Sondheim's weaker lyrics/rhymes — Page 5

I want to hit the nonexistent like button on g.d.e.l.g.i.'s post

Exactly - I think it's fine for someone to say "I don't like X," particularly when they can state an articulate and well-informed reason why. But that's a far cry from saying "this lyric is weak," or stating that the Tempest is "dramaturgically weak."

But if you're someone who says that the Tempest is "dramaturgically weak," you're probably not going to say instead "although I know it's acknowledged by better (and perhaps worse) minds than mine to be a masterpiece, I don't quite get Prospero's latter motivations."

Then they should be able to explain why.

---

In response to After Eight's complaint that no other lyricist is as studied and analyzed as Sondheim...

In the eighteenth century, often considered the golden age of British poetry, there was a schism in popular imagination between two different schools of poetry. The first, the Wits (led by Alexander Pope and John Gay), held that the best poetry was that which showed wit: that which expressed what everyone may have thought or felt, but better than they could have said it. The second, the Visionaries (led by John Milton and Isaac Watts), insisted that great poetry came from unique individual inspiration and expression, that which no one but the specific poet could have created for its idiosyncratic uniqueness.

That schism has never healed. It's fairly easy to sort writers of today into Wit and Visionary categories, but very rarely do the two sides actually meet. The Visionaries, however, tend to get more analysis, since in writers where there is little ambiguity there can be little actual debate. Can one debate layers of meaning, contradiction and ambiguity in Jerry Herman? Not very easily, although that doesn't mean Jerry Herman is bad or a lesser writer. But visionary complexity is not Herman's bag- he is a Wit. He gives voice to life sentiments that all have felt, yet none have said as well as him.

I understand completely what you say, and would definitely ask for a different lyric for the Mysteriousgrowl musical.

But Rose isn't you; what can be truly wonderful about other people is how they're different, and how they think and express themselves in ways we might not. In other words, we explore them, rather than expecting them to adhere to our expectations. (or, at least, that's what I like to think.)

Updated On: 12/30/13 at 12:39 PM

Does that make sense?

No, not really.

You're missing the point that people frequently make offhand references to chronological age equating infirmity or inactivity. It's part of common everyday speech to say things like "I feel so old" or "I'm not that old!" or "Oh, come on, you're not that old" or "Stop acting like such an old woman." So for Rose to say the lyrical equivalent of "That's okay for old people but not for me" is good character writing.

But, yes, you have every right to question, "Why 105"? Is it just for the rhyme? Perhaps, but the history of songwriting provides much more cringe-worthy examples of words shoe-horned in just for a rhyme. And, besides, people often use an uneven number to make a point: It can seem more emphatic to say "if I live to be a hundred and a half..." or "if I live to be 117..." than to simply say "if I live to be a hundred..."

But if it really bothers you that the rhyming lyric has her say "some people of 105," what would be your solution? To have something else there that doesn't rhyme? To have her not refer to age at all because "105-year-olds can be full of joie de vivre"?

Okay, then, here's your assignment: Finish that quatrain with two lines that are better than "That's okay for some people / Of one hundred and five." All right, GO!

But don't forget that the beginning of that verse refers to people who live their lives in living rooms: meaning that they stay at home and go nowhere and do nothing, for their whole lives. It's possible, isn't it, that idea leads inexorably and inevitably to the idea of STILL being in that living room at a chronological age equaling something around a hundred? Well, let's see what you come up with.

The point is that so many of the examples in this thread--from using "career" as a verb to "not even figs...raisins" to "instead of just kept on" to "better than not"--are not "weak lyrics" or cheats"--they are twists on colloquialisms, versions of things people say, idiosyncratic choices that define character.

They "bother" you not because they're "weak," but because they are sharp.

---

Updated On: 12/30/13 at 01:03 PM

I meant it seriously, as a sort of game. I'll offer one myself--see if it's any better than Sondheim's:

Some people can thrive and bloom
Living life in the living room.
That's perfect for some people
But no way to survive.

But I...

Better than 105?

---

I do like that better, PJ, no facetiousness at all.

The logic is better, more consistent, and the lyric is smoother.

And I did take your challenge seriously and wrote my own.

You can see that we approached it the same way.

“Some people can get a thrill
Knitting sweaters and sitting still
That's okay for some people
Who don't know they're alive

Some people can thrive and bloom
Living life in a living room
That's perfect for some people
Content just to survive”

I like both yours and mine better than Sondheim's.

Burn me at the stake.

---

Updated On: 12/30/13 at 01:38 PM

Growler--what kind of message board would that be if people explained their comments? I think you should just hang out at datalounge.

I prefer it too. Does that place me in Hell? (Which looks a lot more fun if it's PJs Hell--do I have to disagree with certain other posters to make sure I get into his?)

I have never had a problem with Prospero's revelation, nor with his decision to break his staff and give up magic. Nor with his difficulty in letting Ariel go free, nor with his startling acceptance of Caliban with "this thing of darkness, I acknowledge mine."

It's all there in the text, for them what's open to seeing it.


Since I've never heard a p*ucking Ph.D. use "career" as a verb, I have to wonder how the hell Carlotta knows it?!

Oh fer chrissakes, stop going on about "career" as a verb. It was common in the early twentieth century, when Carolotta was a girl. She uses it--wittily--because saying career three times emphasizes just how many career changes she's had.

To paraphrase Shakespeare: There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your PhD program.

---

Updated On: 12/30/13 at 05:53 PM

Personally, I have no problem with Prospero's actions because it's always seemed clear to me that he always intended to forgive everyone and rejoin the world (like Dolly Levi). I'd need to revisit the text to remember why this is how I've always seen it, but there you are. It is clear that his efforts to keep Ferdinand and Miranda apart are clearly sham and more of an effort to bring them together, so it's not much more of a jump to see the trials he puts upon the others as tests to improve them (like El Gallo's role in The Fantasticks - he doesn't want to take Luisa from Matt, but he knows they both need to be hurt before they can grow).