Frank Sinatra: His Merits and Demerits

As this topic has generated some interesting discussion on the "Soliloquy" thread, and some passionate debate, I'm moving it to its own discussion point. Frank Sinatra was "The Voice" of the bridge between pure 1930s swing-band music and 1980s adult contemporary, singing a little bit of everything in between from jazz to pop to the blues and even experiments in rock and roll and power balladry.

But was he a peerless talent and promoter of the songwriters and composers who generated material for him, as OlBlueEyes has posited, a lazy and contemptuous hack who had a beautiful instrument but no respect for it or anything else, as Smaxie argues, or somewhere in between (the position shared by GavestonPS and myself).

One thing is almost universally agreed on: he was a rather crummy musical theatre actor, but his recordings of songs from musicals introduced them to many, and often remain representative of those shows today.

Alright, kids: discuss.

"One thing is almost universally agreed on: he was a rather crummy musical theatre actor, but his recordings of songs from musicals introduced them to many, and often remain representative of those shows today."

Hmm, I'll take the opposite side of this statement. I've never been a fan of his as a recording artist (I was born in the early 90s), but actually found him quite convincing in his movie musical roles (I'll exclude Guys & Dolls, but I think he should have played Sky). The scene leading up to, and performance of, The Lady is a Tramp in the movie version of Pal Joey remains one of my absolute favorite movie musical numbers to this day. Everything from the way Sinatra's gestures are timed perfectly to the music (and camera shots, it is one of the best filmed movie musical numbers in my opinion), how powerful his voice gets, and his physical/cinematic chemistry with Rita Hayworth really makes that number have a lasting impact for me.

Aside from The Lady is a Tramp, I really haven't been "blown away" by anything else of his movie musical work, but I don't think crummy is the word I would use. Adequate, serviceable, or charmingly fun? I've also never been a great admirer of his recordings of musical theatre standards outside the movies he was in (including New York, New York for which I will always prefer Liza's). I will say that I find "That's Life" to be an incredibly powerful, dramatic, and haunting recording of a song. I guess his rendition of that exemplifies what I like most about Frank Sinatra.

Smaxie said: "I didn't use 'hack'... but stand by lazy and contemptuous."

Thank you. I concur. "Hack" seems much too harsh for a singer who had such an undeniable influence.

I won't speak for you, Smaxie, but perhaps my impression of Sinatra stems in part from not really knowing his work until the 1960s. (I'm speaking "in real time" here. Of course, I now have his recordings from the 1940s and 1950s.)

Pop music (except rock) had degenerated in general by then: compare "Strangers in the Night" or "Goldfinger" or even "New York, New York" to the best songs of Porter, the Gershwins, Rodgers, Berlin or Arlen.

Evans2 said: "Sinatra had the utmost respect for the songwriters. As was previously mentioned, while in concert, he would state the names of the composer and lyricist before singing each song. Name another singer of equal stature to do the same.

His Soliloquy brought the song to the masses. Whether you like it or not, you can't dare say he didn't sing it with conviction."

Actually, Judy Garland often announced the names of songwriters and arrangers, even when she had limited time on her TV show. Songwriters WERE stars back in the day and saying you were going to sing Porter or Berlin gave a singer extra cred.

But I don't think announcing a songwriter's name shows much appreciation if you then proceed to mangle his lyrics. (And while we're on the subject, the fact that Streisand can't seem to sing Sondheim without asking him to rewrite the lyrics does her no credit, however willing (or even enthusiastic) Sondheim may be to indulge her.)

I don't pretend to speak for Sinatra's "convictions". I haven't heard his "Soliloquy" for years (so I'll happily take your word if you enjoyed it). Most of the time, however, he acted too cool for any "conviction" I would recognize.

By the time I saw Mr Sinatra live[at the opening of Sanctuary Cove in Queensland/Australia] he was well past his prime and couldn't even read the tele-prompters[?]. He shared the bill with Whitney Houston who was NOT a well woman, and Peter Allen who literally stole the show from the other two--we gossiped about the other two and RAVED about Peter Allen.

In his prime he was considered to be a very fine interpreter of popular song, which of course back then, in many instances came from the world of musical theater. His ability to deliver a heart breaking lyric came mostly from his own battles with manic depression and alcohol abuse. He lived about twenty lives in his 82 years, and while there are many things about the man that weren’t deseriable, he was a friend to many people that we who post here find extremely admirable.

It’s interesting to note, that he couldn’t actually read music - something that always bothered him. He “jumped the shark” many times in the last twenty five years or so of his career, but still managed to have some interesting and thoughtful takes on showtunes. Check out his take on “Good Thing Going” - a song he recorded because it was just assumed that Merrily would turn into another smash hit show by Sondheim.

I agree with jv92, that the concept albums were some of his very best work, but every now and again you will find a hidden gem in some of his later work.

Don’t forget - “Send In The Clowns” only became a monster hit song outside of the theater world AFTER he and Judy Collins recorded it. Sondheim himself has acknowledged that in many interviews.

Flawed, difficult to work with, and of course - held on too long to his career past his prime. But doesn’t that describe the vast majority of the true greats in showbiz?

Updated On: 8/21/18 at 10:18 AM

CarlosAlberto said: "Ooooh someone really got under your skin in the Soliloquy thread for you to waste your energy on this thread! Wow!"

...or it was clearly a sub-discussion worthy of its own thread? Like, he doesn't seem particularly perturbed by other people's opinions at all, he just wanted to focus the discussion elsewhere.

Excellent point, jv92. As years went by, both Sinatra and Streisand became victims of their superstardom, and their artistry suffered. Streisand, being younger, still possessed stronger pipes and more control than the Chairman did in later years. They both knew their adoring fans would buy into anything they released. Not unusual- look at Elvis; look at Dylan.

jv92 said: "castlestreet said:
I agree with jv92, that the concept albums were some of his very best work...

...Flawed, difficult to work with, and of course - held on too long to his career past his prime. But doesn’t that describe the vast majority of the true greats in showbiz?"



Oh, of course!


By the time he was making those records at Capitol, his star had quickly fallen and he needed to reinvent himself. I don't think "desperate" is the right word, but he certainly wanted to come back on top and those wonderful charts and arrangement helped, but so did his sensitivity and the deep pathos and hurt he brought to songs like "Glad to be Unhappy" (perhaps my favorite Sinatra recording) or "One for My Baby" (close second). Then theego skyrocketed, and it became less about the song and more about HIM.



This is probably heresy, but I feel the same way about Streisand. It happens very quickly, too. Her first few records at Columbia are spellbinding, sensitive and nuanced. Her performance on the FUNNY GIRL cast album is dazzling. Then comes the movie of that show, and the later recordings, and it becomes less about Jule Styne (or Arlen, et al... later add Sondheim to the mix) and more about HER. Even if Sondheim rewrote and adjusted some lyrics for her, I just think it's nervy. It's nice that he was good natured and willing to explore more with her, but I just find it... egotistical.



You get it with Garland, too, but less so than the other big ones."

His star had hardly "fallen" while he was at Capitol - he did his first album at Capitol in 1954, the same year he'd won the Oscar for 1953's From Here to Eternity. That film was his comeback. He was on top for the entire time he was at Capitol. Furthermore, anyone who thinks Sinatra was not a fine actor should watch a little movie called The Manchurian Candidate.