Historiographic Metatheatre and Narrative Closure in Pippin’s Alternate “Theo Ending”

The musical Pippin (1972), with music and lyrics by Stephen Schwartz and book by Roger O. Hirson, famously employs an anarchic, metatheatrical narrative structure. As the actors are drawn deeper into the world of an inset play that they are performing, called Pippin: His Life and Times, the boundaries between their individual identities and their roles within the play begin to blur, highlighting the complicated interplay between self and performance and the complexity of filling or rejecting the social roles that one has inherited. This play-within-a-play recounts the story of Pippin, a fictionalized son of Charlemagne who goes on an episodic journey in search of the meaning of life. At the climax of the musical, the Leading Player and the other performers prepare Pippin for the ultimate “grand finale” in which he is expected to leap into a blazing fire as the climax to the play-with-a-play, and, in doing so, fulfill his presumed destiny. Faced with a dawning awareness of being manipulated by the performers around him, Pippin realizes that true fulfillment is not to be found in external validation and, instead, chooses a more authentic life away from the artifice of performance. In Bob Fosse’s original 1972 production, the musical ends with Pippin (both the actor embodying the role of “Pippin” and the now fully self-actualized character of Pippin) leaving the production to live a simple family life with his wife, Catherine, and stepson Theo. The Leading Player and troupe, exasperated by his defiance, remove the scenery, leaving Pippin, Catherine, and Theo alone on a bare stage in the musical’s final moment.

In contrast, the 2013 Broadway revival directed by Diane Paulus introduced a revised ending in which Theo returns to the stage after Pippin and Catherine have exited. In this scenario, Theo is rejoined by the Leading Player and troupe, who now resume the musical with Theo in the lead role singing the opening of the iconic “Corner of the Sky.” The so-called “Theo Ending,” the most common choice of ending in professional productions today, including the 2021 Off West End revival directed by Stephen Dexter, reflects the cyclical nature of the hero’s journey. Despite the seemingly minor change that it creates in the overall structure of the work, its addition results in a necessary critical recalibration of the metatheatrical elements at play within the musical. 

To date, there has been surprisingly little academic discussion of Pippin nor consideration of the metatheatrical conceit employed in the musical’s conclusion, including both the original Fosse ending and the revised Theo ending. In The Musical Theater of Stephen Schwartz,  Paul Laird merely refers to “the show’s ambiguous ending, when the Leading Player strips away the production elements.”(1) Robert Emmet Long describes the work somewhat unassumingly as “a concept musical in which the sense of estrangement in Pippin’s world makes a comment on our own contemporary one.”(2) Despite its innovative structure and thematic depth, Pippin has not received the scholarly attention it deserves, particularly when acknowledging its significant contributions to the development of metatheatrical techniques in contemporary musical theatre. Dissecting the implications of the “Theo Ending” underscores the critical importance of the recent revision, particularly how the “Theo Ending” revisits and reinvigorates the central theme of male psychosocial development, not only reshaping the resolution of the musical, but also shifting from the work’s comparatively static resolution to a new perspective on the evolving nature of masculine identity. One possible explanation for the emergence of the “Theo Ending” is that it makes the musical, for want of a better word, more “commercial.” Seen this way, it is more in tune with the trends in contemporary commercial musical theatre, which emphasize crowd-pleasing, satisfying conclusions, often accompanied by the reprise of the musical’s most widely popular number—in this case reprises of both “Corner of the Sky” and “Magic to Do.” This is at least partially true and, as I demonstrate below, Pippin has seen numerous updates and revisions since its inception. 

