Sondheim / Llyod Webber Subject Matter...some thoughts- Page 2

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 4:52pm

It is stupid. I guess that's what I'm getting at. There's no comparison.

I thought my prose was pretty clear, but I'll clarify for Spider and FreeAdmission if they're done patting each other on the back. Please go back and reread my post. What I was saying is that Sondheim, as an invidivual, writes his own lyrics and his own music. I believe that lyrics are a vital element of musical theater because the meaning and messages of the story, and the character and personality must be conveyed through the lyrics. Andrew Lloyd Webber not only does not write his own lyrics, but he picks lyricists who write nothing but cliches, over and over. You could mix the lyrics up in a Webber show to no ill effect. That said, this does not have anything to do with Andrew Lloyd Webber's personal worth to the musical theater, just in relation to Stephen Sondheim. It's like saying two people are worth as much as one person, you dig? Yes, Rogers and Hammerstein contributed seperately to different areas for musical theater, but Sondheim contributed to both of those areas as just one person. That's just what I'm saying. He's important both as a lyricist and as a composer seperately.

It's stupid to imply that I'm saying being just a composer is less important. Richard Rodgers contributed enormously to the sound of musical theater. And he hardly wrote simple music. A composer of merit will garner the acknowledgement they deserve. I believe that in their day Sullivan was very jealous of Gilbert because his music was usually little more than incident to set Gilbert's lyrics to.

Porter, Berlin, Rodgers, etc... they wrote complicated music. It just happened to be the popular music of the day. There's all kinds of things to be said about, say Jerome Kern's music, which is apparently "simple". It's craft, not simplicity. If you look at Webber's shows, the ones that enjoy immense popularity are the ones that are very gimmicky. I'd go see a show if they were going to have a falling chandelier halfway through. That's cool. That's like Cirque Du Soleil. And gimmicks have their place too. That's why I say there's no comparison.

Andrew Lloyd Webber has worked with good lyricists who were obviously influenced by the better lyricists that preceded them, Sondheim included. Namely Tim Rice. In fact, I wouldn't call Tim Rice's lyrics simplistic. I think they're precocious. Not really that great, but certainly trying, at least.

Andrew Lloyd Webber has had absolutely no influence on the world of composition. He did not invent recitative, the sung through musical, or gothic/controversal subject matter. In fact, the point of musical theater is contentiously to NOT be sung through. You move the story through SONGS, not dialogue set to music. When you blur the line you're moving into another area, and there are people who do it well and people who don't. If he championed anything, he championed the Come Up With 7 Melodies And Just Use Them Over and Over musical. Who invents anything? What has Sondheim invented? I don't see how a person is being revolutionary by simply singing the recitative to guitars instead of brass. I don't really see him taking us forwards very often rather than backwards, man, is all I'm saying.

While I'm not trying to raise Stephen Sondheim on a golden pedestal (although he does deserve it!) I'm just saying that if you really look at it seriously, Andrew Lloyd Webber is little more than a glorified tune smith. While there's merit in being a good tune smith, lots of people are good tune smiths.

PS, The Who's Tommy (another rock opera) came out before Jesus Christ Superstar, but I do find JCS, as I pointed out, to be one of his better shows. But in other words, somebody wrote a sung through musical to guitars before he did.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 5:04pm

You are right. Both men are seperate (if that makes any kind of sense). And like I said, I am not damning either of them and I love them both for different reasons. We cool?

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 5:52pm

For sure.

After all that though, it did make me think of a subject matter relationship.

Has anybody else felt like Franklin Shephard from Merrily We Roll Along is similiar to Andrew Lloyd Webber a little bit? I'm not knocking Webber, but just how the character becomes this big corporation, and how all of his songs are a variation on one song. I feel like the character is less autobiographical of Sondheim as he reminds me of Webber.

Updated On: 4/15/06 at 05:52 PM

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 6:40pm

What musical is this from again? Sorry, but I am having a severe brain fart.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 8:55pm

I don't see the Franklin Sheperd/Lloyd Webber comparison. Franklin is a composer who is VERY good, almost genius. He sells out not by making commercial shows, but by leaving composing altogether. He leaves his passion for the fame and money of producing in the film world. I don't see how that has anything to do with Webber. Sure he writes big splashy commercial musicals, but I really believe that Webber is doing his best to make it a quality production.

