression during times of loneliness and adversity was already begotten by the time I got to the Horizon, or more holistically, developed long thereafter.

And perhaps it wasn't just that evening that made me comfortable going to concerts, many other events and even around the world all by myself, although it helped that the adults next to me were nothing but nice.

Likely it was as much the mailroom job itself that helped me acclimate to people and surroundings different from what I was accustomed, or perhaps not always perceived as "perfectly safe."

But for numerous reasons, I'm obviously glad I went to that Springsteen show on July 17, 1984, and happy that my parents helped get me there.

For whatever sentimentality, nostalgia, rite of passage pathos or pseudo psychology this recollection is dripping with, the truth is it was Springsteen's performance itself--quite possibly, with Michael Jordan's Bulls debut still months away, the best I had ever seen anyone do anything--that mattered most.

Let's hope I never forget I was there, but even if I should, my initial Springsteen concert experience and what it's meant to my life, will remain part of me.

To paraphase a famous lyric from "Thunder Road":

Show a little faith, there's still magic in that night.

Thanks, Bruce. Thanks, Mom and Dad. Thanks, Aunt Mickey, who like my father is no longer with us. Thanks, mailroom colleagues at Altheimer & Gray in the summer of 1984. Thanks, ticket broker long since gone from a hotel that no longer exists. Thanks, fellow Springsteen fans, who treated a kid with kindness and made a solo concertgoer feel forever part of a "tramps like us" community.

Thanks for that night and the 30 years since.

Thank you for reading this; I hope you have a similar story. 

And wherever you may be, Rosie come out tonight:

(This video is from a show a week after the one I attended, at which "Rosalita" was also played)

Revised Book Works Well, but 'Brigadoon' Still Rises on Its Score -- Chicago Theater Review

Theater Review

Brigadoon
Goodman Theatre, Chicago
Thru August 17
@@@@

"I saw the rain dirty valley,
you saw Brigadoon 
I saw the crescent,
you saw the whole of the moon"
-- The Waterboys, "The Whole Of The Moon" (1985)

I can't see the musical Brigadoon without thinking of the lyrics above, which come from one of my favorite songs, by a band originally hailing from Scotland.  

But it also seems apt to cite them here because I saw Brigadoon Sunday, on the night of a big, bright, full moon.

And it's also true that the Goodman Theatre only stages classic musicals only once in a blue moon.

Though Candide, Ain't Misbehavin' and Purlie count in this regard, the venerable theater that mostly stages straight plays has developed--just since the year 2000--several stellar new musicals including The Visit, Bounce, The Light in the Piazza, The Million Dollar Quartet, Floyd & Clea Under the Western Sky, Turn of the Century and The Jungle Book.

Hence it was a rare treat to hear the 13-piece orchestra play Brigadoon's lush score written by Frederick Loewe, with lyrics by Alan Jay Lerner--almost always referenced as Lerner & Loewe--which first ran on Broadway in 1947.

How the show came to Dearborn Street is somewhat noteworthy and well-chronicled in this piece by Chicago Tribune theater critic Chris Jones (who, incidentally, was somewhat lukewarm in his review of the production itself, finding more flaws with it than I did).

Essentially, Liza Lerner, the daughter of Alan, felt that the musical's book (i.e. script)--which her father wrote along with the lyrics--needed some revising to better connect with 21st century audiences.

As Jones notes, part of Liza's motivation was likely commercial, as new professional stagings of Brigadoon--which hasn't been produced nearly as often as Lerner & Loewe's My Fair Lady and Camelot--would also rejuvenate financial returns for the creators' estates.

As the back story goes, Liza Lerner reached out to Rachel Rockwell, a director who has received numerous rave reviews for Chicago-area musicals she has helmed.

Lerner was able to entice the Goodman--which had been looking for the right project to enlist Rockwell--to support her vision by booking Brigadoon as the final show of their 2013-2014 subscription season. 

With the songs and their lyrics remaining untouched, and Rockwell handling the choreography as well as directing, a writer named Brian Hill came aboard to rehabilitate the book. 

