Act 1: Wishing and Hoping

First, you will read in many places that Sondheim was inspired to write his fractured fairy tale,
which blends major elements and characters from Rapunzel, Cinderella, Jack and the Beanstalk,
and Little Red Riding Hood with an original storyline about a childless Baker and his wife (or as I
like to call it, Hansel and Gretel in reverse) as a kind of post-modern meditation on Freudian
themes within classic fairy tales, and on the dangers of wishing. However, in a James Lipton
interview published in the Paris Review in 1997, Sondheim disputes both of these points.
This is probably only interesting to psychology majors, or those of us who have been to way too
much therapy, but with respect to whether Freudian analysis had a significant influence on the
work, Sondheim answered, Everybody assumes we were influenced by Bruno Bettelheim [for
those of you not hip to mid-20th century psychologists, Bettelheim was a renowned child
psychologist and writer that wrote extensively about Freud] but if theres any outside influence,
its Jung. I only bring this rather obscure point up because the entire musical makes a lot more
sense if you dont view the actions of the characters through Freuds lenses of life and death
instincts like love, food, shelter and sex, but rather through Jungs concepts about individuation
and his archetypes: the father (the Baker), the mother (Cinderella and the Bakers wife), the child
(Jack and Little Red Riding Hood), the wise old man (the Bakers father), the hero (the Baker and
the princes), the maiden (Rapunzel), and the trickster (the Wolf). Now back to your regularly
scheduled reading, in which I will attempt to summarize the intricate plot of Into the Woods in
around 2000 wordsand likely fail.
It is true that the dramatic action of the story begins and ends with the line I wish, but on this
point that the story is about the dangers of wishing,which is highlighted in the tag line for the
movie, Be Careful What You Wish For,Sondheim himself does not (or I should say did not)
agree that this really captured the main theme of the story. (Although it is a really good tag line.)
Rather he said,
Its about moral responsibilitythe responsibility you have in getting your wish not to cheat and
step on other peoples toes, because it rebounds. The second act is about the consequences of not
only the wishes themselves but of the methods by which the characters achieve their wishes,
which are not always proper and moral.
When I read this I have to admit that the entire story made a lot more sense (thank you, Mr.
Sondheim). One of the problems I have with the idea that the moral lesson from Into the Woods is
that you should be careful what you wish for is that the wishes the characters make are not absurd
or obviously morally deficient. This is not The Fisherman and His Wife where the wife wishes
ultimately to be God, or Rumpelstiltskin where the Weavers daughter wishes to spin gold from
straw. The story of Into the Woods begins with three rather modest desires, the Baker and his
Wife wish to have a child, Cinderella wishes to go to a ball (note not to get a prince, but just to
experience a ball), and Jack wishes that his cow (and best friend) Milky-White would produce
milk.

It is not in the wishes, but in how they go about securing their wished for desires that the trouble
arises. To begin with, the Baker and his wife find out that the reason they cant have children is
that the Bakers father (years ago) ran afoul of a neighbor witch who not only took from him his
first-born daughter (Rapunzel), but also cursed his son (the Baker) with impotency. The witch
informs them that she can reverse the curse if they will bring her four things before midnight of
the third day has passed. These things are: the cow as white as milk, the cape as red as blood, the
hair as yellow as corn, and the slipper as pure as gold. So, the Baker and his Wife go into the
woods in search of these items.

