Was Sondheim a better composer or lyricist

[Theatrefanboy1]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 5:44pm

After attending both here we are and merrily we roll along (the later I preferred 10x over). I’m curious if Sondheim served better as a composer or lyricist overall in his career. Some of his lyricist are brilliant and yet he has some great compositions at times as well

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 5:59pm

Not a very insightful answer, but I think he was equally good at both. If I had to choose, I'd say music. Some of his lyrics exist only so he can indulge in his love of language. They are not there for any other purpose.

[joevitus]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 7:11pm

Jay Lerner-Z said: "Not a very insightful answer, but I think he was equally good at both. If I had to choose, I'd say music. Some of his lyrics exist only so he can indulge in his love of language. They are not there for any other purpose."

While I don't agree that some of his lyrics were just there for love of language (though, yes, he loved word play, and was an unparalleled practitioner of it), I agree he was about equally adept at both and I agree that his music has a slight edge.

There is for me, at times, a sort of...how do I say this and not offend anyone?...mechanistic quality to the lyrics he wrote for other composers: West Side Story, Gypsy, Do I Hear A Waltz?, and even for his own music with Forum. I know that "mechanistic" isn't the right word. "Impersonal" would be wrong, too, probably. But I don't feel an emotional engagement. They feel like five finger exercises. And I feel like, if he could do what he's doing lyrically in all of his shows better than anyone else, other people could still have done it. His music, on the other hand, is simply unlike anyone else's, and to my mind overflows with emotion. 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 7:42pm

I think Sondheim himself would agree with your assessment, joevitus. He realized on Do I Hear A Waltz? that he only took the job out of duty to Oscar Hammerstein, and resolved to never do it again. I don't think he did. Only projects from the heart from then on in.

I know he didn't like all of Gypsy's lyrics. He thought "Mr. Goldstone" was just one long drawn-out joke that stopped being funny long before the end.

With his music, sometimes I'm not sure who exactly deserves the credit on the parts I love. For example. the sax on Losing My Mind. Adds so much. Is that Sondheim of Jonathan Tunick? Orchestrators deserve more attention.

[JasonC3]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 7:49pm

I think he was highly capable in both with certain shows and certain songs within a show demonstrating his prowess in one slightly more than the other. 

Given what a perfectionist he was, I concur with joevitus that his lyrics were purposeful and not just for show. The fact that they often are more intricate, unique, clever, or memorable compared to other composers might give some people the wrong impression. 

But as people who perform his songs regularly say, they come from (and advance) the character and the story. Less likely to do that if your goal is to show how clever you are.

 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 8:00pm

Overall, I think his lyrics are excellent, yeah. Just on occasion, he goes that little bit too far. For this I deduct two marks, but still give him 98/100.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 11:08pm

Both. But I will defend the lyricist position. While he does have some rather hummable melodies in his work, if you remove them and just play them as instrumentals, I think a lot of the songs suffer. The lyrics are the animating force that's needed to give the melodies life and purpose. The music is like an instruction for how to deliver the words. I wouldn't judge him on his "worst" lyrics because his best efforts were when he was able to find the language to express the characters' feelings. And some of the songs in Do I Hear A Waltz? are still decent. 

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 11/12/23 at 11:23pm

I agree with VintageSnarker in that I think all his lyrics are very purposeful and he has some wonderful turns of phrases (sure some of them may feel overly clever, but Sondheim himself was very aware of when the lyricist was showing off too much, especially when looking back on his earlier work), and well there's a whole podcast dedicated to analyzing his lyrics. 

I think his music is excellent at serving the story and the lyrics he writes, but many times taken on their own, I don't find them particularly engaging outside of the context of the story.  And of course, all due credit to Jonathan Tunick as well for orchestrating so many of the great scores.  And in general, people say that Sondheim always preferred to work with actors who could sing rather than singers who could act, so many songs are written in a way that flows well between dialogue and song (again, serving the story and scene well), but may not be as "satisfying" (not the right word, but hopefully close enough) to listen to just as songs (I think a lot of the Sunday score is like this for me).