In the Goodman production, which if widely embraced--the run has already been extended--could have a considerable shelf life, whether on Broadway or as the new "standard Brigadoon" that theaters license, set designer Kevin Depinet adds some nifty touches to differentiate this depiction of the Scottish Highlands. 

I have no problem with any of the above, either in theory or as the changes served the show I saw on Sunday night. 

Though I had recently watched the 1954 movie version of Brigadoon starring Gene Kelly and Cyd Charisse, and noted some onstage dialogue that wasn't in the movie--and presumably differs from the original stage incarnation, which I last saw in 2011--if I hadn't ingested Jones' article and other press in advance, I can't say I would have identified Rockwell's piece as revisionist. 

Not only are the songs all the same, but so is the basic premise, which involves a pair of American men on a trip to Scotland before one of them--Tommy Albright, well-sung at Goodman by Kevin Earley--is to be married, somewhat begrudgingly.

Tommy and Jeff (Rod Thomas, who I've seen in multiple fine roles recently) stumble upon an not-on-the-map village called Brigadoon. As it's explained, still, Brigadoon rises out of the mist once every 100 years, which to its villagers represents just a single day. 

As far as I could tell, Hill's new verbiage serves to reference brutal war and strife as precipitating Brigadoon's fairy-tale disappearing act, which--per Goodman artistic director Robert Falls' program notes--dovetails well with a rough period of Scottish history.

That Brigadoon, the musical, is set as always, in 1946, allows Hill to parallel what had happened in Scotland with World War II experiences and barbarism. 

Along with abetting the production's efforts to better portray the true character--rather than caricature--of 18th century Scotland, I felt the updated text added some nice resonance, especially as the Scottish are soon to vote on gaining independence from the United Kingdom. 

But at its core, Brigadoon is still a fanciful--yet poignant--love story between Tommy and Fiona, a villager well embodied by the lovely Jennie Sophia, and a celebration of a close-knit community that contrasts with New York of the 1940s and big city life today. 

The Brigadoon score remains terrific--if a notch below My Fair Lady--with great songs like "Down in MacConnachy Square," "Waitin' for My Dearie," "I'll Go Home with Bonnie Jean," "Heather on the Hill," "Almost Like Being in Love" and "There But For You Go I" being terrifically delivered at the Goodman. 

The cast was strong throughout, and it was fun to watch so many longtime Chicago musical theater performers I've often seen get the chance to demonstrate their gifts on the Goodman stage. 

These included Sophia, Thomas, Larry Adams, Joseph Anthony Foronda, George Keating, Michael Aaron Lindner, Maggie Portman, Emily Rohm, Craig Spidle, Richard Strimer and Roger Mueller, the latter whom I hadn't previously seen but who, in addition to being a longtime Chicago actor, is the father of Jessie Mueller, now a Broadway star and Tony winner for Beautiful: The Carole King Musical.

I think almost anyone who sees this rendition of Brigadoon will sufficiently enjoy it, and perhaps even love it. The standing ovation on Sunday night not only justly saluted the actors and musicians, but the work of Rockwell, Depinet--whose scenery slyly added modernity while retaining classicism--and costume designer Mara Blumenfeld, whose concoctions are a joy (and not as dominated by kilts as one may imagine). 

Yet while this review should be seen as a rave and a recommendation--albeit not an insistent one to those who aren't naturally drawn to musical theater--for whatever reason, I wasn't as buoyant throughout or after this visit to Brigadoon as I was at a splendid Light Opera Works production employing the original material. 

I also can't claim to have liked the Goodman's foray into classic musicals nearly as much as Chicago Shakespeare Theatre's Gypsy, Lyric Opera's The Sound of Music or Drury Lane Oakbrook's Les Misérables earlier this year. 

Other than some awkward pacing, I cannot denote any flaws in Rockwell's direction here, but perhaps due to the source material itself, her takes on Les Miz, The Sound of Music, Sweeney Todd and Ragtime (all at Drury Lane Oakbrook) just excited me more. 

