WSJ offers a helpful primer on the increasingly common practice--unique to musicals--of calling something a revival when in fact the script has been significant rewritten and even the score (or at songlist) may be altered.
I don't like to be too hardline a purist about these things. And I don't want contemporary directors and producers to be completely straitjacketed about how they handle a classic text. Still I find myself sympathetic too Miles Krueger's quoted indictment:
"Imagine 'Aida' with a few other Verdi favorites. Imagine 'Gone With the Wind' with scenes from a few other Clark Gable movies. New generations think they can bring an extra dimension or perspective perhaps overlooked by the creators. But the creators are the ones who did it, for God's sake. They did it. Adding songs is an admission that the original work isn't good enough to present as it was originally presented. It negates the whole point of the revival."Seeing alternate versions is always nice. And yes, the original "book" is often published. But unfortunately the "revisal" may be the only version of certain musicals that we get to see fully realized on stage.