[GovernorSlaton]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:13pm

I'm not getting that either. Shepard (especially at the end...well, really the "beginning") is most definitely Sondheim. He's said that "Opening Doors" is the only consciously autobiographical song he ever wrote, and songs like "Bobby and Jackie and Jack" and "Good Thing Going" bear more than a passing resemblance to Sondheim's early material. Sure, he sells out in the end (well, the beginning...never mind), but that doesn't remind me of Webber -- he's a Hollywood producer who's turned his back on musicals, not a composer writing splashy spectacles.

Anyway, I don't like to get into Sondheim/Webber arguments, but suffice it to say that one's body of work is miles ahead of the other (and it doesn't contain "Tell Me on a Sunday").

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 9:57pm

April 15, 2006--NYC

At a breakfast press conference held this morning at Angus McIndoe, Stephen Sondheim and Harold Prince announced that the upcoming concert performance of Bounce, being held May 9 as a benefit for The Actor's Fund of America, will not, as originally planned, simply be a sing-though of the the score as it was performed in try-out engagements in Chicago and Washington DC. Instead, the original cast will perform a complete read-through of a newly-revised version of Bounce intended for Broadway, written with the assistance of the newest member of their creative team, Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber.

"I've been trying to get Andrew involved with this project ever since Chicago", explained Prince, "but obviously it's a delicate subject to bring up to any composer/lyricist. Especially one as accomplished as Steve."

Sondheim nodded quietly as Prince continued.

"I love Stephen Sondheim. The man is a genius and our working relationship has always been based on total honesty. And the honest truth is that Bounce requires a type of score he's not accustomed to writing. It's a vaudeville-style musical comedy that needs catchy tunes, and let's face it, Steve hasn't written a catchy tune since "Comedy Tonight".

The twenty time Tony Award winning director/producer chuckled warmly as the Pulitzer Prize winning dramatist gave a brief smile and softly grunted.

"If I may interrupt for a moment please", requested Lloyd Webber, "I'd like to make it clear that I have not written a single note of music for Bounce, nor do I intend to. My role in this project is to provide coaching for Mr. Sondheim. His work is certainly brilliant without help, but I've simply been making suggestions on how to make his melodies more accessible to the public."

"Yes, people somehow get the notion that I don't like Andrew", Sondheim added, "or that I don't respect his music, but that can't be further from the truth. We have different goals in the types of musicals we write. He and Hal have had a very successful partnership mounting two long-running popular hits. The success of Phantom and Evita speak for themselves, and it's only natural that if we're trying to put on a more audience-pleasing show we should take some hints from the best. And I'm sure Andrew knows that if he ever wants to try writing a Pulitzer Prize winner he can come to me for assistance."

"That would be lovely but I'm afraid I'd have to relinquish my English citizenship for that and the Queen would renounce my knighthood.", joked the three time Tony winner.

"But seriously", Sondheim continued, "Andrew has been very valuable in demonstrating how unnecessary it is to use a surplus of words in getting a lyrical point across. I've always relied on intricate rhyme schemes, alliteration and rapid-fire patter to tell my stories completely, but working with Andrew has taught me that most people find that sort of thing just plain annoying and they'd rather hear simple, repetitive lyrics which don't get in the way of the melody."

"And let me tell you", added Prince, "the actors complain about it all the time. Who can learn all those words?"

Lloyd Webber explained, "I've always encouraged my lyricists to just come up with one or two important points for a song, and to keep writing variations on them that can fill up thirty-two measures. You don't need to keep hitting the audience over the head with details. For example, everyone knows the story of Jesus Christ. Tim Rice didn't have to explain to the audience who Mary Magdalene or Pontius Pilate was. A brief outline that could support choral pieces and high belting solos was all that was necessary. Same with Evita. Maybe not everyone is familiar with the story of Juan and Eva Peron, but really, it's a brutal dictator and his ambitious wife. How much more do you need to know? Do you think anyone has ever understood a word that any Eva has ever sung during "A New Argentina"? Of course not. But the high belting tells you she's a strong and passionate woman and that's all that matters."

"Yes", Sondheim agreed, "fewer words and more high belting."

"And don't ever forget the power of visuals in telling a story.", Lloyd Webber continued, "Visuals give information far quicker than words and they don't get in the way of your melodies. For example, the first act of Bounce takes place during the Alaska Gold Rush. Now, instead of having pages and pages of dialogue and lyrics saying "Oh, we're in Alaska, gee it's cold" we'll be having an enormous glacier appear on stage. Well, actually it is rather small for a glacier, but on the stage it really is very impressive."