And while I can appreciate how Brigadoon fits into the history of musical theater, by--in the wake of Rodgers & Hammerstein's Oklahoma and Carousel, and preceding South Pacific by two years--better bridging strong narratives and great, storytelling songs, Lerner & Loewe's first highly successful musical doesn't seem to match the thematic verve of their rivals' (or even their own) best works. 

Nonetheless, whether you discovered Brigadoon long ago or will newly arrive upon it, Goodman's production provides nothing less than a warm welcome with plenty of hearty song and dance. 

And if you decide that this is a staging that can be mist, the good news is that you shouldn't have to wait 100 years for this nicely updated gem to rise again. 

Pithy Philosophies #17

Seth Saith:

It is not until one embraces, and even espouses,  viewpoints against our natural tendencies that our opinions gain real validity.

Their World Cup Runneth (Almost) Over: Jordan and Paolo Provide the Final Analysis

I've really enjoyed the 2014 World Cup, which seemed to be a bigger deal in America than ever before.

I didn't watch all the games, but quite a few and most of the major ones (though I can't deny writing blog posts, perusing nonsense on my phone and reading the newspaper throughout some low-scoring halves).

As I wrote or referenced in introducing their initial World Cup preview and their observations leading into the Knockout Stage, the avid interest of my close friends Jordan and Paolo have largely abetted whatever interest I've had in soccer over the years--and their insights, graciously shared here, have certainly heightened my appreciation of this World Cup.

With Germany v Argentina set for the final on Sunday afternoon at Maracana stadium in Rio de Janeiro, preceded by a somewhat silly Third Place game between Brazil and the Netherlands on Saturday--now especially cruel for the host nation after their humiliating 7-1 loss to Germany--I've once again asked my pals to kick around their thoughts about the big game and the Cup as a whole.

Here's their Final analysis:

1. So it's down to Germany v Argentina. Your thoughts...

a. On what led us here:

Jordan: Argentina, though they have looked increasingly solid defensively, has never looked all that convincing, doing just enough to get through.

Germany started off on fire the first match, then showed some vulnerabilities in two of their next three. An illness for center-back Mats Hummels causing him to miss the game against Algeria did not help but the main problem was twofold; central defender Per Mertesacker looked awful and the German manager kept playing his world-class right back, Philipp Lahm, in midfield. When Germany reached the quarterfinal against France, Hummels was back (and scored the only goal) and Lahm was back in his best position and Mertesacker was grabbing bench.

Paolo: Obviously not the preferred final match, either for the Brazilians--who seemed unable to cope with the pressure of playing at home--or the Dutch,  who are still the best footballing nation not to win a World Cup. Germany has looked great most of the tournament, and Argentina has looked tenuous but has done what is necessary to get it done.

b. On the game itself and possible outcome:

Jordan: I don't expect a game as dire as Argentina-Netherlands but I don't expect a classic either. I have a hard time envisioning a scenario where Argentina wins. Germany is just better. They can play with the ball or play on the counter-attack. I would give Argentina about a 10% chance to win.

Paolo: The head says Germany wins it, as they have been the best side overall of the tourney. The heart wants Argentina to win on some magical Messi goal.

Angel di Maria

2. Germany clearly looked much better in its blitzkrieg of host Brazil than Argentina did in beating the Netherlands on free kicks after a rather lackluster 0-0 tie over 120 minutes (or even how the Argentines looked vs. Switzerland and Belgium). But two things may bolster Argentina's chances: the health of Aguero and Di Maria (and also Mascherano, who was rather banged up against the Dutch) and simply the possibility of Lionel Messi being game-changing.

a. Please address what you've heard about the Argentinean injuries and where things may stand on Sunday. Or aren't they as important as I may think?

Jordan: Aguero is not 100% fit and has not been for a while. He is in poor form and while he is a fantastic player when healthy he likely will at best be a late game substitution. Missing Di Maria is a bigger issue. I'm still not sure if he will play but if he does I doubt he will be anywhere near 100%.

