LaChiusa "esoteric?"

Esoteric: "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest."

I wouldn't say that applies to LaChiusa's work. His musical palette is completely tonal, and his characters tend to baldly sing exactly what's on their minds (no "In Buddy's Eyes" for him).

I wouldn't say that he actually has a definable "style;" I'd never listen to a song and say "that sounds like LaChiusa," as I would for Finn and a few others. He tends to alter what style he has to suit the piece.

That said, I feel that he has problem giving his songs a firm structure; to me, they generally tend to meander, and could use more of a sense of clear shape.

Updated On: 9/26/16 at 01:08 PM

I think LaChiusa is "esoteric" compared to Herman, Lloyd Webber, Rodgers and the like. (That lack of consistent and clear structure is partly why.)

This is by no means a criticism. I think he does exactly what he wants to do and does it well.

In an almost undeniable sense, most current musical theatre composers might well be considered "esoteric" rather than mainstream. Not sure what the context was in Wikipedia. Might it have been a reference to his point of departure subjects (somewhat fringe for musical theatre, e.g., Medea, a jazz age poem, La Ronde, chamber musicals devoted to First Ladies and daughters, etc.) rather than his musical style?

Don't answer that question with the name of a composer. That will only stultify creativity.

Answer with a mood or a color or a tone...or a painter or an art movement or a historical period...or a kind of food or a season of the year or an emotion.

Judy Garland once said, "Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of somebody else."