 

[binau]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 3:24am

It's hard when I think he is by far the best musical theatre composer AND lyricist. However, for me I would actually go against the grain and say he is a better composer - and his musical ideas are not just good in the context of musical theatre, but good in the context of music more broadly in my opinion. There is a certain sense of magic about scores such as Sweeney Todd, Sunday in the Park with George, Follies etc. that make the quality of his work seem to transcend into a new dimension. And I don't think literally any other musical theatre composer is anywhere near close. 

[baritonewithtenortendencies]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 9:31am

I think he is both one of the best lyricists and composers in Broadway history. However, there are composers that compete with him or even surpass him. Leonard Bernstein comes to mind. William Finn and Jason Robert Brown are similar quality at their best, as well. However, I don't think any other Broadway lyricist has ever reached the absurd heights of Sondheim. Lyrics were easy and effortless for him. He is to lyrics what Alan Menken is to melody. I think Sondheim is the greatest lyricist in Broadway history, and certainly amongst the best composers. 

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 10:10am

I wouldn't judge on the basis of whether his songs stand alone. That was never what he was aiming for, so I think it's unfair to see that as a flaw.

As for "purpose", too often the only purpose is to rhyme. Impressively. Is that worth it?

One of his poorer rhymes, at least for me, is in Sweeney Todd. What makes Sweeney's eye odd? The Sweeneys that I've seen all had perfectly fine eyes.

[Alex Kulak2]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 11:37am

It's worth noting that Sondheim was on record saying that he found writing music more gratifying than writing lyrics. There was an interview where he was asked if there were any composers that'd he'd be willing to write just lyrics for again. He said no, and that on the contrary, there were some lyricists he'd be willing to write just music for.

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 11:40am

Jay Lerner-Z said: "One of his poorer rhymes, at least for me, is in Sweeney Todd. What makes Sweeney's eye odd? The Sweeneys that I've seen all had perfectly fine eyes."

I’m going to assume you’re just joking around, but for argument’s sake, I’ll take this at face value. He clearly means “eye” in the context of something like “an eye for fashion.” It’s not a literal eyeball that’s odd (I’m imagining Mad-Eye Moody), but his outlook. And Sweeney’s view of the world is certainly odd. He’s nihilistic and blinded by his rage; a complete psychopath. He looks scary and his worldview is warped. Very odd, indeed.

Updated On: 11/13/23 at 11:40 AM

[kdogg36]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 11:43am

Jay Lerner-Z said: "I wouldn't judge on the basis of whether his songs stand alone. That was never what he was aiming for, so I think it's unfair to see that as a flaw."

I was going to say the same thing. If the songs fit so well in context that it's difficult to separate them from that context, or if the music ebbs and flows with the dialog so freely that it's difficult to isolate a pure "song" to perform outside the show, these are features, not bugs. 

Regarding your comment about the saxophone in "Losing My Mind," it's my understanding that Sondheim's orchestrators rarely, if ever, introduced any new material in the accompaniment that he didn't write himself. I remember reading (somewhere, long ago), about Sondheim's reaction to Tunick introducing a "Someone is Waiting" countermelody in the leadup to "Being Alive"; it stayed in the score, but Sondheim apparently took notice that it wasn't in what he had handed over to Tunick. Much later, as discussed in Sondheim on Music, Starobin had attempted to elaborate on Sondheim's accompaniment in his on-spec demo orchestration for Sunday in the Park with George, and had to be told that it was meant to be deliberately spare; they never had a problem after that.

Long story short, Sondheim may or may not have specified that those melodies in "Losing My Mind" were meant for a saxophone, but they were almost certainly in the score he prepared for Tunick to orchestrate.

Updated On: 11/13/23 at 11:43 AM

[verywellthensigh]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 11:48am

Better than who?

[kdogg36]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 11:49am

ColorTheHours048 said: "I’m going to assume you’re just joking around, but for argument’s sake, I’ll take this at face value. He clearly means “eye” in the context of something like “an eye for fashion.” "

For what it's worth, I've always taken it the way Jay does, and have never thought of your interpretation. The full phrase is "his skin was pale and his eye was odd," which seems to be in the realm of physical description.