Javier Mascherano concussed

Mascherano has been heroic and is possibly Argentina's most important player but I have a big problem
with the fact that he was allowed to continue playing after being knocked almost unconscious in their last match against the Netherlands. Alvaro Pereira on Uruguay was literally knocked unconscious against England in the group stage but was allowed to continue playing. It's outrageous that players who have been pretty clearly concussed have been allowed to continue playing. I blame Sepp Blatter.

Paolo: Mascherano is the heart of the defense, although not the best tactical defender. But heart has its place in the game, and I think he will play. It's a once in a lifetime opportunity.

Lionel Messi

b. Is there anything tactically about the way Germany plays that may enable Messi to get better chances to find space, score and assist than it seemed he had against the Netherlands (and some earlier games)? It seems he not only has the weight of being "the world's best player" on him, but the weight of Maradona. What's necessary for him to be a difference-maker on Sunday?

Jordan: Mats Hummels seems to have an issue with a knee but I believe he is still expected to play. Even if Mertesacker has to play I don't think Argentina has shown enough attacking competence to make it an issue.

I expect Germany to alter their strategy just a bit to account for Messi. Either Schweinsteiger or Khedeira may be charged with keeping a close eye on him and will stay back more than normal. Though I am rooting for him I don't think Messi will be able to influence the game all that much.

Paolo:  The Germans mark forwards very well, and are very disciplined in keeping their defensive form. But Messi only needs a small amount of space to move in -- that is the genius of his game, My belief is that the truly great players rise to the occasion. I hope Messi can fulfill his legacy with a WC win. 

Thomas Müller with Sideshow Bob, aka David Luiz

3. Give me your Golden Ball (MVP) winner for the entire Cup, dependent, of course, on what happens Sunday. And perhaps a few runners-up and best goalies.

Jordan: Thomas Müller of Germany is the odds-on favorite. If Messi dominates and Argentina win he would get it.

Runners up for me: Toni Kroos (Germany), James Rodriguez (Colombia). Arjen Robben (Netherlands) and Neymar (Brazil) will get votes. Javier Mascherano (Argentina) has been heroic but as a defensive midfielder is not likely to be considered.

Several goalkeepers were awesome: Neuer (Germany), Ochoa (Mexico), Navas (Costa Rica), Enyeama (Nigeria), and Howard (U.S.A.) stood out.

It may be something of an anomaly but the goalkeepers for three of the four semi-final teams are rated as very sub-par. Romero (Argentina), Cillessen (Netherlands) and Julio Cesar (Brazil) are universally considered to be poor.

Paolo: Nothing to add, Jordan's  list is complete

 
4. Without simply belittling a poor effort, can you address the destruction of Brazil vs. Germany? To me, they hadn't looked superior throughout the whole World Cup, and unfortunately Neymar--their best player--was hurt in the waning minutes of their quarter-final game against Colombia. Perhaps that shook their confidence going in against Germany, but they--and especially their defense, which has little to do with Neymar--folded like a cheap suit after the first goal.  

Any explanation?

Jordan: Brazil was not good throughout and their effort against Germany was shocking. Theoretically the loss of Thiago Silva, their captain and best defensive player, should have been at least as concerning as the loss of Neymar. I think there are three factors to explain the way Brazil played:

1) They weren't that good a team.

2) They were under a ton of pressure.

3) They were completely overcome by emotion. (this being partly related to #2)

Many of the Brazilian players had been criticized for weeping earlier in the tournament but the lengths they went to to commemorate Neymar before the game against Germany was ridiculously overboard. As many people have pointed out they seemed to be acting as if Neymar had died. They completely lost their heads. Germany lost one of their best players (Marco Reus) a week before the World Cup started but you didn't see them wailing and gnashing their teeth at any time.

