Howard might be gone, but Keating! lives on.
For what might be the zillionth time, Keating!, that paean to a certain infamous Labor leader from long ago, is playing again in Melbourne from the 13th to the 24th of February. It features songs, dancing, a drunken Bob Hawke and a totally romanticised portrait of Paul Keating. One suspects Prime Minister “Kev” Rudd will never inspire the same sort of artistic endeavour. Of course, one also suspects “Kev” will be PM a lot longer than PK, but hey Brendan Nelson is looking, cough cough, good. Well, he used to look good in the days when he sported an earring. Radical.
After arriving early to see Keating! last year, my friend and I noticed that the man himself (PK not “Kev” or Brendan “Muntz” Nelson) was already seated and waiting for the show to begin. As there was hardly anybody else in the theatre, my friend approached PK and asked for his autograph. My pal’s request was appropriate for the night ahead because PK was celebrated like a man who had just had a hit single, or at least like a man who had beaten John Howard. Hopefully, the latest season of the show will include a reference or two to certain comments made about a certain late editor of Quadrant. Anyway, what follows is a little review I composed about Keating! after I saw it in 2007:
Seeing Paul Keating in the foyer last night was a sure sign the production written about him wasn’t going to star the “Captain Wacky” figure who featured in Pamela Williams’s book about the 1996 election, The Victory.
As soon as Terry Serio kicked off proceedings as a pissed and dishonest Bob Hawke it was clear Keating! was going to be its hero’s “sweetest” moment.
Perhaps the only other place Hawke’s breaking of the Kirribilli agreement has taken on such importance is inside Keating’s head.
Undoubtedly, the show was a romanticised account of the motivations and achievements of the man who was Prime Minister for less than five years, while also being a rebuke to those who hindered his career, including, albeit implicitly, the Australian voters.
Leaving aside its hagiographic intent, Keating! was an exceptional piece of theatre performed by an extraordinary (the superlatives could persist for longer than Howard’s been involved in politics) cast including Mike McLeish as Keating and Eddie Perfect as Dr. John Hewson and Alexander Downer.
If the current Minister for Foreign Affairs had known that one day he’d be portrayed as a demented Dr. Frank N. Furter begging for a spanking from members of an audience made up largely of Laborites, he might’ve changed his mind about wearing those fishnet stockings.
“I’m too freaky”, Perfect sang, and thus not incorrectly explained why Downer never got the top job.
The wonderful songs, which were packed with satirical insights, covered nearly every genre including rap, reggae and good old-fashioned musical theatre sob sister stuff.
“I’m dreaming of the light on the hill”, McLeish crooned divinely as Keating stared defeat in the face.
Perhaps this reference to Ben Chifley’s famous speech outlining what he thought the ALP should stand for inspired the author of Keating! to engage in the ultimate act of historical revisionism.
That’s right; John Howard loses in 1996 which allows Keating to go on promoting Indigenous rights, republicanism and the building of a relationship with Asia.
Despite the fact it probably wasn’t writer Casey Bennetto’s goal, the Elvis-like backdrop spelling out the word “Keating” in red lights and lyrics such as “I must be obeyed” did hint at the former Member for Blaxland’s arrogance.
However, it was Howard attired in his green and gold tracksuit and other “ordinary man” clothes who was the evil demagogue only interested in his own advancement. “On the mateship”, he warbles in an exaggerated version of that voice before telling us that he doesn’t really have any mates.
Although Keating! is as biased as all get out, if it isn’t the best thing at this year’s Melbourne International Comedy Festival (MICF) I’ll rejoin the Labor Party and endure State Conference.
Now for a musical about Howard - the evil Dracula sucking the decency out of Australia, the Sweeney Todd carving up ur democratic rights, the Uriah Heep lying his way through election after election,the Invisible Man missing in defeat.
First Darlene bring P.K. back to life via her (excellent) article, then P.B. mentions the possibility of a Howard musical. AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
These two men, for very different reasons, haunt my life. I’m going to make a strong cup of coffee then drink half a bottle of whiskey.
Only then, hopefully, will I feel better!
Paul i hope you’ve seen my Poligoths.
Sweeny Todd - now there’s some visual inspiration. But deserves the transformation?
sublimecowgirl.
Have seen polliegoths. That was you? Great stuff. Sent them all over Australia & the world via a link on e-mails I was so impressed.
Howard the Musical…..gulp.
Has anyone seen Sweeney Todd (the movie)? Any good?
I haven’t seen it but watching Depp for two hours is always good.
Darlene, saw it last night and recommend it highly. I started off thnking it was very cartoonish, with the over the top gore and ended up very moved and even a little upset. Fantastic final image. Amazing production design, well acted and very, very black.
