Experimentalist vs. Purist Views on the Revival of Oklahoma!

Pros and Cons of a Purist and Experimentalist Perspective

Regarding the decision to cast Curly and Laurie as a lesbian couple, Will and Ado Annie as a gay couple, ad Aunt Eller as a transgender woman, it's an experimental approach to the musical Oklahoma! by Rodgers and Hammerstein. This casting choice challenges the traditional heteronormative representation of the story and attempts to provide a more inclusive and diverse portrayal.

From a more purist perspective, this decision could be seen as a departure fro the original intentions of the creators and the historical context in which the show was produced. However, from an experimentalist perspective, it could be viewed as an innovative and necessary way to update the story and reflect the contemporary cultural values of diversity and representation.

The pros of the purist approach are that it respects the original vision of the creators and preserves the historical context of the work. On the other hand, the cons are that it might limit the potential for reinterpretation and adaptation, and it could exclude certain groups of people from representation.

The pros of the experimentalist approach are that it can provide a fresh perspective on the story and reflect contemporary cultural values. However, the cons are that it could distance the work from its original historical context leading to potential criticism of cultural appropriation or disrespecting the legacy of the original work.

Effects of Reimagining Works on Delivery of Story and Relevance

Regarding the decision to cast Curly and Laurie as a lesbian couple, Will and Ado Annie as a gay couple, and Aunt Eller as a transgender woman, it's subjective whether it adds to or distracts from the story. However, it does offer a more inclusive representation of different identities and perspectives. It is unclear how Rogers and Hammerstein would react to this decision in their time, as the cultural norms and attitudes were vastly different in the mid-1940s. If they were alive today, they might be more open to experimentation and reinterpretation of their work given their progressive ideals.

In terms of the musical's relevance to audiences today, this casting decision could make it more relevant by reflecting the contemporary cultural values of diversity and representation. With this, it could also potentially create controversy and divide audiences who have a strong attachment to the original work. 

The notion of the show being considered a timeless classic might be challenged by this experimental casting choice. It could lead to a reconsideration of what makes a work timeless and whether it needs to adapt to reflect changing cultural values and perspectives.