I would, however, like to take this opportunity to do some belittling. Marcelo and Fernandinho were exceptionally and implausibly terrible but I am saving the knives for one of my least favorite players, David Luiz (also known derisively as Sideshow Bob). He was the captain of the team with Thiago Silva out and he played like a complete freaking idiot. He was meant to be in the center of their defense but went charging around the field like a chicken with his head cut off leaving chaos and empty spaces where he was supposed to be. 

   

And if you'd like to have a visual example of why I have a problem with David Luiz, take a look at this:

For context, this heinous assault was committed off the ball and was committed against a 19-year-old player, Jake Reeves, on a team in England's third division (called League One) in the dying minutes of a game that Chelsea was winning 4-0 in the fourth round of the FA Cup.

David Luiz is a dirty, dirty player and a bad person. His tears at the end of the game against Germany made me happy. Screw him.

Paolo: Completely agree with Jordan's assessment. The Brazilians didn't have to qualify for the Cup so they did not play a tough competitive schedule and I believe missed the opportunity for the team to bond under that process. What I saw was a lack of on the field chemistry and cohesion.

Plus, as mentioned before, the pressure of playing at home (and all the backlash over WC expenditures) just discombobulated them. Once they were down 2-0 they gave up. I'm surprised they didn't lose by more.

5. Somewhat facetiously, should Brazil show up for the Third Place game vs. the Netherlands? And more literally, will they? I can't help but sense another blowout.

Jordan: I don't think there will be a blowout. No one cares about this game, not even the players. The third place game shouldn't even be played.

Paolo: I respectfully disagree with Jordan. This is Brazil s opportunity to show the world and its fans that the semi-final was an aberration and that they can win playing their type of game. I pray they win. Losing, and or losing badly, would further wound the world's greatest footballing nation -- and that would be a tragedy. Some semblance of dignity needs to be restored to the nation, I hope they play great and win. 

6. Though we discussed last time that this has been a very competitive, well-played and entertaining World Cup, it's not hard to imagine that it will be recalled primarily for Spain's disappointment, Suarez' bite and Brazil's humiliation. Why should World Cup 2014 be remembered for more than that?

James Rodriguez' goal against Uruguay

Jordan: It should be remembered for the Suarez bite and for Brazil's humiliation. That doesn't mean it
hasn't been a really great spectacle. Though the games seemed to get less exciting after the group stage there have been plenty of fantastic performances and moments.

The goals by Van Persie (against Spain), Cahill (against the Netherlands), James Rodriguez (against Uruguay), and Jermaine Jones (against Portugal) were all worthy of all-time World Cup commemoration. I'm not enough of a World Cup historian to be in a position to compare it to other World Cups but I think the consensus is that this has been the best one since 1998.

Paolo: Also, because finally even non-football fans in the U.S. have to at the very least admit that the World Cup is the greatest sports tourney in the world. And U.S. fans coalesced around a team that they learned to love. 30 years from now this tourney and squad will be cited as the defining moment in U.S. soccer. 

7. From this World Cup, how do you forecast International soccer in years to come, leading up and into World Cup 2018, which will be held in Russia? Which teams' stature has substantive shifted, for better or worse?

Jordan: I don't have a forecast. The gap in quality does seem to be narrowing between the traditional powers and some of the smaller countries. Brazil's stature has been shattered. They need to regroup.

Paolo: I think that CONCACAF proved it deserves a 4th qualifying team. Africa and Asia also need more teams in the tourney. I think the US has proved it can play with anyone, as well as Costa Rica.  

8. Anything else you would like to add...

   
Jordan: Someone should do something to stop Sepp Blatter and get rid of the corruption of FIFA but I'm not holding my breath. (See this 2013 article from The Guardian.)

I especially like how FIFA says they are opposed to racism and discrimination yet have awarded the next two World Cups to Russia and Qatar. Great job, FIFA.

The popularity of soccer in the U.S. is certainly increasing. Being able to watch so many games of the European leagues (Premier League, Serie A, La Liga, Bundesliga, League 1, Portugese Liga, Champions League, Europa League, etc.) can only increase interest.