Meanwhile, the other characters have also been forced or have chosen to go into the woods. Jack,
he of the milky-white cow, has been forced by his mother into the woods to go sell their milk-less
cow so they can eat. Cinderella has fled from her cruel stepmother and stepsisters into the woods
to pray by her mothers grave for a way to the princes ball. And, Little Red Riding Hood, as is her
wont, goes skipping off into the woods to deliver bread to her grandmother.
The first of these characters to run up against the Bakers desire for a child is Jack, who the Baker
bamboozles into selling his beloved, and I mean beloved cow (listen to the words in Jacks song I
Guess This is Goodbye), for five beans he finds in the pocket of his fathers old coat. (Note, in the
play the Baker is helped in this task and many others by a creepy old man who unbeknownst to
the Baker is his long-lost and presumed dead father, who shows up quite regularly in the original
work, but probably wont show up in the movie at all since I havent seen anyone listed as playing
him.) This is the first example of a character using immoral means to obtain their wish and it ends
tragically, because the beans are magical and a giant beanstalk does grow from them and Jack
does venture up the beanstalk and does steal from and ultimately kill the Giant (trying to get
money to buy back his beloved, and again I cant stress enough how much this kid loves his cow,
Milky-White). In the second part of the story, this leads to the Giants wife coming down another
beanstalk and taking her vengeance out upon the characters to tragic results.

The second character to run into the Baker is Red Riding Hood, who has just run into the Wolf
who sings a song full of sexual innuendo (Hello, Little Girl) that I can only imagine is going to
be heavily edited, as Disney actually got a little girl (Lilla Crawford) to play the role. I mean, the
Wolf sings about scrumptious carnality for goodness sake, which I can only hope to heavens
remains, because hearing Johnny Depp singing that line has to be a dream of nearly everyone on
the planet. Anyway, after unsuccessfully trying to steal the cloak from the girl, the Baker pursues
her only to be on the scene just in time to rescue her and her grandmother from the wolf by
cutting them out of the wolfs belly.
There is an interesting dynamic here between the Baker and his Wife, where in the first half of the
story it is the Bakers Wife who is pushing him to be ruthless (listen for the song Maybe Theyre
Magic about the beans), and then the Baker himself becomes ruthlessly obsessed with his quest
to the exclusion of everything else. The experience with the wolf leaves Red Riding Hood
completely altered. She now carries a knife and wears the wolf as a cape (having given hers to the
Baker as a reward for rescuing her), and she sings about how I Know Things Now. Again, Im
not sure how much of Red Riding Hoods performance will be preserved from the musical as there
is certainly a sexual overtone in the original as she confesses that the meeting with the wolf scared
her, well, excited and scared her.
If you thought things were confusing before, now the action comes fast and furious and mean and
nasty. The Bakers Wife runs into Cinderella, who has been to the ball (thanks, dead Mom) and
isnt sure the Prince is all hes cracked up to be. While trying to understand why anyone wouldnt
want to marry a prince, the Bakers Wife discovers and then tries to steal one of Cinderellas
slippers. Jack returns with gold from the beanstalk and tries to buy back Milky-White from the
Baker, but the Bakers Wife has lost the animal in her pursuit of Cinderella. Rapunzel has been
discovered and repeatedly visited by a different prince and by the Bakers Wife who rips out a
chunk of her hair. (And, before you ask, yes there are two nearly identical princes in the story and
their song Agony, in which they try to one-up each other on how tragic their love-lives are, is
hilarious.)

Not so funny is that the Witch discovers that Prince (well call him #2) has been visiting Rapunzel,
which leads to the Witch singing her song Stay With Me, which from the trailer is going to be a

highlight of the movie. When Rapunzel refuses to stay the witch cuts off her hair and banishes her
to a desert where she gives birth to twins. Oh, and the Witch blinds Prince (#2) alsovery nice.
(By the way, all of this nastiness with Rapunzel is very much in keeping with the way the Grimm
Brothers originally told the story.) Meanwhile, Jack and Red Riding Hood run into each other and
Red Riding Hood goads Jack into returning to the Giants realm to steal a golden harp.
Somewhere in all this Milky-White dies and is buried. (Whew!)
As the third midnight arrives and we close the FIRST part of the story (yes you read that right we
are only half-way done), Cinderella leaves one of her golden slippers behind for the Prince (#1) to
find, which he does. The Bakers Wife manages to steal the second of Cinderellas slippers. The
Baker, the Bakers Wife and the Witch manage to resurrect Milky-White and create the potion,
which restores the Witchs beauty and thus lifts the curse from the Baker. Jack, who is now
exceedingly wealthy having killed the Giant and stolen most of his riches, gets back his now milkproducing Milky-White. And Cinderella is discovered by and then weds Prince (#1).
I have diagramed all this action, reaction and interaction below for your convenience. (Click to
enlarge.)

