Musical Theatre vs. Play With Music

[RippedMan]

Posted: 9/26/10 at 11:40pm

What's the difference? "Brief Encounter" has a good bit of music, and "Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson" has less than 30mins of actual musical (according to the cast album). Is it just what the producers want to bill it as? I wish BBAJ had more "meat" to it as far as music. For a musical it is pretty slim. None of its songs exceeds 3mins, and none really "go anywhere" musically or story wise. "Brief Encounter" has some excellent music, but it is not plot based, but more character based, or used as underscoring, but I think it probably has more actual music than BBAJ.

[CockeyedOptimist2]

Posted: 9/26/10 at 11:57pm

I have seen many more musicals than plays with music, but I would say that the function of the music would be the key difference. Is it there for the ambience, as I would say that it is in Brief Encounter, or does it actually contribute to plot/character development, as it does in most post-Oklahoma! musicals. Other thoughts?

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 9/27/10 at 12:44am

I think it has something to do with the number of songs.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 9/27/10 at 1:05am

^ I agree. A traditional musical has a round at least fifteen to twenty songs. Some have more or less depending on the story and some are even sung all the way through and have as many as thirty. A play with music on the other hand usually has fewer songs and only segments of a song may be played.

[BDrischBDemented]

Posted: 9/27/10 at 1:20am

Isn't a play with music basically any "musical" that you can remove the songs from with no real dramatic alteration, i.e. "Forum"?

[Weez]

Posted: 9/27/10 at 4:56am

My personal definition: Is there a reason for the characters to be singing ("they're performing in a band" being the most common one)? If so, it's a play with music.

Although that said, I'm still not sure how to class the National's recent productions of Mother Courage and Her Children and Earthquakes in London. Both felt like and seemed to be plays with music, but the music seemed much more ingrained...

AUGH! There's actually a word that applies specifically to music that is playing *in* a scene rather than *over* the scene, and if I could remember it, this entire post would make FAR more sense, but there's just a hole in my memory where this word should be (ironically, the word I thought it might have been for about half a second is "eidetic" XD). D:

EDIT: yesss! Twitter has come up trumps! Let's redefine:

If the songs are diegetic, it's a play with music. If not, it's a musical. (Although do bear in mind this is my personal definition and by no means gospel.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diegesis#Diegesis_in_music-theatre - for further reading, although it's more about explaining why most musicals are non-diegetic. XD

Updated On: 9/27/10 at 04:56 AM

[mallardo]

Posted: 9/27/10 at 5:05am

Brecht wrote songs for some of his plays including Mother Courage and Caucasian Chalk Circle - although the NT used original music for its production of the former. In any case the music is integral to the plays but these are plays with music, not musicals.

And of course there are songs in many Shakespeare plays. In Twelfth Night, for example, Feste's songs are among the highights of the piece.

[binau]

Posted: 9/27/10 at 5:08am

Some people (e.g. Patti LuPone referring to GYPSY) also use the term "play with music" to emphasise a libretto comparatively stronger than other musicals.

[romgitsean]

Posted: 10/17/10 at 12:28am

I just thought of a perfect example of this. I know I'm mad behind on this, but as an actor who sings - the term 'play with music' over musicals has been a topic of debate between some of my closer musical theatre friends.

So my example is this: Blood Brothers. I would not consider Blood Brothers to be a 'musical' because the musical numbers are so spread out and basically reiterate the plot, primarily because the show was originally written without music (which, does anyone have a copy of Blood Brothers before they wrote music into it?). Additionally, there's only really about five songs, but a LOT of reprises.

Although it was stated that plays with music typically have music that moves along the plot, I would be more inclined to disagree with that. I think the entire point of a musical is that the songs more often than not tell the story, and are in a continual pattern. A play with music just has music which CAN tell the story, but more often that not just are there to reiterate a point as a mean of further extending and enhancing the dialogue. That's my opinion, though.

[MadonnaMusical]

Posted: 10/17/10 at 12:38am

I totally left BRIEF ENCOUNTER thinking "That was a musical!" Totally a musical! The songs all tell of the inner feelings of the characters even if the main characters aren't the ones singing them. I think the Tony committee is going to have a difficult time deciding on that one.... although I don't really think it'll get any Tony love so I don't think they really need to worry. lol.

Another good example is "Valley of the Dolls."

[CapnHook]

Posted: 10/17/10 at 1:30am

GREAT discussion topic! I asked the same questions after seeing both shows.