Paolo: Yes, the 2022 Cup needs to be moved to the US!

As with before, thank you very much for your time and great insights. 

Jordan: Any time dude. 

I don't know about you, but I think Jordan and Paolo warrant a regular gig, or perhaps their own blog, analyzing international and club soccer around the world. But enjoy the Final, and may  your Cup runneth over.

Maybe I'm Still Amazed: At 72, Paul McCartney Delivers a Superlative Celebration of Beatlemania, but Could Use a Few More 'New' Wrinkles -- Chicago Concert Review

Concert Review

Paul McCartney

United Center, Chicago

July 9, 2014

@@@@@

Although I am too young to have witnessed--or even known of--them in an extant state, I have always worshiped the Beatles.

And yes, worship is the right term, as the legendary band's music and message have been more important and impactful to my life--and, as I see it, the world--that any religion or religious figure.

But reasons for reverence--or simply excuses to celebrate the unrivaled greatness of the Beatles--have been particularly robust this year.

2014 marks the 50th anniversary of the Beatles first hit in America ("I Want to Hold Your Hand"), their initial arrival in the United States, their historic appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show and--just this week--the release of their first movie, A Hard Day's Night.

In addition to hosting a Beatles Night on the Feb. 9 Ed Sullivan anniversary, watching the restored version of A Hard Day's Night and, as always, listening heavily to their music, so far this year I have seen The Beatles LOVE Cirque du Soleil show in Las Vegas, two stellar Beatles tribute bands--American English and the Cheetles--and a concert two weeks ago by Ringo Starr & His All-Starr Band.

This week Ringo celebrated his 74th birthday, and on Wednesday, Sir Paul McCartney came to Chicago for a concert just six weeks after being hospitalized for a virus for nearly a week.

Such is my regard for McCartney, the music he has created--not just with the Beatles--and his outstanding
concerts I've attended in the past that his United Center show was pretty much an automatic @@@@@ so long as he showed up in good health, good voice and delivered one of his now-standard nearly 3-hour shows.

All three were true, and Wednesday's concert was, in itself, phenomenal and genuinely deserving of my highest rating.

Over the last few weeks I've unabashedly awarded @@@@1/2 to highly enjoyable, musically-stellar concerts by Barry Gibb, New Order and Ringo, and this one by Sir Paul was definitively better--not just due to its duration or the inclusion of 26 brilliant Beatles songs (and highlights from his Wings and solo oeuvre) but because Paul and his band sounded terrific.

"Eight Days a Week" was a great opener, "All My Loving" reminded that it was the first song the Beatles played on Ed Sullivan, "Paperback Writer" rocked as did Wings' "Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-Five, "Maybe I'm Amazed" was superb and a string of gems with Paul playing acoustic guitar--"I've Just Seen a Face," "We Can Work It Out," "And I Love Her," "Another Day" and "Blackbird"--was simply sublime.

And at that point, Paul was only 15 songs--actually 16 including an instrumental romp through Jimi Hendrix' "Foxy Lady"--through a 2 hour, 45 minute set of 39 (or 40) songs.

The show would proceed to include many more Beatles and Wings hits--you can see Paul McCartney's full Chicago setlist on Setlist.fm--and four songs from 2013 New album.

That "Save Me," "New," "Queenie Eye" and "Everybody Out There" sounded so swell among a plethora of stone-cold classics is a testament to how gifted McCartney remains as a songwriter.

Though it's hard to say which, if any, of the oldies I would have replaced, I certainly would've been happy hearing a few more New songs, as well as more than just "My Valentine" from Paul's rather strong output over the past 20 years.

But as Paul himself noted, when he plays new songs he hopes the fans like them, but when he starts an old one, "the cell phones come out; I just see a sea of twinkling lights."

So I understand why Paul feels the need to keep his setlists stacked with "Back in the USSR," "Get Back," "Let It Be," "Hey Jude," "Live and Let Die"--complete with the same over-the-top pyrotechnics since Wings Over America--and other proven crowd pleasers.

