Sondheim Flaws--a discussion- Page 2

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:07pm

"As for the whole dialouge thing, maybe i misread it or something but i'm not sure what you mean when you say that sondheim can't fix the dialouge given to him. Doesn't he write all the lyrics to his songs? Why coulsn't he rewrite dialouge."

Sondheim indeed writes the lyrics to the SONGS.
He doesn't write the dialogue in the book scenes between the songs however. If those scenes don't work, it's not his fault. That's the fault of the book writer and Sondheim can't be expected to fix those scenes (and has said that he couldn't if he wanted to -- writing dialogue is not where his talent lies).

[LostLeander]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:12pm

I like Bounce a lot, and I've heard this said, but the Bounce score is exactly what it needs to be for the show.

If you listen, a story is being told musically, through motifs, and recurring lyrics, and such.

It's about ownership, and taking over something (land, or a person) without asking, talent, and oppurtunity.
This I all learned through the music.
I haven't seen the show, or read the book, so I can't really comment on the whole show itself, but I think it is an awesome score, but it's just, not somehow, as new and inventive as her other stuff.

It seems familiar, in that it's like something we've heard before, and Sondheim reinvents his style with every show, I think this territory is similar to Funny Thing, and perhaps that's why people didn't take to this score as much as his others.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:27pm

blasphemy!!!!

nah, I kid, I'm just too lazy to go into it.

[littleredridinghood]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:29pm

I have nothing to add to this discussion except to say I have to write a 15-page-minimum paper on Sondheim's flaws for my writing seminar for college. It's freaking HARD to do, and as other people have said, I keep saying "the book wasn't strong enough" or "the plot didn't appeal to the audience..." There's hardly anything wrong with his actual writing. Plus, my professor thinks if you go up to any random person and ask who Sondheim is, they'll know, and then spout off a list of all his works. He's a composer, so he might have a skewed view, but I'm a music freak too, and I know if I asked 100 random people who Sondheim was, probably at least 80% of them would look at me with blank looks.

[jasonf]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:30pm

As I've been reading through this, I've been trying to think of places where I think his score or lyrics falter. There are songs I'm not fond of (Liasions, Green Finch and Linnet Bird, One More Kiss) though I wouldn't say any of those are really missteps - just songs I don't really like. (I've never seen Night Music or Follies, so I can't say anything about the placement of those songs, but I do think GFaLB is completely unecessary, though, again, not necessarily his fault). I do think that Bounce is pretty weak though - it's the only Sondheim show I haven't bothered to put on my iPod.

[Plum]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:47pm

I love "Green Finch and Linnet Bird." And what is it but Johanna's introduction and "I want" song?

[LostLeander]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 8:47pm

Green Finch and Linnet Bird unnecessary?

Eep.

It's Johanna's theme! She is the Green Finch and Linnet Bird, it establishes her as trapped song bird in cage kept by Turpin and the Bedle. The song is metaphor that can't be portrayed by dialogue.

I think this song is completely necessary and quite beautiful, (Except when performed by the atrocity that is Betsy Joslyn in the Hearn/Lansburg DVD).

I can understand if you just don't like the song though.

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 11:26pm

Sondheim is a purebred Broadway Baby. Let's not forget that.

[ALWrules]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 11:35pm

Sondheim is by no doubt a theatrical genius. However, most of you on this post are ignoring the topic: his flaws.
Sondheim's flaws to me are sometimes his inconsistency in the melodic nature of his music. Sure, his subject manner is phenomenal, but in the end it comes down to his music is sometimes just to hard to listen to.
For example, Company, Sweeney Todd and Assassins were interesting subject matters where the music was as melodic as it was interesting. Into the Woods to me is an example of where he gets too caught up in creating an intersting story that he forgets what the first word of "musical theater" is. The music isn't consistently beautiful and fun to listen to; a lot of it is filler to try and get to the next piece. I felt a similar feeling for when I saw Bounce.
To me there is no doubt Sondheim is the world's greatest lyricist. The best composer? I don't think so.

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 11/21/05 at 11:45pm

"However, most of you on this post are ignoring the topic: his flaws."

Heh, shouldn't be surprised, but didn't take long before most of the thread was praising him. Further explaining why I was curious to hear flaws you all believe he has since you all see the rarity they're discussed or even acknowledged to exist.