Additionally, the “Theo Ending” crucially brings into sharper focus the nature of the Leading Player as not simply an embodiment of Pippin’s ego or subconscious, or as a cypher for the forces of capitalist surveillance culture, but rather as the voice of the collective unconscious—what psychologist Carl Jung saw as the deepest and most perplexing layer of the psyche that unites all humans through a shared language of archetype and understanding. I argue that Pippin and Jungian theory can engage in a productive dialogue about the nature of male psychosexual development that enhances understanding of both without subordinating one to the other. As the son of King Charlemagne, Pippin struggles with the formidable shadow of his father, as well as the scheming of his stepmother, Fastrada and his half-brother, Lewis, who leave him trapped between the expectations of his class and his desire to find something more authentic and, perhaps ironically, something more “exceptional” than becoming Holy Roman Emperor.  The metatheatrical techniques of the musical, further intensified and complicated by the “Theo Ending,” reflect the psychoanalytic process itself, particularly in the way they reveal the multi-layered, often contradictory aspects of the self. Viewed through this lens, the “Theo Ending” ultimately reflects a bolder and more daring approach to the metatheatrical contours of the work, while also serving as a poignant mirror to the masculine shadow and archetypes that underlie Pippin’s transformational journey, as well as Theo’s similar journey, which is set to follow his stepfather’s. The significance of the new ending lies in its reinforcement of the musical’s central thematic figuration: that the pursuit of extraordinary accomplishments, while enticing in youth, ultimately results in a debilitating lack of authenticity and connection to the world around oneself. By shifting the narrative focus to Theo in the final moments, this ending emphasizes that this struggle is not confined to the protagonist  but is a recurring challenge across generations.

Metatheatre in Pippin

Hirson’s original book for Pippin (already an almost complete revision of a musical of the same name that Schwartz wrote while attending Carnegie Mellon University)(3) underwent a substantial metamorphosis under Fosse’s direction, which altered both the tone and narrative trajectory of the musical. Known for his penetrating and assertive directing style, Fosse left an indelible mark on the musical’s development, and his collaboration with Schwartz during the original production was marked by passionate disagreements and creative conflicts that continued to drive the development of the musical.(4) Fosse recreated the character of the Leading Player, originally known in a different form as the Old Man, after casting director Michael Shurtleff introduced him to actor Ben Vereen. Reshaping the role specifically for Vereen, Fosse transformed the Leading Player into the essential narrative fulcrum for the musical’s metadramatic layers.(5) Stuart Ostrow contends that Fosse’s addition of this character turned Schwartz’s work “from a sincere, naïve, morality play to an anachronistic cynical burlesque."(6) A further crucial alteration made by Fosse was a slight modification of the musical’s ending. In the original book, Pippin closes the show by declaring himself “trapped, but happy;” Fosse opted to eliminate the final two words, leaving Pippin “trapped” in a state of tantalizing ambiguity.(7) This directorial choice not only underlines the pervasive fear of being trapped by social expectations, which is woven into the revised narrative, but also challenges the convention of a happy marital resolution as the best and most desirable conclusion. Pippin might have found a wife, but that is no guarantee of his happiness. The work concludes on an ambiguous note regarding Pippin’s fate and the dynamics of desire, ambition, and the quest for fulfillment that he strives for but ultimately fails to achieve. The ending of Pippin has  evolved over time, creating an enduring sense of ambiguity for critics and audiences regarding its significance and the role of the Leading Player in it.(8)

As Elodie Paillard and Silvia Milanezi describe, metadrama encompasses “theatricality, reflexivity, auto-referentiality, forms of theatrical illusion, or what is called play-within-the-play.”(9) This framework of metadrama introduces a sense of self-reflexivity and dramatic irony, a narrative deice that Yifen Beus acknowledges has early origins despite its seemingly postmodern ambiance and tone. (10) The use of metatheatricality in Pippin is emblematic of the form’s evolution  over dramatic history, as the technique can be traced back to the works of early Greek playwrights of the fourth century BCE, including Euripides and Aristophanes.(11) In these classical Greek comedies, characters could be acutely aware of their role within the theatrical performance and frequently broke the fourth wall to address the audience directly, a dramatic tradition also notably employed by William Shakespeare in works such as Hamlet and A Midsummer Night’s Dream.(12)