Back to ‘Keating’; saw it last May and loved it. I wonder what sort of little epilogue they’ll have re the Ruddster’s victory. I also wonder if Keating’s latest intervention re Soeharto will damage the box office. We fans don’t like reminding that our heroes have very serious blind spots.
I’m excited that it’s coming to Brisbane at last - in April…
Depp is pretty hot, sublime…
Keating! the musical was fab, but it perhaps would’ve been even better if they’d delved into some of the Keating’s flaws and “interesting” allegiances. I suspect they’ll ignore the Soeharto stuff, and perhaps suggest that without Keating Rudd wouldn’t have won.
Thanks for the heads up on Sweeney Todd. I’ll go see it this weekend. Last weekend I watched Superbad twice, so Sweeney Todd should be a change of pace.
Oh my god, it’s finally going to Brisbane. They’ve made Brisbanites wait. The wait’s worth it, though. It’s a hoot.
“Howard the Duck” out now on DVD for any Howard obsessives..
Howard the Duck, oh my.
That was a huge flop, wasn’t it?
Darlene
Keating achieved many things and has many fine qualities, but integrating Australia more within Asia was not one of his successes. In fact, the cementing of our relations with Asian nations over the past ten years succeeded in spite of Keating. On the indigenous front, I think the revelations over the past few years merely reveal what rot was setting in on Keating’s watch. Fire and brimstone speeches are important, but at the end of the day, Keating’s turned out to be more hot air than actually addressing the horrific realities of indigenous disadvantage. You are on firm ground re The Republic.
While I cannot imagine anybody being moved to produce Howard The Musical, Keating’s performance over McGuinness and Soharto’s deaths were disgusting, and did his crumbling legacy no favours.
“Keating achieved many things and has many fine qualities, but integrating Australia more within Asia was not one of his successes. In fact, the cementing of our relations with Asian nations over the past ten years succeeded in spite of Keating.”
Show, don’t tell.
Harried Hermione, thanks for that. I’m no fan of Keating (I can assure you, I wasn’t asking for his autograph). I loved the musical, but it’s a shame the makers didn’t feel like they could be more honest about the man and his flaws.
Probably made Keating a saint because of their antagonism towards Howard.
In December 2006, the SMH claimed that Keating had been to the musical 3 times. I therefore assume his appearance at the 2007 production was at least his 4th visit.
Doesn’t anyone else here find that just a little creepy?
It’s also a bit sad, Steve. He gets treated like a hero for a night (four nights or more apparently) and back to reality he goes. I find it a tad odd that he goes to see a show about himself so many times.
Harried Hermione:#12 “Keating’s performance over McGuinness and Soharto’s deaths ”
Well I read both, and certainly on McGuiness he was right. PK’s point is that McG refused to acknowledge that PK in his first year as treasurer delivered everything and more that McG had been agitating for over many years, and the McG never had the grace to give him credit, but chose to sling nothing but mud PK’s way.
“Dishonest liar” seems like a reasonable assessment to me given the history.
Perhaps his mistake was to open with the “speak ill of the dead” remark. I think most people latched onto that without realizing that Keating has made these points before, so he has certainly “spoken ill of the living” while McG was around to defend himself.
Complaining that Keating was monstering a man on the day of his funeral is just posturing. I don’t recall Keating ever being shy of a little monstering in case the monsteree might fight back, and I can recall that he gave Paddy M quite a few serves over the years.
Storm in a teacup.
His Soeharto comments I’m less sure of, but I think he made his points well and they are worth consideration.
The intent may be hagiographic, but the effect, surely, is closer to irony?
Also, I don’t think correcting Darlene is really relevant, Hermione, since she is reporting the content of the musical, not her own feelings about Keating.
BTW Darlene, Alison Croggon has written a good review of Sweeney Todd if you’re interested:
http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com/2008/01/sweeney-todd.html
I’m slightly less enthused than her, but still enjoyed it.
What Keating wrote about Suharto was either naive, stupid or both. Suharto was a war time Japanese collaborator, later petty crook and CIA operative and then war criminal. In Keating’s defence of Suharto you could replace the name Suharto by Pinochet , but of course Suharto was the bigger crook of the two. Every “reform” that Keating did is made a joke by his love of that despot.
The irony thing is interesting, Klaus. The night I went was chockers with Keating fans, Keating was there, at the end of the show Keating got up on stage and danced with the cast. Perhaps without Keating’s presence the vibe would have been different.
Cheers, will check out Alison’s review. She always writes good stuff.
I’m sure it could be enjoyed on both levels, and there’s probably some overlap between the enthusiasts and the ironists. I wonder if, in his heart of hearts, the man himself feels the irony, or if he imagines it in roughly the same way as it is portrayed in the musical.
Historical revisionism?? You really didn’t ‘get’ it did you?
The writers drop a small hint in the title of the show. Perhaps it was too obvious.
Keating - “the musical” (we had to have) is a masterpiece of live performance.
