Now, I am going to humor you, but I would like to start by saying that this is not the first, not the second, but the third time that I have encountered such a post as yours within the last nine months.
You don't have to love Sarah Jacobs, but the fact that you have chosen to whip out a burner account to voice your opinion rather than express yourself on your own blog leads me to assume the following.
You feel guilt, fear, or a general sense of wrongdoing.
Your intentions are either to identify other people who agree with you anonymously and absolve yourself of guilt through the validation, or you seek to cross a perceived line without consequences.
I'm personally tired of posts like yours.
You don't have to love Sarah Jacobs, but I do. And I would find your opinions to have far greater weight if you weren't dodging the responsibility for them.
That aside, you are right on what I am choosing to identify as your underlying point: the stage musical was not written for Sarah Jacobs.
The fact of the matter, that I think everyone knows very well, is that Sarah Jacobs was very deliberately and purposefully written out of the stage musical, along with Denton and several over characters, to make room for Harvey Fierstein's reimaginings.
There is no place for her in the musical as it stands because her place was, very simply, erased. I don't believe you'd find any argument on that point. What I believe you are missing here is that there is no reason why Sarah Jacobs couldn't or shouldn't be written back in. But as to your reasoning...
Who says that Sarah wouldn't be the love interest? And who says she'd have to be the love interest to have relevance? Katherine is currently doing the work of two characters, Denton and Sarah. Why couldn't Katherine's role be solely that of reporter? Why does Katherine have to be the love interest? Why couldn't Sarah and Jack's relationship be fleshed out? And why wouldn't Sarah's inclusion as a working class woman with the same struggles as the newsies and the weight of her family's safety in the midst of financial hardship and a strike contribute an interesting and meaningful layer to the stage musical without any trace of romance?
Denton doesn't exist, but Katherine does. Katherine canonically faces the same risk as Denton and is backlisted for her coverage of the strike. Wouldn't it be interesting if Pulitzer gave her an ultimatum similar to the one that Denton faced? Wouldn't it be interesting to have Katherine's support of the strike falter? Wouldn't it be interesting to have Sarah be the person to reignite that spark?
The Newsies Banner, if I recall correctly, called for a city wide general children's strike in the stage musical no different than in the movie. Is there any substantial reason why other child workers couldn't be worked into the ensemble? Factory girls, shoe shiners, messenger boys, and Sarah?
Jack's character has everything to do with family. In either script, the film or the stage musical, it is quite literally stated in plain text. The Jacobs family as a whole will never not be important to Jack's arc. Sure in one version they welcome him to dinner and in the other this invitation remains nothing more than an offer. But both are important. Even when the Jacobs family is dwindled down to David and Les, they are important. The stage musical, in my opinion, did a very messy job with it, but Jack's story is still about found family whichever way you slice it.
I'm afraid I don't follow your logic on this last point. It's an unfortunate truth that Mayer and Esther Jacobs make no appearance in the stage musical, but if their sons still exist, why can't their daughter?
vaporwave
pixelskylines
dededos
titsay
discoholicmusic
turnnoffyourmind
