^^^
Phyllis, Sondheim's erudition is amply demonstrated apart from the shows he has written. (In contrast, I took a class from Lee Adams in college and he's a very nice man, but not a musical theater historian. Students ended up teaching the history part of the class while Adams told very interesting and useful stories about his own work.)
But renowned scholars disagree all the time. You are certainly right that we don't have to agree just because Sondheim says something.
I still think the Times article just had so many stupid remarks in one place that it demanded a response.
To me, if a lullaby has to be in a low key so as not to wake the baby, then why are people singing at all throughout the rest of the show? (BTW, I repeated the same musical theater history course under critic Martin Gottfried. He argued that the film of Cabaret was a "breakthrough" because the songs were performed only as "on stage" songs and not as people singing their inner thoughts. He boldly predicted the convention of people singing asides to the audience would soon disappear. I thought he was an idiot and time proved me right.)
I know Sondheim criticizes "I Feel Pretty" in naturalistic terms and I find that unfortunate. The truth is he and Harnick (who first pointed out the alleged problem) employ a convention in which rhyme indicates intellect and education. So the problem isn't that Maria isn't true to her social class in real life, but that she isn't true to the conventions ("rules") Sondheim chooses to employ for a serious musical play. (In my experience, idiots rhyme like crazy in musical comedy, just as children and rappers do.)
ETA I think this long, rambling post needs a summary. In short, musical theater has always been a product of conventions over realism. When people talk like they don't know the conventions, we should be suspicious.
Updated On: 8/17/11 at 07:39 PM