[ALWrules]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 12:11am

What I have noticed on this site in general is people taking totalizing views supporting or opposing something? People claim "I Love Sondheim." Well, I like him too but that doesn't mean I won't point out some of his flaws. Just because you like one of his works doesn't make you obligated to love him unquestioningly. It is one of the things that has been somewhat frustrating on BWW.com. People won't either defend their position and evade the difficult questions.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 12:19am

ALWrules I agree completly. I think his music works in the context of the show, but most of the songs aren't that melodic and do seem like filler. Esp, a lot of Into the Woods. Its hard to just sit down and listen to it.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 2:48am

A lot of people and critics argue that it is hard to listen to Sondheim's music. I actually do believe he is truly the best composer and lyricist on Broadway; his melody and lyrics go together, the music adds so much to the meaning of the lyrics or the subtext. A song like "Could I Leave You?" from the show Follies, the music expresses the subtext and the irony of the song about Phylis' marriage. The motifs in Into the Woods and Passion do not slow down the story but further reinforce the show's themes. If you don't think this is musical theater, then I don't know what it is. It is important to understand about Sondheim that in some of his shows, plot is the least important aspect, Company and Sunday In The Park With George are shows in which the plot is merely a tool to deliver a certain message, therefore advancing the plot is not the main goal of the librettist/composer.
I do believe his music and lyrics can be flawed. Some of Cinderella's songs in Into the Woods are unnecessarily repetitive, some of the songs in Merrilly We Roll Along are bluh (although one of my top 10 fav. Sondheim songs is in this show), and though Passion is probably my favorite Sondheim show along with Sunday In The Park With George and Company, I do believe it lacks some actual numbers like "I Wish I Could Forget You" or "No One Has Ever Loved Me" because sometimes the letters are not enough and can get tedious in my opinion.

[CompanyGuy]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 3:41am

Now I know that this is quite delayed, but when talking about "show-stoppers", I truly believe that Sondheim doesn't write a song just to stop the show. He writes for the time, place, and person. And in many ways, when comparing Sondheim to some great lyricist/songwriters, many people find this the flaw. I don't consider it so, but people like fluff, they like getting lost for a few hours. And his choices are bold, and unique, which sets him apart from everyone else, flaw or not. He writes for the show, not the audience.

Posted: 11/22/05 at 4:32am

A flaw that comes to my mind, and I don't believe anyone has mentioned it yet, one which Sondheim himself has pointed out, is his sometimes inability to write consistently "in character." The example Sondheim uses is from WEST SIDE STORY. Maria, a young Puerto Rican girl, recently transplanted to Manhattan, will not say "...it's alarming how charming I feel..." There are others within his body work although as his lyric writing matured, these examples proved elusive to distinguish.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 4:47am

Yeah, somebody already mentioned that one earlier in the thread. I suppose excuses can be made for a very young Sondheim. I think that is the moment where you can very clearly hear the voice of the lyricist. For a lot of witty lyricists you can pretty much always hear them rather than the character (Porter and Coward immediately come to mind). While some people would argue that you can ALWAYS hear the voice of Sondheim in his characters due to the sheer complexity of the lyrics, this is only semi true. You can hear Sondheim's wit, but only when he's writing for witty characters. Otherwise his characters make points in spite of themselves. I think in Into the Woods you hear his voice a lot, because it's a psychological play where the characters aren't really... real. Like in the case of Little Red, why's she singing about what she sings about?

But a lot of times Sondheim is like Harburg. The tricky rhyming is what gives it character.

Also, it's a matter of taste when it comes to Sondheim's music. I find when he's melodious he's gorgeous, and his dissonant, complicated melodies are always theatrically honest and arguably another expression of beauty. There may not be one wrong note in South Pacific but I find Sondheim more interesting at nearly every turn (except for cases like "This Nearly Was Mine," which is just a gorgeous song).

You know. "Pretty isn't beautiful, mother. Pretty is what changes." I like that. It speaks to me in volumes.

I'm curious if anyone can think of actual flaws rather than matters of opinion. It really does seem like a subjective question, doesn't it?

For example, let's talk about Forum. Sondheim has said himself he got a little gimmicky with the score, anxious to show himself off as the hot new composer who wants to write some off kilter music. As such songs like "Pretty Little Picture" go down in history as his cut songs because they're weird. The same goes for Anyone Can Whistle, the score of which can be enormously complicated. A lot of marks of genius there though. The sheer wry sound of the title song... his trademark maniac songs like "Everybody Says Don't".

Do you think weird works in the musical theater? There are songs in Floyd Collins (one of my favorites) that are just plain weird, same goes for Piazza, of course anything LaChiusa. It's interesting musical experimentation.

Um, a "flaw" that always kinds of irks me. The end of "If You Can Find Me, I'm Here" and "I'm Still Here" are the same give or take a still and an am. Seems a pretty obvious way to end a song, I guess, but still. "Everybody Rise!" "For me!" What else can you think of?

[LostLeander]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 5:02am

I think those songs, "I'm Still Here", "Ladies Who Lunch", "Rose's Turn" all end with those repetitive endings because they are exactly what they want, or what they want to show.

They've spent the whole time talking about what's happened in their lives, or telling a story, but in the end they are purely "This is what I want, and I want it so badly that I going to keep on repeating it."

"Everybody Rise! RISE! RISE! RISE!" She want's her damn due respect, and she's demanding.
"I'm Still! Look who's here! I'm still Heeeere!" Look! I may be old, but dammit I've still got it, and (again) pay attention to me.
"For me! For me! For me! For MEEE!" It's MY TURN! Give me my chance in the spotlight, (again) PAY ATTENTION TO ME!