Simple, right?

Act II: The Truth of Consequences

At the end of the first part of the story then everyone is presumably happy. They each have
fulfilled their wish, and can now live happily ever after. The Baker and his wife have a child.
Cinderella is living literally like a queen with her Prince (#1). Jack has his health, his wealth and
his cow. Red Riding Hood is alive and has a grandmother she can visit without having to worry
about the Wolf ever again. Only Rapunzel and the Witch can be said to be unhappy. Although the
Witch has her beauty back, she has lost Rapunzel forever. Meanwhile, Rapunzel has her children
and has found her Prince (#2) and cured his blindness, but having been locked in a tower all her
life is plagued by fear and anxiety. And, there is another shadow looming over all of this
happinessand its a big shadow.

Remember that Giant Jack killed? It turns out he had a wife, and the Giantess is angry. She comes
down a second beanstalk that grew from that last bean of the Bakers and starts wreaking havoc.
She wants vengeance and demands the people hand over Jack, which everyone is willing to do
except the one person that knows where he isJacks mother. During a confrontation with the
Giantess, Rapunzel, who has been driven pretty much insane by the Witchs treatment of her and
the stress of being a mother, rushes towards the Giantess and is crushed.
It is my understanding, from Variety, and other such fine publications, that this will not happen
in the movie. I have no idea, and sometimes it seems like Sondheim has no idea what is actually
going to happen in the movie. In June he gave a number of answers to the question of whether the
story had been Disneyfied, at one point saying, You will find in the movie that Rapunzel does
not get killed, only to backtrack five days later. There is a new song, Rainbows, that may or may
not make it into the final cut that is or was to have been sung by Ms. Streeps Witch, which may
address this plot change. In the end your guess is as good as mine, but in many ways Rapunzels
death is the most poignant and important to the story. She was a true innocent, and the brutality
and suddenness of her ending is the first moment where the rest of the characters begin to realize

the real and terrible consequences of their actions.

Whatever happens there, if the movie sticks at all to the plot of the musical characters will begin
to drop like flies. Jacks mother is killed by the Princes steward for arguing with and infuriating
the Giantess. Red Riding Hoods grandmother is killed in another attack by the Giantess and her
mother goes permanently missing. The Bakers Wifewho while out looking for Jack runs into
Cinderellas prince (#1) and has a brief roll in the woods with him, by which I mean they have a
roll in the hay, by which I mean they have sexwith the immediacy of horror film morality is
thereafter crushed by a tree that the Giantess knocks over. (Note, Sondheim has also had public
debates with himself about whether the Bakers Wifes liaison with Prince (#1) will make it into
the film.)
So, we are left with Cinderella and her Prince (#1), the Baker, Jack, Red Riding Hood, the Witch,
and an enormous body-count. There is a moment (Your Fault) where they turn on each other,
each claiming that the death and destruction is someone elses fault in an endless loop of pass the
blame. The Baker decides to leave his child with Cinderella and run away, and it looks for a
moment like no one will end up happy.

But, in a magical moment that is pure Sondheim, each comes to a place of wisdom about how they
contributed to what happened. The Witch sacrifices herself to give the other characters an
opportunity to defeat the Giantess. And, in the end, they do by working together. Cinderella leaves
her inconstant Prince (#1) and decides to stay with the Baker and his baby, and the Baker decides
to take in Jack and Red Riding Hood. However, this is not the saccharine sweet ending of most
Disney movies. Each of the characters has lost someone. Jack has lost his Mother. Red Riding
Hood has lost her grandmother. Cinderella has lost her Prince (#1). The Baker has lost his wife.
Still, one imagines that they will live, if not happily ever after, certainly much wiser ever after, and
they will not be alone.
Throughout the story the characters leave us with many morals, from the thought provoking, like
the witch proclaiming, Careful the things you say children will listen, to the comical, like Jacks
Mother explaining, Slotted spoons dont hold much soup. But, the one that always strikes me
comes in the final few choruses of the reprise of the song Into the Woods at the end of the
second act where the whole cast sings:
You cant just act,You have to listen.You cant just act,You have to think.
Ultimately, if Disneys version of Into the Woods can convey that message then, even if it does
allow Rapunzel to live and even if it turns down Depps sexiness so the Wolf will be less lascivious
and even if it cuts out the adultery so the Bakers Wife will be more chaste, it will still be a film
worth seeing. I suppose in the end I will leave my judgment to the story and performances on the
screen, but I cannot say that I am not worried. I just cant help think that, despite Disneys
obvious desire to adapt Into the Woods, perhaps they should have heeded their own warning to
Be Careful What You Wish For.

