Barnes on Guettel's Music: In PIAZZA's defense...help!

Posted: 5/23/05 at 8:16pm

http://www.nypost.com/theatre/44814.htm

I was just browsing some of the NY Post's theater reviews and decided to re-visit Barnes' review of Piazza as I just got tickets for this summer (travelling all the way from Japan!). I was shocked after reading it again because recently the music of Piazza has become the first Broadway score in a long time to have me totally obsessed...and I mean a long time. The last score I truly fell in love with was JRB's The Last 5 Years and before that...well...hmmm...

Anyhow, I started thinking about the impact that this kind of review could have on a show, the loss of dollars, audience, etc, and all because Barnes felt that, in his opinion (and Barnes is a prolific composer, right?), the music is the show's "fatal flaw".

I listened to the same 4 songs from the nonesuch.com website, where the Light in the Piazza songs can be currently sampled, over a period of about 4 hours while working at my computer yesterday. I delighted in discovering all the rich themes and passages embedded in not only the melodies and group pieces but the accompaniments as well. The lush sound, the glorious performances, the moving lyrics, the amazingly rich texture of the sound of Piazza is breathtaking.

As a composer, myself, this is the kind of score I yearn to see performed, to hear live. And to "diss" the show due to the music not "soaring"...well...Barnes seemed to like the lyrics and the performances, so why was the show a disappointment and fatally flawed?

It just totally irks me...know what I mean?

[wickedfan]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 8:45pm

Keep in mind, Barnes has been known to not completely "get" some shows in the past. Case in point: FOLLIES. If I recall, he said the lyrcis were "fresh as a daisy" but the the melodies just weren't any good. Same thing with COMPANY too.

[junglered]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 8:48pm

The music in "The Light in The Piazza" is rich, complex, uplifting and simply glorious!

[Plum]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 8:53pm

Don't take Barnes too seriously; he's been known to fall asleep at shows he's reviewing.

[Pinguin]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 8:55pm

You can't take him too seriously. It's the NY Post for crying out loud; while of course their reviews will be read and all, most people will depend on other sources for their reviews.

Piazza is amazing, and has the only score worth anything this season :0)

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 8:57pm

Do NOT take ANYTHING Clive Barnes says seriously -- no one else does. Barnes is 79 and has never been particularly sophisticated in being able to appreciate new and harmonically complex scores. And NO he's not a composer .... far from it -- to my knowledge, he's never written anything but misguided reviews of theatre and ballet for the last 40-odd years. He was the lead theatre and dance critic for the Times from 1967 to 1978 (or so). He was fired because his reviews were so generally out-of-step (and full of biases and insupportable opinions) that he was considered an embarassment to the paper. The Post (hardly a bastion of journalistic integrity) didn't care and hired him and he's been reviewing, as bad as he can, for them ever since. He needs to have retired a LONG time ago.

Because he writes for the Post, what he has to say doesn't carry a great deal of weight in terms of ticket sales or anything else. In fact, PIAZZA is doing very good business these days. Obviously many of his colleagues thoroughly disagreed with his assessment of the score (some of whom called this score the finest since Sondheim's PASSION), given that they just awarded PIAZZA's music and the orchestrations at the Drama Desks last night.

However, I do think that the score comes off MUCH better in the theatre than on those recordings on Nonesuch. Some of the truly gorgeous detail in the orchestration seemed to get lost in the recording process -- the articulation in the string arrangements and some of the subtle counterpoint with the horns, in particular, seems to have not been engineered well and comes off a bit generic-sounding to me (which it absolutely doesn't in the theatre). I think you'll be pleasantly surprised when you see the show in the theatre this summer.

Updated On: 5/23/05 at 08:57 PM

[wickedfan]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 9:18pm

Well said Margo. My sentiments exactly.

[Thesbijean]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 9:26pm

"Because he writes for the Post, what he has to say doesn't carry a great deal of weight in terms of ticket sales or anything else."

Riedel writes for the Post...come on Margo...

[Plum]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 9:28pm

Riedel is also the only theater gossip columnist. Barnes is one of many critics. Not to mention that the Post is well-known for its gossip, but not exactly respected in terms of actual news coverage or arts criticism.
Updated On: 5/23/05 at 09:28 PM

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 9:37pm

The only single critic that has the power to close a play on Broadway with a bad review is Ben Brantley. Period. All the rest have a minimal effect on box office sales. Now if ALL of them TOGETHER hate a play then, yes, it'll have an impact, but none of them individually has much power at all.