Closer to Pippin’s time, the backstage musical films of the 1920s and 30s, including The Broadway Melody (1929), 42nd Street (1933), Footlight Parade (1933), and Dames (1934), interpolated the lives of performers into the performance itself, suggesting an equally resonant influence on the form of Pippin. This blurring of the boundaries between the world of the play and the real lives of the actors is a recurring theme in the history of musical theatre, including perhaps the most famous example of Cole Porter’s Kiss Me, Kate (1948). The plot conceptually turns on the juxtaposition of reality and fiction as a theatre troupe stages an adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew. In Porter’s musical, the interplay between the characters’ on-stage personalities and their off-stage struggles becomes a central thematic focus, a dynamic explored in darker and more sombre ways in later works such as A Chorus Line (1975) and Follies (1971). Iconic pieces of 1970s musical theatre, these two works drew not merely on the metadramatic mode employed in earlier musicals and musical movies, but also upon Bertolt Brecht’s Verfremdungseffekt (or “alienation effect”) to challenge prevailing norms of dramatic representation that prompted audiences to engage with the material in a more introspective and critical way. By using methods such as direct address, visible stage mechanics, and deliberate breaking of the fourth wall, Brecht aimed to disrupt the passive consumption of theatre and instead promote a socially aware audience experience. More recent musicals such as Nic Doodson, Andrew Kay, and Ben Norris’s The Choir of Man (2017) have taken this self-reflexivity in a new direction that, in the twenty-first century, now seeks to engage rather than alienate or distance the audience. In it, the actors use their real names, and the book is updated with each successive cast, incorporating specific real-life details such as their birthplaces and family backgrounds into the narrative, blurring the line between the performers’ onstage personas and their authentic identities. 

Metatheatrical techniques witnessed a remarkable revival during the postmodern era. The Fantasticks (1960) and Man of La Mancha (1965) transpose the original metatextual elements of their source material—Edmund Rostand’s Les Romanesques (1894) and Miguel de Cervantes’ Don Quixote (1605 and 1615)—into productions that first emerged during a time of significant social and cultural upheaval in the United States involving personal liberation, self-discovery, and the questioning of social norms. These works stand alongside Cabaret (1966), Hair (1967), Godspell (1971) and King of Hearts (1978) as part of a movement toward more experimental and thematically complex musicals that collectively began to push the boundaries of the genre—not only by moving away from the conventions of the book musical form but, in doing so, introducing political and social commentary in a way that was more explicitly daring than in earlier eras. Pippin’s self-referential and metatheatrical approach elevates the act of performance to a central narrative device. With a conscious and continuous self-awareness within the narrative structure of the work, Pippin’s developmental journey is entirely dependent on the unfolding of that journey within the play-within-a-play structure. In this sense, Pippin represents a fusion of the long history of metatheatre with a new postmodern reckoning with the validity of historical narrative. 

More specifically – and in sharp distinction to The Fantasticks, Man of La Mancha, Cabaret, Hair, and Godspell – Pippin is an example of what Phillip Zapkin describes as “historiographic metatheatre.”(13) Historiographic metatheatre refers to a type of performance that not only recounts an historical event, but also self-consciously examines the nature of historical representation itself and, in doing so, modulates and manipulates both the methods of the historian and the established historical record. Thus, works of historiographic metatheatre question the ways in which history is constructed and understood, often blurring the lines between fact and fiction, and reality and performance. Zapkin is drawing upon Linda Hutcheon’s influential definition of “historiographic metafiction,” defined by Hutcheon as fiction that “works to situate itself within historical discourse without surrendering its autonomy as fiction” by manipulating and challenging its own very nature as historical.(14) E.L. Doctorow’s Ragtime (1975), a classic example of historiographic metafiction, weaves together the lives of three fictional families with historical figures such as J.P. Morgan, Harry Houdini, and Henry Ford, blending reality and fiction in a way that questions the traditional boundaries of historical storytelling and, through this, scrutinizes the history that America told of itself through the twentieth century. Doctorow’s Ragtime would later be adapted into Flaherty, Ahrens, and McNally’s Tony Award-winning musical of the same name, which led to the emergence of more historiographic metatheatre musicals into the twenty-first century, including Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton (2015) and Toby Marlow and Lucy Moss’s Six (2017). The significance of these works inhere in their ability to reflect on the nature of historical storytelling itself, questioning and reshaping the way historical narratives are constructed and consumed. Both critical and popular successes, the works examine the interplay between historical facts and representation in the form of musical theatre, portraying both historical events and the processes through which they are remembered and interpreted. 