INTOTHEWOODS
IntotheWords
byThomasUhm
IntotheWoods,thefairytalemusicalwrittenbytheawardwinningteamofJamesLapineandStephen

Sondheim,isoneofSondheim'smostfrequentlyperformedworks,whichshouldcomeasnosurpriseto
anyonefamiliarwiththeplay.Thereisanensemblecastwithexcellentparts,beautifulmusic,acompelling
andengagingstory,and,perhapsbestofall,afeelgoodending.Forthesereasons,amongothers,Intothe
Woods has become a standard among school, community, and regional theaters. However, in the
formulationofthisfantasticquestofaBaker,hiswifeandmanyothermorefamiliarfairytalecharacters,
LapineandSondheim havecraftedashowthat stillmanagestostrikeveryclosetohome.Thereare
messagesandmotifsthroughouttheshowthatgobeyondtheframeworkofatypicalflightoffancy,and
continuetostaywithuslongafterwehaveleftthetheater.Thetemptationexiststoforgetaboutthese
soberingthemesinthepursuitoflightheartedentertainment,butthesearelessonsthatcannotbeeasily
dismissed,andtheyprovidethebackboneofthispiece.Atitscore,IntotheWoodsisnotsomuchabout
fantasyasitisaboutreality.
ItisdifficulttoencapsulateallofthedisparatemessagesofIntotheWoodsintoasingletheme,butthe
enginethatdriveseverythingelseintheshowistheabsenceofabsolutes.Therearemanysmallerissues,
suchastoleranceandunderstanding,whichfallintothegreatercategoryofchallengingtheassumptionswe
makeaboutourselvesandothers.Avastmajorityofthecharactersintheplayaredefinitelynotwhatthey
seem,despiteourinstinctordesiretoneatlycategorizethem.Whoarethegoodguys?TheBakerprepares
toleavehissonoutofhisownselfpityandinsecurity,LittleRedRidingHoodkillsthewolfandmakesa
spectacleoutofwearinghisskin,Jackkillsthegiantstealingagoldenharpthatneitherhimnorhismother
particularlyneed,theBaker'sWifecommitsadultery,etc.etc.However,thesearedoneinsuchawayasto
maketheseactionsacceptableandunderstandable,andsometimes,evensympathetic.
Amajorindicationthat ourassumptionsaboutcharactersarebeingchallengedisthetreatmentofthe
princes.VerylittleisplacedintoaSondheimshowwithoutcarefuldeliberation,andoneofthestrongest
andmostinterestingdecisionsmadeintheshowisthecastingofthesameactortoplaytheWolfand
Cinderella'sPrince.ThejuxtapositionoftheWolfandCinderella'sPrinceinIntotheWoodsisoneofthe
most crucial character decisionsintheshow,and abarometer ofhowmucha particulardirectorand
productionstaffunderstandthework.DoublecastinginIntotheWoodsisaconsciouschoicethatismade
toenhance thescript and tocreateintentional linksbetweencharacters inashow,and the Wolfand
Cinderella'sPrincearelinkedtogetherinanumberofdifferentways.LittleRedRidingHoodthinksof
herself as a tough adult, and she has always had a fascination with taking care of herself. This
independenceismanifestedherinsistenceongoingthroughthewoodsbyherselfandtheabsenceinthe
showof aphysical mother whodirectsher. That autonomyismirrored inanother oneofthe female
characters,theBaker'sWife,whobelievesinherownabilitytogetthroughthewoodsunharmed.Herself
confidenceissoprofoundthatshetriestoguidetheBakeronhisquest,becauseshefeelsthathewillonly
besuccessfulwithherassistance.TheWolfandCinderella'sPrinceprovideopportunitiesforLittleRedand
theBaker'sWifetoliveouttheirfantasies,todisastrousends.ThemethodsoftheWolfandCinderella's
Princearethekeysinthisequationbecauseoftheirsimilarities.Bothencounters(theWolf/LittleRedand
Cinderella'sPrince/Baker'sWife)areessentiallyseductionscenes,donefromaveryselfishperspective(the
wolfdoesittogleaninformationaboutthegrandmotherandthelittlegirl,andtheprincedoesittohave
another"moment"forhimself).Thesescenesarealsotextuallylinkedbytheline"onewouldbesoboring",
whichisspokentobothLittleRedandtheBaker'sWife.
BylinkingtheWolfandCinderella'sPrinceintheseways,LapineandSondheimareplayingoffofthe
audienceexpectationsforthewolf,asapredatorybeing,andthenusingthoseexpectationstosubvertthe
expectationsoftheprince.Theprincefromthefirstactis,forthemostpart,afairlynoblefigure,andinthe
absenceofasecondactthesplittingofpartsmaymakesomesense.However,startingfromActIIAgony,
webegintorealizethatthePrincesarenotthenoble,essentiallygoodpeoplethatwehadenvisioned,but
selfaggrandizingyoungmen.ThistransformationbecomescompletewhenCinderella'sPrinceseducesthe
Baker'sWife,whenthewolfaspectoftheprince'scharactermustcomeout,andallvestigesofnobilityare
lost.Thatdoesnotmakethembadpeople,butitbringsusdowntoearthaboutourexpectationsabout
princes.Theunionoftheprince/wolfrevealshowtheyaretwosidestothesamecoin,andthatourdesireto

