Has it been poined out that ALW's music is mostly derivative from major classical composers? He rechannels and recycles most of the great Italian composers(Puccini is a particular favorite), for example. There is nothing original in his work. Sondheim, however, is only Sondheim; and the fact that we KNOW it is his music is a compliment, not a criticism. The fact that some of his songs are inseperable from their context is a plus, not a minus! This is the organic nature of his work. (Although many, including "Being Alive" and several numbers from "Follies" work just fine on their own.) Great singers--Barbara Cook--do not devote programs to ALW.
Updated On: 6/15/05 at 07:14 PM
'Sondheim, however, is only Sondheim'
Except when it sounds like Ravel...whom Sondheim has stated is a favorite of his.
But he does not copy the music, as ALW does; he reinvents it in a unique way, and that's a real difference. All artists are influenced by other artists, but major artists create their own work from the works of the past, while minor artists merely copy (Salieri vs Mozart, for example).
Updated On: 6/15/05 at 07:17 PM
Well that's true.
I just was in shock when someone had Ravel playing on their cd player and was told no when I asked if it was a Sondheim piece I'd never heard of.
I just love it when people say that Sondheim music always sounds the same. They obviously haven't ever listened to much of his work. They are so extremely different.
I am a slight fan of ALW, and particularly like his work with Tim Rice. Beyond that, it just goes into over-sensationalised banal rubbish. Cat and Phantom may be the longest running shows in history, but I personally think that Cats should have closed out of town and Phantom should have a had a run of about 400 performances, if that.
Sondheim, however, is exceptional. I have to agree with Governor (and Hal Prince). He is a brilliant lyricist, but a phenomenal composer. Unlike ALW he can pay homage to another composer without stealing their work. Assassins and Follies have the best examples of these.
Sondheim by far, but I agree with Plum that ALW can have more artistic merit than he is given credit for. Howver, POTO and Cats don't fall into that category...
Well, let's tally -
I've fallen asleep in Jesus Christ Superstar, Cats and Phantom. I loved Evita. I don't get Starlight Express. I think Aspects of Love is a nice chamber piece and Sunset Boulevard was wonderfully entertaining and absolutely unnecessary.
I've fallen asleep in Pacific Overtures and ran screaming from Anyone Can Whistle. I've seen Sunday in the Park a half dozen times and own, I think, 4 different recordings of A Little Night Music and a dozen versions of I'm Still Here. Company is a blast, Sweeny Todd one of the few musical theatre pieces in recent history to break through into the operatic repertoire, and Passion is exquisite. Assassins is one of the few examples of truly political musical theatre since Weill.
Sondheim takes it.
Stand-by Joined: 6/3/05
Broadway Legend Joined: 3/4/04
Matt- the ALW/Sondheim comparison, messy though it may be, is made because they've been the two major musical theater composers in terms of number of shows produced and in terms of influence in the late 20th century. Also, once again despite the mess, they make convenient avatars for the neverending art vs. commerce argument.
But that's really an oversimplification. Sondheim has made changes for the sake of making his shows more palatable for audiences (like putting "Being Alive" at the end of Company.) And say what you want about his success rate, but I really think Lloyd Webber tries to do artistic things as well as compose pop hits in his shows. Thankfully this thread hasn't really devolved into those hackneyd arguments, though. :)
Videos