It's the power of the Times. It's been the case for decades (at LEAST since Brooks Atkinson). The Times can close a show ON Broadway or prevent a show that's off-Broadway (or in regional theatre or London) from moving TO Broadway with a single negative review.

Clives Barnes can't do that and hasn't had that sort of power since..... well, since the Times fired him over 25 years ago.

[MusicMan]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 10:51pm

Marlen--
Barnes is hardly the lone dissenter on the score.
The score may have its attractions but it'e still extremely problematic. I've reprinted an excerpt below from my original review of TLITP:
"...The show's greatest debit, however, is...well...an effective and memorable score. What's so disappointing about it is that every number starts our promisingly, with Guettel supplying tantalizing melodic ideas and accompaniments. But they either go nowhere or are spun out into extended, self-indulgent ariosos or pointless vocalise that dissipate the tension, resulting in slack and boring numbers that don't land and do nothing for the performers. One sits in the theater and hears the opening measures of a number and thinks, "Finally! This is it! A great musical theatre song!" But, inevitably, the balloon of anticipation deflates, expectations are crushed and stasis sets in. A very big part of the problem are the lyrics which lack poetic concision, a strong central idea or image, title resolution and emotional payoff. And the one number with a well-defined, if rather precious, lyrical motif, DIVIDING DAY, struck me as musically incongruous for the character. Though the score's impressionistic qualities support the romantic, fairy-tale nature of the story, it is, given the mood of the piece, unavoidably monochromatic in tone and lacking in variety. However intelligent and atmospheric, the score never excites, never moves and seems superfluous to the story, leading one to wonder if the piece merited musicalization in the first place. Finally, the transporting, transcendent, and spiritual release necessary to the story is not to be found in the musical and the score must take the blame..."
Having seen the show a second time, I'm not inclined to revise my opinion.


Updated On: 5/1/08 at 10:51 PM

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/23/05 at 11:06pm

Wow, Music Man, couldn't disagree with you more. I think Guettel's score is anything but precious. I will only say I think he'd benefit from a stronger mentor in the lyrics department (or, better yet, a really powerful writer to at least co-write the lyrics)...but, musically, that score is lush, melodic (although apparently not to your liking) and EXTREMELY emotionally satisfying, particular "Fable and "Say it Somehow."

[sparky310]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 3:18pm

the plain truth is most audiences are not interested in being challenged a bit to listen to the music or lyrics..they want every show to sound the same, look the same and feel the same..tothem theatre is not a place to learn, to feel, to experience life. it is a complete escape and to some extent thats nice..but the demand by the public has continually been influenced and catered to by the low brow ramblings of critics who tell these semi-ingorants what to think...piazza is not only fresh in style and talent and story..its a fresh challenge to see beyond one moment, one character but the domino effect lives have on one another..this might be to much for some to handle..so i f'em

[WOSQ]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 3:37pm

By way of summarizing Barnes and the Post, he is an old fart who has been known to fall asleep during performances and who writes for a paper (and I use the term loosely) that a good review doesn't sell many tickets. A slob writing for a rag although in his defense he wasn't always a hack.

Even in his prime when writing for the Times (1967-77) he had plenty of blind spots. Check Goldman's The Season. [I am assuming that everyone knows Barnes was the chief drama critic and chief dance critic for the Times and was demoted and the Powers-That-Be brought in another theatre critic. Murdoch who had just bought the Post, made Barnes an offer to be drama and dance critic again and he jumped at the chance. Then he found out it was Murdoch. Faust and all that. I'd sleep too.]

The only paper with clout is the aforementioned Times and it doesn't much matter who is writing the review. Its the paper not the critic any more.

Posted: 5/24/05 at 6:31pm

Well, the new review of the OBCR by the Times says it all. Thank you Mr. Holden!

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/theater/24piaz.html

Clive Barnes...Retire already and keep you misguided opinions to yourself!