makethemanobjectofourwishesistoplaceourtrustinfalseideals.ThesongssungrightafterLittle
Red'sandtheBaker'sWife'srealizationofwhathappened,"IKnowThingsNow"and"Momentsinthe
Woods"arebothrifewithuncertainty,andthoughmoralsarebeingstated,thesemoralsarenotclearfor
eitherone"Ishouldhaveheededheradvice,butheseemedsonice...Isn'titnicetoknowalot,andalittle
bitnot"or"Whynotbothinstead,there'stheanswerifyou'reclever...Letthemomentgo,don'tforgetitfor
amoment,though".Itispartofthebreakingdownofabsoluterightsandwrongs.
Ontheflipside,whoarethebadguys?TheWitchistheobviouschoice,butmostofthatcomesfromher
havingtheclearestvisionofanyoneinthepiece.ShehidesRapunzelawaybecauseshewantstoprotect
Rapunzelfromalltheevilforcesintheworld,forcesthateventuallyleadtoRapunzel'sdeath(thoughthe
Witch'soverprotectioncripplesRapunzel'scopingskills,andcompoundstheproblem).Thewitchalso
wantstoturnyoungsoRapunzelwillloveher,andshewishestothrowJacktotheGiantessbecause
otherwisetheGiantesswillkillthemall.Inthesecondact,afterRapunzeldiesandleavestheWitchdevoid
ofemotion,sheisthevoiceofpurereasonthatcutsthrougheveryone'semotionaldefensestellingthe
stepmother that there is nowhere to hide, confronting Little Red about how the wolf's mother feels,
weighingthelifeofoneagainstthelivesofmany.TheWitch'skeyline"you'resonice,you'renotgood,
you'renotbad,you'rejustnice.I'mnotgood,I'mnotnice,I'mjustright."
WhatabouttheGiantess?Shecomesdownandthreatenstokilleveryoneuntilshefindstheboy.Butthe
unaskedquestioniswhywasshedownthereinthefirstplace?Theonlyreasonshereturnsistoexact
vengeanceonaboywhoshetookinandtreatedlikeherownchild("Shegivesyoufoodandshegivesyou
rest,andshedrawsyouclosetohergiantbreast")becausehebetrayedhertrustbystealinghergold,her
hen*and*herharp,andthenkilledherhusband.Inthetree,JackdemandstokilltheSteward,whokilled
hismother,because"whathedidwaswrong,andhemustbepunished".Thatdoublestandardexposesour
prejudicestowardshopingthatthere'sarightandawrong,andbecauseofthatoftengoesunnoticed.The
Baker'sresponsesaysalotabouttheBaker'spersonalgrowth"Wrongthings,rightthings,whocansay
what'strue".ThisrevelationisespeciallysalientaftertheBaker'sownexperiencewiththeMysteriousMan