These are pretty self-indulgent lyrics then, but God-Almighty they are self-indulgent people, n'est-ce pas?

It's the actor's job to fill each of one those repetitive lyrics to keep on our attention.

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 7:13am

Jose', many people also cite some of Dot's songs in Sunday in the Park With George as examples of a person who is singing things that are quite a bit higher than their alleged academic standard. "Everybody Loves Louis" being one of them.

[fiatlux]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 7:33am

" "Everybody Loves Louis" being one of them. "

I don't think that is one of them, I'd be interested to hear which lyric you mean. But "We Do Not Belong Together" - "I am unfinished, I am diminished etc" doesn't sound right to me for the character.

As a Brit a few bits of Sweeney sounds wrong ("he kept a shop in London town")...but frankly it's nit-picking because 99% of it is on the button.

If I were to say there was a flaw - with the exception of the one already highlighted by Margo regarding the bookwriters - is his profligacy with words for instance - Weekend in the Country or Please Hello - when there is so much going on when all the voices blend that it runs the risk of none of it being understood - which is a huge pity.

[Plum]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 9:38am

"Everybody Loves Louis"? Really? What is it, the knead/need pun, or the art being "hard to swallow"? :P Maybe it rhymes too much, since combinations like perfection/objection/connection are associated with more witty characters than Dot, who isn't dumb but isn't ultra-articulate, either.

And "London town" sounds fine to me; that's a certain section of central London that marks the city's old borders, I believe. Or is that "city" rather than "town"? Hm.

ALWrules, define "melodic." Becuase I really, really hate that damn criticism. "Melodic" seems to mean whatever people want it to mean, especially if they're using it to criticize Sondheim wholesale. And if you think you must have Rodgers (or, dare I say, ALW)-esque lyrics to make good music, congratulations, you've dismissed rap as a genre.
Updated On: 11/22/05 at 09:38 AM

[fiatlux]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 9:46am

"And "London town" sounds fine to me; that's a certain section of central London that marks the city's old borders, I believe. Or is that "city" rather than "town"? Hm."

We don't say London town ever - unless one is being ironic. Sweeney's shop is in the City (of London) however, you usually only use the City when talking of the financial institutions etc that are within the Square Mile.

There's also a line about "alley ashcans" but that might be Wheeler rather than Sondheim, if so he should have known better.


Updated On: 11/22/05 at 09:46 AM

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 9:51am

As far as Sondheim as collaborator, my problem hasn't been with his ability to write a song that furthers the plot, or furthers the character. My problem has been that more often than not with Sondheim, the style of the book doesn't match the style of the music (for example, one is a two-dimensional farce, and one is intimately realistic). As a collaborator, what Sondheim seems to have not done is to switch up his style to fit the book. I think that gives a director a very difficult task of favoring one over the other (you've got to pick, or you'll get panned). Now mind you, I usually think the style Sondheim chooses for his music is far smarter than the book writer, but I have noticed this trend with Sondheim. This is also not to say that sometimes this juxt makes for an interesting theatre piece. I just am not sure that this choice is always a choice. I would also assert that a good collaborator would have many many meetings deciding the style of the show before putting pen to paper (or keys to software).

[fiatlux]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 9:53am

touchmeinthemorning, I think you would need to give specifics, because frankly that strikes me as being very far from the truth...

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 10:00am

Ok, we'll start with a few:

Passion (BBCish book, ultra-modern (almost atonal) score)

Into the Woods (farce book, romantic score -- with a few exceptions)

Anyone Can Whistle (need we even go into this incongruency?)

[fiesta1]

Posted: 11/22/05 at 10:05am

As a disclaimer, I must say that I too am a huge Sondheim fan. But my SO really does not like him (so I often go alone). So to mention Sondheim's flaws, I will channel my SO:

The music is just too darn difficult for singers/musicians who are not adequately trained to master. Rogers/Hammerstein are part of the American canon because hundreds of productions of their work are launched each year (decades after they were written). How many community theatres or colleges attempt Follies, Sweeney or Passion? And how many do NOT massacre it? I've seen HS productions of Into The Woods and Forum (the most accessible works) that are missing the complexity of the music and lyrics. It is very hard to do a 'smashing' production if the company is not trained and near-professional.

The lyrics require careful listening. The attention paid to the lyrics often means that you miss other elements of the production. The lyrics are also based from the American cultural idiom and are difficult for non-native speakers to understand.

Sondheim is also not afraid of chord changes, dissonance, and complexity in the music. Some listeners frequenty find this jarring and unpleasant (and yes, these folks likely hate rap too). Many do not want to pay $100 for a ticket for music that grates on their nerves (just as many classical music fans avoid Phillip Glass).

He also frequently tackles unusual subject matters that do not readily lend themselves to musical comedy. My SO feels that pure Broadway Hell would be if he was paired with Paula Vogel to write the book to anything. Come to think of it, "How I Learned to Drive" or 'Hot N'Throbbing' are the types of material he likes..... With the exception of Into the Woods, Sondheim musicals are not the type that typical Times Square tourists relish.