"You should see what (set designer) Eugene Lee has come up with!", chimed Prince. "Just looking at it makes me chilly."

"And act two takes place in Florida. They're on the beach for goodness sake, but previously the audiences never saw the ocean. So what we've devised -- this is really quite brilliant -- is a musical interlude where the glacier is inside this huge plexiglas tank and it melts under these enormous heat lamps. And when the whole thing is finished we have the Atlantic Ocean. Stephen has even written a new song for Richard Kind to sing while swimming in the ocean. It's a very catchy melody called "I Like to Swim in the Ocean."

"At first I was reluctant to write the song", added Sondheim, "because I couldn't figure out how anyone could sing while swimming in a tank of water. But then Andrew taught me about the value of lip-syncing."

"Lip-syncing is an important tool if you want your score sung properly for eight performances a week." explained Lloyd Webber."The so-called "purists" complain that it's not really live theatre, but lip-syncing helps insure that your star will be able to perform a tremendously difficult score with lots of high belting every single time. Do you want understudies going on continually because the stars are ruining their voices by trying to sing impossibly high notes every night? That's what theatre without lip-syncing gets you."

At this point Harold Prince read the following statement from Bounce's book writer, John Weidman, who was not present at the press conference:
"I'm very excited to have another opportunity to work on Bounce with a firm belief that we can create a musical deserving of a successful Broadway run. In revising the book I've taken the advice of several colleagues, all of whom asked to remain nameless, and have been reading comments posted on theatre web sites, especially those from people with bootleg videos of our Chicago and Washington engagements. Although they are certainly illegal, comments posted by those who own bootlegs are perhaps the best resource we have in making creative decisions. When you ask an audience member after a performance what they thought of the show you usually get comments like "I didn't like that character" or "Most of the jokes weren't funny", but that doesn't help you pinpoint specific trouble spots. People who own bootlegs are generally passionate and knowledgeable theatre-goers who watch the videos over and over again and are able to point out exactly which jokes don't work and what is needed to create more interest in the story. I wish to thank all those who express opinions on theatre web sites and let them know that we who create musicals are paying very close attention to your posts. You are having a tremendous effect on the future of Broadway."

Although the press conference ended without an opportunity for questions, the voice of Michael Riedel could be heard from the back of the room as the threesome rose to leave:
"Steve! How do you think your fans are going to react to you taking advice from that limey hack?"

"Who gives a damn about them?" Sondheim muttered as Prince gingerly led him out of the room. "If I can live the rest of my life without another over-analytical social outcast telling me how Sunday in the Park with George changed his life I could die a happy man."

[TheEnchantedHunter]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 10:07pm

"Andrew Lloyd Webber has had absolutely no influence on the world of composition. He did not invent recitative, the sung through musical, or gothic/controversal subject matter."

Absolutely untrue. Lloyd Webber has had much more of an influence than Sondheim, pioneering the sung-through musical (JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR) way before Sondheim ever did and choosing esoteric subject matter in the process.

Vivian Darkbloom
Ramsdale, New England

[dirty rotten guy]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 10:13pm

For me, Lloyd Webber's show generally seem very dated when you revisit them, while Sondheim almost always creates a piece of theater that is timeless.

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 10:27pm

Franklin Sheperd isn't Sondheim either. He vehemently denys that. I think writing what you know is much different than writing you. Merrily is a Sondheim writing about the business he knows.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/15/06 at 10:52pm

Hm, I wasn't saying the character and the person are exactly alike. I was getting at a joke without trying to offend the Webber acolytes. Franklin is always singing the same song in the show, and it seems like Webber is always writing the same song.

While the character has little to do with Sondheim, he's said himself, and somebody else has already pointed this out, that "Opening Doors" is a pretty much autobiographical account of his creative process. I think the show has very little to do with his life though.

There is this one line where Frank says "I saw My Fair Lady. I sort of enjoyed it." That sounds like something Sondheim would say to me.

Andrew Lloyd Webber did not invent the concept of a sung through musical (a thinly veiled operetta/opera), nor was he the first person to choose esoteric subject matter. As per usual he's just taking something that was successfully done before and reproducing it, which by most accounts is a pretty smart move. I still fail to see Webber's influence beyond inspiring exact clones.