exposingtheBaker'sownfailings.However,whodoessheactuallykill?ShekillsRapunzel,butthatwas
becauseRapunzelranunderherfeet(I'mmakingtheassumptionthatsinceshewasnearsighted,shewould
nothavebeenawareofalittlewomanrunningunderneath,andthereforekilledhermaliciously),andshe
killstheNarratorbecauseshewasdeceivedbythegroupintothinkingthathewasJack.Shedoesagreat
dealofdamagetopropertyandcompletelyuprootsseveralhomes,butverylittleactualmaliciousdamage
topeople,andcertainlynotmuchmorethantheStewardortheBaker/Granny/LittleRedoreventhebirds
thatblindedthestepsisters.And,thatdestructionactuallyassistsCinderella'sawakening,forifhertreehad
notbeendestroyed,shewouldnothavebeenforcedbackintothewoodandthenbeenexposedtoher
husband'sdeception.Wedeceiveourselvessomuchbyouremotionalselfrighteousnessandourinsistence
onclearcutblack/whitethatwelosesightofthegray.Thisisnottosaythattheyshouldhavedonewhat
theWitchdemanded,butrathertoestablishthatpureevil,likepuregood,simplydoesnotexist.
Thekeytoaccomplishingthisgoalisnotonlybyknockingdowntheprinceorthegiantessorthewitchto
ourlevel,butbyrealizingthatthatweareallonthesamelevel.Thereisaconstantattemptbythewitchto
equatewolvesandhumans,notonlyin"StaywithMe",butinheraccusationofLittleRedinthesecondact
"Sincewhenareyousosqueamish,howmanywolveshaveyoucarvedup?(LittleRed)Awolf'snotthe
same.(W)Askawolf'smother!"Thishumanizingofthewolf(whyelseisthewolfanatomicallycorrect?)
hastheeffectofmoderatingalotoftheevilthatwenormallyassociatewithwolves,eventhoughwedon't
reallyknowawholelotaboutthem.Thatis,afterall,thebigproblemwithwishfulfillment,weoftenmake
wishesaboutsomethingwithoutrealizingwhatexactlywearewishingfor.Then,there'snowaytotell
whatisgoingtohappenifandwhenourwishescometrue.ThewolfcloakthatLittleRedshowsofftoJack
isanattractiveaccoutermentfromherperspective,ifyouforgetthefactthattheskinoverhershoulders
usedtobealivecreature.HercapealsohastheeffectofnumbinghertoviolenceandincitingJacktogo
get the harp, which ends upin the death ofthe male Giant and the comingdown of the Giantess....
Obviously,thewholethingisinterconnected.But,thesamecanbesaidofthePrince,whoisanobjectof