There is a long tradition of historical musicals that detail real events or the lives of individuals, such as Sherman Edwards and Peter Stone’s 1776 (1969), Maury Yeston and Peter Stone’s Titanic (1997), and Jason Robert Brown and Alfred Uhry’s Parade (1998). But what establishes Pippin as an early frontrunner in the historiographic metatheatre tradition of Ragtime, Hamilton, and Six is its innovative use of metatheatricality to interrogate the nature of historical representation, personal identity, and, ultimately, the psychological forces that shape our understanding of both. Pippin stands apart by not only dramatizing historical moments or figures, but by using metatheatricality to explore the internal dynamics of its characters’ psyches. This self-referential technique places Pippin at the forefront of the historiographic metatheatre tradition, prefiguring later works that similarly use metatheatrical devices to explore and comment on the representation of historical figures and events, offering new perspectives on the past through the lens of contemporary performance. The events of the inset play, Pippin: His Life and Times, are set in the early Middle Ages: however, the period and context during which that story is told have varied considerably across productions. The original 1972 production broadly adhered to the eighth-century setting, with a group of itinerant miracle play performers set in an imaginary design tapestry that blended elements of eighth-century costumes with the flair and sensuality of twentieth-century vaudeville and burlesque. The effect was striking, and Tony Walton won a Tony Award for Best Scenic Design, while Patricia Zipprodt was nominated for a Tony Award for Best Costume Design. In many ways, this bold visual design served as a metaphorical reflection of the fragmentary nature of history and its retelling, visually representing the historiographic metatheatrical maneuvers of the play-within-a-play while emphasizing the musical’s attentiveness to themes more consistent with the sexual revolution of the late twentieth century. Later revivals, however, have made use of a number of innovative interpretive interventions in the staging of the musical’s metatheatrical narrative arc and the startling ending. The 2013 Broadway revival, directed by Diane Paulus, moved the setting of the inset play to the world of the early-twentieth-century circus, a rich terrain for examining tensions between external glamour and internal fulfillment, and the musical’s Off West End revival in 2021 was set in the 1967 Summer of Love. Staged as a protest storytelling circle that gathered to denounce war, this reinterpretation contextualiszd Pippin’s quest within the ethos of social upheaval created by the Vietnam War and the countercultural rebellion that emerged alongside it. In each of these interpretations, metatheatrical elements highlighted the permeability of the historical record: the traveling wonder play, the circus, and the countercultural hippie context each illustrate how the story of a young man’s growth toward individuation can adapt to different cultural, historical, and social contexts. In navigating the function and design of the play-within-a-play, directors and designers are confronted with the challenge of maintaining plausibility and coherence in the seeming chaos of the invented and at times contradictory narratives. 

At the heart of the metatheatrical dynamics of Pippin is the deliberate and artful dissolution of the boundaries between historical fact and narrative fiction. In reforming the historical account of Charlemagne and his eldest son Pippin (in reality, Pepin [c. 768 to 811]), Pippin tests the delicate balance between narrative authenticity and theatrical form. Charlemagne’s reign marked a pivotal moment in European history. Unlike his father, Pepin is mostly forgotten by the established historical record, largely because he was ultimately exiled, leading his younger brother Louis the Pious to become their father’s successor. The musical’s historiographical narrative artifice (embodied in the form of the Leading Player, who manipulates his constructed historical record), challenges both personal and collective historical narratives and, perhaps more provocatively, draws attention to the artifice of the historical record itself. 

As the putative director of the inset play, the Leading Player explicitly directs Pippin’s own developmental story in favor of spectacle, enticing him with a series of caricatured versions of “meaningful” pursuits: war, politics, and hedonistic sexual pleasure. The Leading Player’s cruelty and sadism trivialize the portrayal of events, such as in the Act I song “Glory,” which stylizes the horrors of war as a battle against the Visigoths, a historically inaccurate context as the Visigoths had already been largely defeated before Charlemagne’s reign. Here, the Leading Player reframes battle as an opportunity for personal glory, which relies only on the existence of an anonymous enemy. Fosse’s signature “Manson Trio” dance routine, which first appeared in the original production of this song, shows the Leading Player responding to the bloodshed with a stylized detachment and a parodically mechanical vaudeville dance that trivializes violence with jazz hands and bravado. His manipulation of these moments reduces complex, often violent historical events to consumable performance, emphasizing his control over the inset play and underscoring the performative nature of historical narrative. 

