"If I wrote a musical in the style of Rogers and Hammerstein, no matter how good it was, it would most likely be considered pastiche, or generally frowned upon as unoriginal."
It's an interesting question to ponder, Chewy. I'm sure some people would have that response. However, I'd like to think that if anyone wrote a score nearly as thrilling as - and in the style of - South Pacific, King and I or Carousel today, and if the music fit the material, most people would be awestruck. And if the style of music fit the period of those show's settings, it might by definition be "pastiche" but that would hardly be a disparagement.
The score of Phantom is anachronistic, but "Prima Donna" and the operas within the musical are not objectionably pastiche. The score of Pippin is anachronistic, but there's nothing objecstionable about the numerous moments that suggest madrigals, plainchants and troubadours .
Neither "Titanic" nor the first act of "Grey Gardens" are problematically pastiche.
A Little Night Music was a waltz score composed in the 70s (talk about pastiche!) for a belle epoque comedy confected in the 50s by the world's greatest screenwriter. It is unquestionably Sondheim. However, had the show been done/scored in the 30s by Rodgers and Hart, in the 40s by Weill and Anderson, in the 50s by Lerner and Loewe, or in 60s by Bock and Harnick, no doubt they would have used a similar musical vocabulary. The same general approach I would expect Sondheim, Yeston or Frankel & Korie might bring (in their own individual ways) to the material today; should the results be half (or should I say 3/4) as enchanting as Sondheim's were in 1973, I would expect the audience would be delighted.
Updated On: 9/8/12 at 09:40 AM