While his subject matter itself may be occasionally heady (a hipped out 60s Jesus Christ, Eva Peron, etc...) it's my personal opinion that his shows don't have all that many ideas in their heads. It's like Chuck Palahniuk. Lots of style, not a lot of substance.

Updated On: 4/15/06 at 10:52 PM

[Sumofallthings]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 1:16am

What exactly is the accomplishment of the sung-through musical?

[jackson992]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 5:25am

I'm still waiting to hear a good Sondheim score.

Cats while not my favorite script, the songs are heads above Company.

Trying to compare Phantom to anything Sondheim has written is just plain ridiculous.

The biggest thing to me is I can't think of many Sondheim songs that are sung everywhere. Webbers naturally I can. Several from Phantom, several from Sunset Boulevard, Cats of course made Memory famous, the list goes on.

[jasonf]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 12:27pm

jackson - are you just LOOKING for trouble? Seriously? You sound ignorant and idiotic and better put up some kind of defences because the villagers with pitchforks will be knocking at your door any day now.

Anyone who says "Gumbie Cat" is a better song than "Getting Married Today" -- well....the lack of taste is just astounding.

Comapring Phantom to Sweeney Todd (which is probably the closest in terms of content between the two) is like comparing an Atari to a PS3. The former is not without its charms, but the latter is WAY better.

And as for "sung everywhere" -- A)popularity does not equal quality, B)At one time "Macarena" was being sung everywhere. Does that make it a great song?

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 12:32pm

I believe there was a time in American life when "(How Much) is that Doggie in the Window" was the number one song on the radio. People'll listen to anything, apparently many many times!

I love it. I just picture somebody rolling on in with a cigar in his mouth, saying "Youse punks lookin' for trouble? Well youse found it likewise!" and rolling up his sleeves and going to town. "Sondheim aint better than Webber no how no way!"

[FranklinShepard-Inc.]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 12:46pm

Is this discussion a serious one?

[jasonf]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 1:33pm

Sadly...

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 1:50pm

Hey, there was some quasi interesting discourse. I'm still waiting to hear about Andrew Lloyd Webber's influence and contribution to music though.

[jackson992]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 2:20pm

"Anyone who says "Gumbie Cat" is a better song than "Getting Married Today" -- well....the lack of taste is just astounding. "

Of course Gumbie is a better song. If you had picked something else I might have been able to agree with you. But Getting Mariied Today is definitely not what I would call a good song.

Comparing Phantom to Sweeney is indeed comparing PS3 to Atari. Sweeney is just horrible music. I couldn't believe they revied it or the terrible Assassins.

I'll agree to Macarena being a good song. It's got a great rhthm and good lyrics the things that make a song "good". No one can deny the greatness of songs like All I Ask of You, Close Every Door, With One Look, Don't Cry For Me Argentina. I will say Children Will Listen by Sondheim isn't too bad. Unfortunately he just doesn't have as much of these high quality songs as Webber.

[pandajen14]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 2:26pm

Jackson, you seriously just made my day.

[jackson992]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 2:30pm

*rushes off to play The Woman In White*

[Jazzysuite82]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 2:42pm

This is obviously sarcasm that's gotten waaaaay outta hand. In case this ISN'T sarcasm you should be aware that while Webber is everywhere, so is Sondheim. YOu need only listen to a Babs album, watch the Simpsons, the first season of Desperate Housewives, Warren Beatty's Reds, See Dick Tracy, Listen to Sinatra. The list goes on. THAT'S only the music AND lyric contributions. His lyrical contributions are even greater.

[jackson992]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 3:11pm

I could maybe agree with Sinatra but the rest of that list just isn't that popular. And still doesn't touch on the fact that Webber's music is better musically.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 3:14pm

What's The Simpsons?

[jasonf]

Posted: 4/16/06 at 3:16pm

jazzysuite - the sad thing is, I don't think jackson's being sarcastic -- if he is, then he's not doing a very good job of it.

I can't take anyone seriously who thinks Getting Married Today is not a good song. I'd respect you if you said that you liked Gumbie Cat better at least, but to just say that GMT is not a good song, you just blew whatever chance you had at a reasonable argument with me (or many on this board).

Plus, we're now talking about someone who thinks THESE:

"When I dance they call me macarena
and the boys they say that I´m buena
they all want me, they can´t have me
So they all come and dance beside me
move with me jam with me
and if your good i take you home with me"

Are good lyrics. At least now we know what we're dealing with.