thewishesofCinderellaandtheBaker'sWife.LetusnotforgetthatCinderella'sPrincefallsindesperate
lovewithCinderellaafteronlyashortmeeting("wedidnothingbutdance").That,whileaniceromantic
concept,reallyisnotthebasisofalongtermrelationship,andexplainsnotonlyAgonyII,buthisinfidelity
inthewood.Hisexplanationofhisbehaviorsaysitall"Iwasraisedtobecharming,notsincere.Ididnot
asktobebornaprince,andIamnotperfect.Iamonlyhuman."Inotherwords,heplaystheexteriorpart
ofidealprince,butnoonecouldpossiblyliveitall.
Thisleadstothefurtherexaminationofwishfulfillment.Thisbiasedviewofothersalsoaffectsourview
ofourselves,andwhatweperceiveweneed.Wecannotdreamforourselvesasindividuals,wemustwish
forwhatisgoodforeverybody,otherwiseourdesiresbecomecounterproductive.Anditisnotassimpleas
saying"becarefulwhatyouwishfor,youjustmightgetit",itisbeingcognizantofthefactthatwhatwe
wishforarethingswetrulydonotneedandthemorewepursueourwishes,thegreaterthetendencyto
ignorewhatwepossessinthesearchforwhatwewant.Ifwestartthinkingthatthereisjustonepiece
missingfrom ourlives,one taskleft unaccomplished, then wefall intothe dangerous trapof risking
success.Whathappenswhenyouachievethat"finalgoal"?You'releftwondering"isthatall"or"what
next".Afterall,"wishescometrue,notfree".
Thisdoesnotmeanthatdisasterhasstruckbecausethecharactersintheplayhave'strayedfromthepath'.
Theimplicationsofthatstatementare,asfarasIcantell,thata)thereisa"straightpath",andthatb)that
"straightpath"isasuperiorone.Sincewe'regettingintorealmsofsymbolismhere,there'snowayforany
ofustobecertainthatwe'recorrect,butIwouldarguethatthegiantsrepresentthefactthatthe"straight
path"whichweTHINKexiststrulydoesnot.Thegiantisnotjustanobstacletohappinessandaplot
devicetomakethingsinterestinginthesecondact,butaforcethatmakesusrealizethatwecannotoperate
inisolation.Itisonlybyrealizingthatwearenotalone,thatweneedotherstoexistandsurvive,thatthe
charactersintheshowareenabledtodefeatthegiant.Iftherewerea"straightpath",wecouldexistalone,
eachfollowingourownindependentpaths,callingonothersforhelpifanobstaclesuddenlyimpededout
progress,butthenresumingthejourney.Thegiantcausesacollisionoftheirfates,intertwiningthem.That
isthereasonthegiantisdownthereinthefirstplace.Everyonesoughttheirownprivateendinthefirstact,
andeveryone'sindependentactionscombinedtomakethisdisasterhappen.Jack'skillingofthefirstgiant
wouldnothavebeenpossibleiftheMMhadn'tclimbedintothewitch'sgarden,causingthewitchtocurse
thefamily,causingtheBakerandtheBaker'sWifetoseekapotion,causingthefirstdeceptionofJack,
causingthebakertokilltheWolf,whoseskinLittleRedshowedofftoJack,whohadgoneupasecond
time to get more gold because he wanted to get Milky White, and if there were no sixth bean then
Cinderellacouldn'thavethrownitoverhershoulderwhichmeantthattherewouldhavebeennowaythe
secondgiantcouldhavecomedown,etc.etc.Theirfatesarealreadyintertwined,theyjustdon'tknowit.
Truly,nooneisalone.
Thissongistheculminationofanumberofvitalthemes,andresolvesalotofissuesthattheshowhas
brought up. Many people have dismissed this song as Sondheim's descent into a Hammersteinesque
moralism (pleasedon't get mewrong,Idon't thinkthat'snecessarilyabadthing).'NoOneIsAlone'
definitelyhasthatsurfaceelementofreassuranceinthere,withtheolder,moreexperiencedBakerand
CinderellacomfortingJackandLittleRed.However,historicalprecedentindicatesthatSondheimwould
notwriteasimple"it'sokay,I'mheresoeverythingisallright"song.Whenhewritesasonglikethat,it
tendstobelacedwithsuchironyoflyricorofsituationthatitstingsanerveasopposedtomerelyuplifts.
Othersongsthatcometomindare"NotWhileI'mAround"fromSweeney(whichforsomereasonIfind
absolutely terrifying) and "Our Time" from Merrily. In 'No One is Alone', there are several plot
developmentsthatgivethesongadditionalsignificance.
Firstofall,atthatpointinthestory,everybody*is*alone.TheBakerhaslosthiswifeandhisfather,
Cinderellahaslosthertreeandherprince,LittleRedhaslosthermotherandhergrandmother,andJack
haslosthismother.Plusthey'reallabouttofacethegiant,apositionfromwhichtheyarenotcertainthey
will escape alive. So when the Baker and Cinderella sing this song, they are trying to strengthen