...and thanks for the wonderful posts, folks...I DIDN'T know about Barnes' past.

marlen

[Auggie27]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 8:04pm

I'm with Music Man. We can have a sophisticated ear, and yearn for challenging material (I loved PASSION), and still find the PIAZZA score lacking and inaccessible. Those of us unmoved by the score's impact are not musically illiterate; some of us wanted to adore it, and tried desperately to connect to the songs as they drifted into the rafters of the Beaumont. It's disappointment that informs my reaction to PIAZZA, not cynicism or having a closed mind.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 10:27pm

Also: Wasn't Barnes the ONLY theater critic to give an out-and-out rave to "Carrie"?? Makes ya think...

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/24/05 at 10:32pm

No one ever accused you otherwise, Auggie.
But, for the record, I'll have to say I have the opposite opinions of yours on the scores of Passion and Piazza. I find Passion pretty much boring throughout, with the exception of "Loving You."

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 5/25/05 at 2:16am

I find both Passion and Piazza amazing. I think you can be musically literate and still not get a show. THat doesn't mean it's bad. i personally don't see how you can listen to that show and not think it's great if you're musically literate. Of course I'm biased. Guettel is not for anyone. There are plenty of musically literate people who don't like Sondheim. Musically literate or not, you can't deny Guettel's genious until you look at the score and say "oh he did this. Maybe he should have done this." I think it's fine to not like this score as long as one acknowledges the talent behind it and don't treat your word as law. THat's the problem with critics and why I see them as pointless most of the time. Previously critics were interesting in theatre and nurturing good talent, even if a particular work was bad. Now critics are making personal attacks on people and it's simply not ok. Anyway i'm done. I'm rambling.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 5/25/05 at 8:30am

I don't think those of us unmoved by PIAZZA, or any other show, have an obligation to frame our responses with nods to genius. We are entitled to find genius where we find it, but hardly want to make our opinion "law." And critics are no tougher, and I doubt there was ever a time when they felt obligated to feel "supportive."

Consider:

"...'La Boheme,' even as it leaves little impression on the minds of the audience, will leave no great trace upon the history of our lyric theater," wrote an Italian critic in February 1896, after attending the premiere performance, conducted by Arturo Toscanini.

[paradox_error]

Posted: 5/25/05 at 8:51am

Now I can't much comment on Piazza, as I'm living in Central Europe and have no access to such a musical, but I must say I highly disagree with Bwaysinger on Passion.

Loving You is by far the most bland and unoriginal of Sondheim's songs in the score, written quickly at the last minute to create sympathy for Fosca's character. (I like the song, but there is nothing overly special about it - a simple melody, and truthful, but rather bland lyrics).

The rest of the score is truly inspired, however. I absolutely adore it. Lyrics that live up to Sondheim's standard, and a lush, passionate and highly emotive score.

If Piazza gets comparisons to Passion, I'm sure I'll love it...

Posted: 5/25/05 at 8:51am

Auggie - thank god RENT came along to rescue it from obscurity

[twogaab2]

Posted: 5/25/05 at 9:40am

Hey guys, this is no big deal. A lot of critics have tin ears. One critic said of "Annie Get Your Gun" (I can't remember which one) that the score was O.K., but that Irving Berlin had written so much better (HUH, like which).

Anyway, "everything old is new again".

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/25/05 at 9:45am

"Barnes is hardly the lone dissenter on the score."

Of the critics, dissention of Piazza's score is a very small minority and siding with Barnes isn't exactly something to brag about. Actually, this particular score has received the highest praise of a Broadway score in quite some time, even going so far as to have the cast recording glowingly reviewed in the Times. Does anyone know the last time that happened? I'd be curious to find out.

West Side Story's score had it's dissentors as well. More, in fact. Most of them considered it unmelodic simply because it used harmonies and structure not popular in musical theatre. What could be considered displeasing to the musical "experts" today could turn out to be a revered classic in 50 years. Isn't that interesting?

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/25/05 at 9:48am

Oh, Doxy. If I have to sit through one more reprise of "I'll Say" in Passion, I'll shoot someone. POintless doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of what I think of that score.
And, I say kudos to Lapine and Sondheim for thinking Fosca needed some sympathy. I watch that show with complete and utter skepticism each and every time when, out of nowhere, Fosca's whining and clinging finally makes Giorgio fall in love with her. Bizarre in the extreme.
I will say that I found the staged production starring Cerveris and LuPone is the first time I came even close to buying the relationship. I think that LuPone and Cerveris (perhaps by virtue of having worked together so much at Ravinia) had real chemistry that came through the writing.