Stephen Sondheim did the new production a huge favor by writing an angry letter about the revamped P&B to the "NY Times" long before it hit the stage at the beginning of the year. The producers of the present version could not have paid for better publicity. Sondheim's main focuses were: 1. the substituion of a mere crutch for the formerly crippled Porgy's goat cart; 2. the insistence on "fleshing out" the characters with "back stories" that would explain their behavior more completely for a modern audience; 3. the "softening" of the ending (i.e. less Shakespearean and more Disney); 4. the misleading title for what is, essentially, a rewrite of Gershwin's original. In addition, Sondheim was offended by the presumptuous tone of the show's producers, cast and stars, who seemed eager to suggest that the play was dated, that modern audiences wouldn't sit still for the duration of the original and, worst, that the present directors and cast knew better than Gershwin about how the story and orchestrations should be realized.
Frankly, it's hard to disagree with any of Sondheim's points--providing you've experienced anything like the original Porgy and Bess. If you haven't listened to, say, the Houston Opera production
George Gershwin's "Porgy & Bess", none of Sondheim's objections need apply. And even if you have experienced the original "American Folk Opera," the current "Porgy and Bess" plays better than most Broadway musicals you're likely to see. Sure, it's more "racially sensitive," more optimistic and "beautified" (Porgy exudes masculine charisma and virility, and we can only surmise that he will successfully meet up with Bess at play's end). So the American Dream lives on--a far cry from the more depressing, profoundly poignant, Lear-like ending of the original. But if substituting modern spoken argot for operatic recitative, simplifying some of the music, and reducing the length of the original will enable it to play as a "Broadway musical" to ever-larger audiences, perhaps it's entirely well and good for the two forms of "Porgy and Bess" to co-exist.
Sondheim's most persuasive point, imo, is that too much insistence on "realistic detail" in the portrayals of the characters robs them of the poetic, universal, archetypal potential they have in the original. Listening to the Houston Opera version, I suddenly had a little epiphany, allowing me to see Crown and Sportin' life as personal demons existing in my and everyone's subconscious; Porgy, in turn, is every one of us vainly pursuing an American dream while the counter-current is continuously pushing us further away from shore (to recall the end of "Great Gatsby") ; Bess is the conflicted mind of any one of us, considering alternately appealing pathways of power, pleasure, and devotion, forever conflicted about which path has her name written above it. Extra information, numerous details to inform us about the characters, their historical context, etc. works well in a Faukner novel; in theater, however, it doesn't necessarily promote a willing suspension of disbelief--that state in which we are not simply "entertained" by the characters but experience identification with them.
The recording of the new Porgy and Bess, unlike the Broadway version, has augmented the orchestra with strings, thus bringing it slightly closer to Gershwin's intent as well as his original score. Although expanding the orchestra helps to ""decompress" the current production, I still have difficulty dissociating this production from other recent Broadway musicals that were overly "energetic" (rather than "vital"); overly amplified (with sound systems so sophisticated that "live" orchestras wouldn't have been missed); and overly "canned" (the more extended the run, the more static and unmoving the performance). In one sense, my disappointment in recent Broadway musicals stems for productions that are too flawless, too predictable, too "programmed" (like golfers who work repeatedly to "groove" a particular swingpath into muscle memory). When "production" now counts more than performance, we the consumers are offered a "commodity" as much as an "experience." But Broadway musicals "can" be enlightening as well as entertaining. And one can only hope they can be entertaining without becoming formulaic and "slick."
Finally, it's become practically a "duty" to observe that Audra MacDonald is as bright a light as you're ever likely to see on Broadway. I'll accept that responsibility, with just one small caveat: I hope she branches out into other areas, bringing her beauty, her acting abilities and electric stage presence, her musicianship and seemingly unlimited vocal gift to bear on other projects in different venues--music festivals (classical, Broadway, and jazz), night clubs, films, television. The sky's the limit where she's concerned. In fact, I wouldn't blame her in the least if she decides, after all, to "lose" Porgy after he tracks her down.