I have no doubt that it was written by someone who (like me and my house-mates at the time) sat up late in the early 90s to watch either the Late Show or Question Time highlights, starring PJK in all his vaudevillian glory. That’s the Keating the show is about - a theatrical character invented for the purpose of winning over his mates in the ALP while giving the Tories an old-fashioned rhetorical arse kicking. Dressed to kill. Using the language of in a way that inspired his colleagues and appalled his opponents. This Keating was/is an Aussie original - and a national treasure. The writer took it from there, artistic license and all, to produce what I image he thought was a folly. The rest is box-office history.
You want real history. Read one (or all) of the books about PJK and his short-lived government. Nothing written about Hawke or Howard will ever have the same pull.
Yes, good point, Klaus. I think I will have to go see it again and think about that angle. It’s an enjoyable show, so worth the trouble.
I suspect the overlap between the enthusiasts and the ironists waxes and wans depending on what Keating has been saying in the media.
Thanks for that, MarkWW. It’s an interesting view and I certainly see where you’re coming from. Hint in the title of the show? It’s just called Keating! these days (that says something). Sure it’s the musical we had to have (reference to a comment Keating made once about something else). I’m not a fan of Keating, so I find the theatrical construction of him as unattractive as the real him. A lack of self-reflection about one’s foibles is never a good thing.
“I suspect the overlap between the enthusiasts and the ironists waxes and wans depending on what Keating has been saying in the media.”
I’m sure that’s the case. The third category, of course, are the literal-minded Keating haters.
No, with or without Keating’s presence the mood is unadulterated adoration of Keating. Its an ode to Keating, and doesnt pretend to be anything else. Compared to the Howard years, the Keating years were golden and thats what it celebrates - a view of Keating in light of how bad it was under Howard. Its a retrospective through rose coloured glasses.
I saw it twice. Once during Howard’s final term, and once in the week following the election which saw Rudd elected. What was most interesting for me was the audience reaction to Howard and how it changed pre and post the Howard era. The first time Terry Serio’s satirisation was too close to the bone for people and they could barely bring themselves to clap - there was an undercurrent of aversion to this character, which was too close to the bone for people. In the week following the election however, I noticed how that mood shifted - people could now afford to laugh, be indulgent of Howard the character’s foilbles now he had departed the scene. That was most memorable for me. As much as Keating was being viewed through rose coloured lenses, Howard’s satirisation was now afforded an affectionate remembrance, that was certainly not evident previously.
Keating wasn’t there the night I went, but the atmosphere was charged Darlene.
Haven’t laughed so much since etc etc
The Downer routine. It shld be put up in continuous loop at the National Museum.
At the aftershow party for the opening night of its run in Melbourne, I went up to PJK, spilling drink in hand and said “A beautiful set of numbers!”. He rolled his eyes and said “That’s always a funny line the first time.” I just sorta slunk off after that.
What was really interesting though was spotting at intermission, John Cain, John Brumby and Jeff Kennett all off in a corner huddling together for a serious but apparently affable chat about something serious. Yes, it’s true, all those bastards are in it together.
No doubt conspiring together about some way to do Sydney down. As they should as good Victorians.
“Keating wasn’t there the night I went, but the atmosphere was charged Darlene.”
That’s interesting to read. Well, they are great performers. The “freaky” song is such a treat. It’s a great production.
Hmmm, PK is harsh critic there, Nabakov. What a sod. Although I saw you there and you said the same thing to me (my reaction might have been the same as Keating’s - no, I thought it was funny, but I hadn’t heard it before).
Cain, Brumby and Kennett…………..the plot thickens.
No doubt conspiring together about some way to do Sydney down. As they should as good Victorians.
Conspiring about how to continue doing Victoria down, more likely.
I’m waiting till it opens in Dili.
Even better, opening in Washington before Bush leaves office. Now that would be something.
Paul - yup the poligoths are mine.
I got as far as nicking a Sweeney Todd promo pic yesterday, but then the kids came home and alas the computer was otherwise occupied.
Still mulling over who to morph into the barber tho.
Lindsay “Razor Gang” Tuckey too easy for you SC?
TuckeyTanner!!!Aieee!!! Iron Bar on the brain!!!
Yes i did think of him, but its such a lovely guise, i kinda wanted to do an international pollie…
I’ll toy around tonight.
Paul, in what way would anyone in the Bush administration, or anyone else in Washington for that matter, give a rats-arse about “Keating the Musical”?
“i kinda wanted to do an international pollie”
Sarko! With Bruni as Mrs Lovett.
“Paul, in what way would anyone in the Bush administration, or anyone else in Washington for that matter, give a rats-arse about “Keating the Musicalâ€??”
Yes, they’d probably wonder why anyone would be arsed doing a musical about a former key player in the 80s S&L ripoff.