In her seminal work The Death of Character, Elinor Fuchs discusses the role of metatheatricality in disrupting narrative immersion, particularly in the reemergence in the 1930s of the mystery play in the symbolist works of playwrights such as Maurice Maeterlinck and August Strindberg. “The medieval mystery plays told the sacred history of the world,” Fuchs writes,. “The moralities, based not on history but on doctrine, recapitulated this universal form through a central figure’s progress toward salvation.”(15) Just as miracle plays used allegory to explore spiritual questions, Pippin employs its metatheatrical structure to interrogate contemporary notions of selfhood and identity rather than medieval concerns regarding the correct way to embody spiritual devotion and redemption.  This shift brings with it a distinctly Jungian engagement with the psyche, and Pippin thus not only explores the nature of identity and selfhood but also enacts this process of individuation through the metatheatrical form.

Pippin’s Individuation

Embedded within the thematic tapestry of Pippin is the exploration of individuation through a quest for life’s meaning, a journey frequently hindered within the musical by Pippin’s pursuit of external validation. His search for purpose leads him through a series of episodic vignettes—he tries to find his purpose in war, hedonism, politics, love, and fatherhood. Each illuminates different facets of his personal and psychological journey toward what Jung called “individuation” the integration of different aspects of the self in order to achieve psychological wholeness. Jung explained that “the aim of individuation is nothing less than to divest the self of the false wrappings of the persona, on the one hand and the suggestive power of primordial images on the other.”(16) Jung’s theories, particularly his concepts of the collective unconscious and archetypes, are deeply rooted in his study of artistic and cultural artifacts. He believed that these artifacts, including myths, fairy tales, and religious narratives, contain symbols and motifs that reveal universal patterns of the human psyche. In their influential book King, Warrior, Magician, Lover, Robert Moore and Douglas Gillette highlight four of Jung’s twelve primary archetypes—the four named in the book’s title—which they identify as the essential functions of mature masculinity. The King archetype represents the benevolent and authoritative aspect of masculinity and embodies qualities such as leadership, responsibility, and wisdom. The Warrior archetype represents assertiveness, courage, and the ability to protect and fight for what is just. The Magician is associated with insight, knowledge, and transformative power and emphasises the importance of intellect and spiritual awareness. Finally, the Lover emphasizes the relational aspects of masculinity and represents sensitivity, emotional depth, and the capacity for intimate relationships,. Though Moore and Gillette’s work postdates Pippin and thus did not directly influence the original production, there are striking parallels between their archetypal framework and Pippin’s journey. In Pippin, the protagonist literally embodies the roles of King, Warrior, and Lover throughout his quest for meaning and, at various points in the musical, he also reflects the Magician archetype, particularly in his search for existential understanding and transformation. These symbols are manifestations of the collective unconscious, a shared reservoir of experience and knowledge that transcends individual consciousness. Jung believed that individuation entails a psychic journey of personal discovery in which the individual confronts and integrates his or her hidden or shadow aspects, those aspects of self, such as desires, fears, repressions and unresolved conflicts that have been pushed to the limits of our own awareness as a protective strategy for the ego. Pippin presents an allegory of this process.

Following the opening number, “Magic to Do,” in which the Leading Player and ensemble remind audiences that history is not a singular, unchanging truth, but rather a rich field of diverse stories, perspectives, and interpretations, the actor playing the role of “Pippin” is introduced. “He may be a little nervous; this is his first time playing the role,” the Leading Player explains to the audience, breaking the fourth wall and explicitly identifying the metatheatrical nature of Pippin’s character arc as both a participant in the mystery play, and a new actor to the role. This self-referential comment draws an uncanny parallel between the character Pippin and the performer playing the role; the character of Pippin’s nervousness comes from having to give a valedictory speech to the faculty of the University of Padua, while the nervousness of the performer of that character comes from this being his “first” performance of the role. Here, Pippin, recently honored as Scholar of the House, struggles with the tension between accepting this prestigious role and pursuing a more meaningful existence, mirroring the performer’s own apprehensions about stepping into this new role. In a gesture that will be brought into sharper focus in the musical’s final moments, there is a convoluted overlap of “self” and “role,” between the nervous character of Pippin and the “first-time actor” performing that role, insomuch as all social behaviours are a performance. Pippin’s intention, as introduced in “Corner of the Sky,”is to find his own unique place in the world and to transcend the mundane to achieve the extraordinary. In this widely popular song (indeed, one of the most musically successful numbers in the show), Pippin explores the complexity of human ambition, which seems to necessitate a ceaseless pursuit of meaning. For the youthful Pippin, meaning and purpose seem attainable only through grand, exceptional achievements, dismissing the ordinary as inherently unfulfilling. This dichotomy between the extraordinary and the ordinary underscores Pippin’s internal conflict and his relentless search for significance beyond conventional success. 

