Radio City Music Hall Christmas Spectacular
I was worried that it would be taken over by political correctness and become more of a “holidays” spectacular instead of a Christmas spectacular, with Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, and weird Islamic holidays getting equal billing with Christmas. But I was pleasantly surprised that it was 100% unapologetically a Christmas spectacular: probably not a whole lot different than the original Christmas Spectacular in 1933, except with more pizzazz. A guy dressed as Santa Claus reminded us that the Parade of the Wooden Soldiers (shown in the video above) dates back to the original 1933 show. My mother says that in the 1970s or 1980s they did include a Hanukkah dance, but that has been removed. I guess the people who are paying to see the show want to see a Christmas show.
Even though the Parade of the Wooden Soldiers has a long tradition, my two favorite scenes were stuffed animals dancing to a medley of Tchaikovsky’s Nutcracker Suite and a Strauss waltz, and the Living Nativity which has real live sheep and a camel and they sang Hark! the Herald Angels Sing. (Like the Parade of the Wooden Soldiers, the Living Nativity also dates back to the original 1933 show.) Thankfully, there were no Mariah Carey songs.
Now, I imagine some readers want to know the answer to the most important question. Is it prole? I think it’s definitely more prole, than say, the New York Philharmonic Orchestra. In front of me was a prole Hispanic family. I imagine they were city workers. It’s also very touristy, which is a mark of proleness. Nevertheless, the Christmas Spectacular is probably classless like the NFL. Proles can enjoy it (if they can afford the tickets), but so can the upper classes. I suspect that some SWPLs pretend that they are only enjoying it ironically but secretly they are enjoying it unironically.
The only part of the show which was especially prole was a brief 3D movie of Santa Claus flying around New York City on his sleigh. Was that really necessary?