It's also worth noting that this one-off arena show in Chicago--his first gig in the city since two at Wrigley Field in Summer 2011--comes amidst playing stadiums around the world and a U.S. tour that will hit some less-visited markets like Fargo, Missoula and Lubbock.

So my "But..." isn't that big, nor detracting, especially given that after reports surfaced--somewhat obliquely--in May that McCartney canceled several Asian dates and was admitted to a Tokyo hospital for a viral infection, I was worried about his well-being and whether he would cancel the UC show, or even be precluded from performing ever again.

Hence, I feel more lucky and blessed that I got to see Sir Paul for the 10th time--six in the past 5 years--than concerned about what what may have made this show just a bit better.

And though it was just cooler to see him for two nights at Wrigley, last year at a sweltering Miller Park in Milwaukee, in late 2011 at Le Bercy in Paris and in 2009 in Tulsa on a road trip built around him, I can't honestly say that Paul and his crack, long-standing touring band--Rusty Anderson (guitar), Brian Ray (bass), Paul "Wix" Wickens (keyboards), Abe Laboriel, Jr. (drums)--didn't sound just as good on Wednesday, nor was the setlist markedly different or worse.

But in remarking that he saw faces in the crowd he recognized from past shows, Paul himself noted that "many of you have heard this story before" as he relayed how Jimi Hendrix had performed the entire Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band album in London just two days after its 1967 release, and that from the stage Jimi had asked Eric Clapton if he could tune his guitar.

Anyone who has see Sir Paul live since 2009 also has heard him speak--as if scripted--about the difficulty he has concentrating on lyrics and chords when he notes signs in the audience, his impetus for writing "Blackbird" and his interactions with Russian leaders upon playing a show in Red Square.

Even his "Let's hear it for John" introduction to "Here Today"--written in memory of Lennon, who he first met 57 years ago this past Monday--and his story about George Harrison's love of ukeleles leading into a version of "Something" felt a bit rushed and rote, if moving nonetheless.

With Mark Caro's somewhat similar Chicago Tribune review saving me from having to count, I also can tell you that I heard 35 of this show's 39 songs played last year at Miller Park--the New songs being the only newbies, as the album dropped in October--and 26 of the same songs at Wrigley (and also in Paris) in 2011.

So, more as critique than criticism, I find it a bit of a shame that one of the most innovative musicians of all-time seems all-too-reluctant to shake things up, even in knowing that he legion of loyal, longtime fans keep coming back.

As with Ringo at his recent Chicago Theater show, Paul made no mention of this being the 50th anniversary of the Beatles coming to America.

Certainly this doesn't merit much hand-wringing, but McCartney has almost 60 years worth of some of the best stories in rock history, yet he keeps retelling the same ones.

Perhaps he could have remembered how the Beatles first played Chicago--at the International Amphitheatre in 1964--or how he and the band had eaten at Margie's Candies (still at Western & Armitage) between a pair Comiskey Park shows in 1965. (Yes, back then, the Beatles would often play two concerts on the same day!)

I respect that he keeps the setlist much the same because it works wonderfully and should satisfy any newcomers, and I welcomed not only the quartet from New but songs like "Lovely Rita," "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite" and "All Together Now" that were played in Chicago (by an actual Beatle) for the first time ever, after being sprinkled into the standard setlist framework last year.

Yet not only do I think Paul could stand to do some more, or just other, New and newer songs, I don't know why it's been years since he's opted to include "Penny Lane," "Can't Buy Me Love," "Drive My Car," "Hello, Goodbye" and other wonders, let alone most any Beatles song that wasn't his lead vocal (excepting "Something").

Especially given the 50th anniversary commemorations this year, it would have been an absolute joy to hear McCartney harmonize with his current bandmates on "She Loves You," "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" or "A Hard Day's Night."

Suffice it to say, though I've seen him several times, every Paul McCartney concert is memorable and wonderful.

And so was this one.

But it would be nice if the next one--if and when--is even more so.