For Pippin, the “false wrappings of the persona”(17) are reflected in his frequent desire to fulfill the expectations imposed on him by his position in society (first as a student, then as a warrior, lover, leader and, finally, father), while at the same time painfully and pitifully recognizing that the persona society imposes on him does not suit him. His negotiation of identity comes through engagement with archetypal figures—the authoritarian father, a menacing mentor embodied by the Leading Player, and the nurturing anima represented by Catherine—who, together, serve as symbolic manifestations of various facets of Pippin’s subconscious mind. Each of these characters plays a crucial role in developing Pippin’s understanding of himself and the world around him, contributing to the rich palette of themes explored in the musical. “The suggestive power of primordial images,” to use Jung’s phrase, is powerful and unmistakably reflected in the figure of the Leading Player and his coercive performers, emblematic of the overwhelming desire for greatness and visibility that Pippin must ultimately reject in favor of a more authentic understanding of self. 

In Jungian analysis, as in Pippin’s own journey, this process often involves confronting the “shadow,” the repressed or rejected aspects of the self that have been pushed into the depths of the unconscious in order to find harmony between the self and its public expression. Midway through Act II (18), the song “Extraordinary” offers a striking encapsulation of the pursuit of the extraordinary and, ultimately, the futility of the search, as Pippin will only later come to fully realize at the musical’s conclusion. The seductive lure of fame and greatness, a fundamental facet of social masculinity, captures Pippin’s imagination and mirrors the societal expectations surrounding him as he navigates the maze of masculine archetypes and expectations. This otherwise light, pop-inflected song reflects the collective desire for recognition and significance that often defines a man's worth in the eyes of society. It ultimately captures the inner conflict still stunting Pippin’s individuation—the struggle between conforming to external expectations and carving out an authentic identity. As a whole, the musical gestures toward the paradoxical recognition that the more exceptional someone wants to be, the more he runs the risk of losing his authenticity through the erosion of personal coherence and the fragmentation of the self. In this way, the song captures a key paradoxical insight at the thematic heart of the musical: the more one seeks to stand out and achieve exceptionality, the greater the risk of losing one’s true self. The quest for extraordinary achievement often leads to a fragmentation of identity, where the pursuit of external validation undermines personal authenticity. 

Theo’s Individuation

Pippin was, in its formative stages, a fairly standard book musical about the growth and development of a minor historical figure, and did not include any of the metatheatrical elements now most associated with the work. Indeed, in an earlier formation, the musical ended with Pippin’s attempted assassination of his father, until producer Hal Prince encouraged Schwartz to use that material as the first act and then continue Pippin’s story in the second act.(19) In the Fosse ending, Pippin’s decision to settle down with Catherine while feeling “trapped”(20) reflects a dejected yet also deeply human capitulation to societal norms. It represents a mature compromise between his personal desires and commitment to family, highlighting the complex negotiation of masculinity in relation to societal expectations of being father, protector, and provider. Carol de Giere imagines that “on one level, the show’s ending reflected transitions in Schwartz’s own life as he and [his wife] Carole settled into the first home of their own in rural western Connecticut.”(21) It is thus not insignificant that the Theo ending once again extends the timeframe depicted by the musical by expanding the story to imagine Theo’s own subsequent search for his “corner of the sky,” ultimately mirroring Prince’s initial suggestion to explore what happens beyond the climax. Just as Prince’s advice questioned the boundaries of when a narrative can or should conclude, the “Theo Ending” proposes an ongoing cycle of self-discovery and endeavor and is not confined to a single life, but is a recurring journey that is passed down through generations. By positioning Theo as the new seeker of the “corner of the sky,” the “Theo Ending” offers a poignant echo of the burden of parental and societal expectations that Pippin experienced and had to overcome. 