themselves,aswellastheyoungerones.Thelyricislacedwiththiskindofselfawareness.Cinderella
sings"Mothercannotguideyou/nowyou'reonyourown/onlymebesideyou/stillyou'renotalone/noone
isalone".Thatword,*still*,comingafter'onlyme',isabsolutelyvitaltothetoneofthesong.Sheisnot
sayingthat'sinceI'mhere,youdonothavetogothroughlifebyyourself',sheissaying'despitethefact
thatI'mtheonlyonewhoispresentlyheretoshareyourgrief,youhavenotlosteverything,because
nobodyiscompletelyalone'.Shethencontinueswith"sometimespeopleleaveyou/halfwaythroughthe
wood/othersmaydeceiveyou/youdecidewhat'sgood/youdecidealone/but,nooneisalone."Cinderellais
tryingtoconvinceherselfoftherightnessofwhat she'ssayingtoLittleRed.Theyarebothdrawing
strengthfromeachother.ThesamethinghappenswithJackandtheBaker,wheretheBakertakesthe
responsibilitytoteachJackthathecan'tkilltheSteward.Thisisthelessonhelearnedfromhisfather,not
torunaway.Finallythesongendswith"someoneisonyourside"whichisleftunresolvedbecauseofthe
arrivalofthegiant.Sondheimmakesuseofthismystical"someone"throughouthiswork,mostnotablyin
'Being Alive' from Company. The first verse of that song mentions "someone to hold you too
close/someonetohurtyoutoodeep",etc.Thereisadistanceintheuseofthatword"someone",which
lendsitasafeimpersonalityandnoncommitment.Theydon'tsayduring'NoOneIsAlone'thatI'monyour
side,theysaysomeoneisonyourside.Itisnotuntilafterthesong,andtheirvictoryoverthegiant,that
theycommittooneanother.
Thatisoneoftheothermajorpurposesof'NoOneIsAlone'theideathatyou'renotalonebecauseallof
youractionsaffecteverybodyelse,andyoucan'tescaperesponsibilityforthoseactions.People,likeitor
not,areinextricablyinterconnected.Wecannotactinabubble,likethecharactersinActIandeventhe
Baker'sWifeduringher'momentinthewood'tendtodo.ThescathingcommentarymadeduringYour
Faultisespeciallypowerfulbecauseeverysinglethingthatissaidistrue.Everyoneisatfaultfortheevents
thathavebefallen,butthepointis,whocares?Atthatpoint,blameisirrelevant.ThatiswhattheWitch
understands,"wellifthat'sthethingyouenjoy/placingtheblame/ifthat'stheaim/givemetheblame/just
givemetheboy".Actionneedstobetaken.However,thereistheextremelypositivemessagethatitisonly
byworkingtogether,andformingacommunity,thatproblemswhicharemuchtoolargeforusindividually
toovercomecanbeconqueredtogether.Collectiveblame,butalsocollectivesolution.
Tolerance and understanding come when individuals stop putting some people down and others on
pedestals.Wecannotactinisolation,norshouldwewanttoforwecanaccomplishindividuallyonlya
fractionofthethingswecanaccomplishcommunally.Appreciatewhatyouhave,realizewhatyouwant,
acceptwhatyoucan'thave,butdiscoverwhatyouarecapableof.Itisonlywhenwestartacceptingeach
other'sfaultsandacknowledgingeachother'sstrengths,thenwecanjointogethertocombatthegiantsthat
faceusall.