This original Fosse ending is a clear example of what the Aarne-Thompson-Uther Index of folktales, used to categorize similar narrative structures across a wide range of folkloric traditions, calls a “treasure at home” narrative, in which a journey is undertaken only to find that what the protagonist had been seeking was already at home. The significance of this narrative archetype lies in the dramatic irony of a protagonist embarking on a long journey in search of riches, only to discover that the treasure or fulfillment he sought lay within the familiar confines of his own home. The “treasure at home” narrative emphasises the idea that true happiness and contentment are often found in the ordinary and mundane aspects of life, rather than in distant and extraordinary adventures. It emphasises the importance of appreciating and valuing what one already has and suggests that the pursuit of external success and wealth only ultimately lead back to the simplicity and richness of one’s home and family. In the context of Pippin, Pippin’s desires and dreams, symbolized by his search for his “corner of the sky,” gradually intertwine with the realization that the seeds of his own contentment have already been sown in the family life he has created and, at least for a time, tried to discard. 

What is most striking when considering the masculine archetype and metatheatrical form of Pippin is that the alternate “Theo Ending” explicitly points out that the voice of the Leading Player is not merely symbolic of Pippin’s ego and subconscious. Rather, it symbolizes a collective psyche that is crucial to the development of the individual from youthful innocence to mature masculinity. Each whispered word of the Leading Player, which Pippin has now learned to recognize and control by the show’s culmination, represents the conflicting demands of societal expectations and personal desires that each individual must learn to deal with. The Leading Player becomes a manifestation of the Jungian collective unconscious, the deepest and most inaccessible layer of the human psyche comprising symbols, archetypes, and primordial images that are common across humans. These archetypes and their associated drives are innate and not shaped by personal experience. According to Jung, the collective unconscious forms a reservoir of common myths and symbols of humanity that influence our thoughts, behaviours, and perceptions:

The existence of the collective unconscious means that individual consciousness is anything but a tabula rasa and is not immune to predetermining influences. On the contrary, it is in the highest degree influenced by inherited presuppositions, quite apart from the unavoidable influences exerted upon it by the environment. The collective unconscious comprises in itself the psychic life of our ancestors right back to the earliest beginnings. It is the matrix of all conscious psychic occurrences, and hence it exerts an influence that compromises the freedom of consciousness in the highest degree, since it is continually striving to lead all conscious processes back into the old paths.(22)

The collective unconscious acts as a source of personal and cultural expression, tapping into a vast reservoir of archetypal meanings that transcend individual experience. Whereas the Fosse ending emphasized the singularity of Pippin’s developmental story (i.e., that his conflict with the Leading Player and the other performers represented an inward psychic journey toward individuation that was unique to him), the “Theo Ending” reemphasizes the universality of the journey toward individuation that occurs in all humans. Although not biologically related to Pippin, Theo nevertheless inherits the “predetermining influences” that shaped his stepfather, and the explicit recognition of the Leading Player of these influences underlines the crucial role they play in Pippin’s development from youthful naivete to mature masculinity. The reintroduction of Theo at the end and his subsequent confrontation with the Leading Player demonstrates the ongoing process of individuation that goes beyond a single life. It points to the permanence of archetypal challenges and the perpetual human search for meaning, establishing the idea in the show’s final moments that the path to maturity and self-knowledge is a universal journey.

The musical’s initial Broadway run in 1972 was met with much critical acclaim, and the work has enjoyed considerable success in Broadway and West End revivals over the past 50 years. While the musical was very much a product of its time and place, its enduring appeal is due in no small part to the mutability afforded by the metatheatrical structure, which allows directors to continue to reshape the thematic contours of the work. The “Theo Ending” reiterates the universal human search for purpose and meaning, achieved by reconciling the innate complexity of the self with its external, public expression and, even more so than the Fosse ending, speaks to a conceptual pluralism in which all humans are united by a shared journey of self-discovery. This interplay between the individual and social expectations—between the authentic self and its social mask—is the central theme of Pippin. More importantly though, the musical’s engagement with a notoriously porous historical record of a largely forgotten son of Charlemagne embeds it within a broader postmodern context in which the boundaries between truth and fiction are constantly renegotiated. By presenting Theo’s journey toward individuation as a continuation of Pippin’s, the musical emphasizes the eternal cycle of growth and transformation that characterizes human experience. Despite the typically postmodern ambiguity of the metatheatrical close, the revised “Theo Ending” points out that the search for one’s own “corner of the sky” is not unique to Pippin, but is a universal experience shared by others, including Theo, who also encounters the fantastical voices of the collective unconscious in his own psychic drama of growth and individuation.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.