I think it's been discussed here and elsewhere about the observations contained in "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" not being entirely in keeping with what we've seen in the show. Although many of those who sing the song are ostensibly characters from the show, it seems like they're telling the story as a received legend rather than as witness accounts.

[rattleNwoolypenguin]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 12:05pm

I don't know how to answer this.

He was meticulous in his compositions and committed himself to every show having a specific voice. There is so much intelligence that went into how he crafted his scores just watch him talk in any of those videos on youtube where he describes what's going on musically. It's not just "Songs" it's scoring with intention always. He was like a classical composer in that way. It was never phoned in. It was motivic, it was inspired by other types of music, he crafted a melodic theme out of the concept of pointillism for god's sake.

His lyrics were for the story and characters. He wrote lyrics to serve the story and they always did. His cleverness always gets remarked upon- his cleverness kept the songs buoyant. Musical theatre is a heightened art form and he knew WHEN to use the cleverness and when to have his lyrics feel like grounded conversation and when to hit you with a universal truth.

There is no "which is better" cause both music and lyrics he came at with the same approach. He was a singular storyteller in every element of his craft.

I think there are other composer lyricists you can weigh music and lyrics next to each other.

I don't think you can with him. When you can analyze and mine so much from looking at the harmonic structure and accompaniment and melody of his work and then separately mine how much his lyrics are doing for the story,

You have someone who can't be in a contest. 

[rattleNwoolypenguin]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 12:18pm

As for his lyric writing for West Side, Gypsy and Do I Hear a Waltz?

He was a kid, and he got better every time and those lyrics still dance circles around many of his peers at the time and they range from great to mixed. When the lyrics in those shows are good they're REALLY good. 

And he had MAJOR critiques of some of his lyrics for those shows in hindsight so you can't even fault him cause he learned what to do differently and kept growing, kept learning and really took so much wisdom from other artists to heart.

That's important too. Many of the greats never changed their approach, never wandered far from how they were writing.

He kept evolving.

 

 

[ColorTheHours048]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 12:31pm

kdogg36 said: "ColorTheHours048 said: "The full phrase is "his skin was pale and his eye was odd," which seems to be in the realm of physical description.

…Although many of those who sing the song are ostensibly characters from the show, it seems like they're telling the story as a received legend rather than as witness accounts."

We could parse the lyrics in “The Ballad of Sweeney Todd” forever and find all kinds of interpretations. It just doesn’t make much sense to me that they would describe his actual eye as “odd”. It feels like such a throwaway observance, and far too specific. The line feels more like “He looked weird and he acted weird”; a general statement on his character and not a literal description of his appearance. Given that it’s the second line in the show, it makes more sense - again, to me, personally - to have them speak in generalizations than specifics.

The fact that we can break down one line from one song - the opening, no less - I think is a testament to his lyrical prowess. Maybe he did mean to imply “Legend has it, Sweeney had a weird eye thing going on.” It scans either way and gets the point across that they’re disseminating gossip.

 

[JasonC3]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 12:45pm

Sweeney is an off-putting dude. "His skin was pale and his eye was odd" seems like a perfectly apt lyric to describe that even if the actor's physicality doesn't 100% reflect either.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 12:53pm

Thanks Color and kdogg, I hadn't considered either of those interpretations. Perspective on the world, or exaggerated witness recollection. Both make sense!

I suppose I was joking around, in the sense that it is not a big deal to me, but I feel the only reason he had an "odd" eye is because that word happens to rhyme with Sweeney's surname.

[rattleNwoolypenguin]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 1:01pm

Re "his eye was odd" don't forget, Sweeney is heightened Music Hall theatre.

Not everything is super literal. It's just wacky big storytelling. 

And the greek chorus is talking about Sweeney like he's a legend they retell.

 

[BeingAlive44Ever]

Posted: 11/13/23 at 11:47pm

Alex Kulak2 said: "It's worth noting that Sondheim was on record saying that he found writing music more gratifying than writing lyrics. There was an interview where he was asked if there were any composers that'd he'd be willing to write just lyrics for again. He said no, and that on the contrary, there were some lyricists he'd be willing to write just music for."

I have seen this and I don't doubt this

I told my voice coach about it and what she had to say was that she thinks Sondheim just had a very easy time writing lyrics

I mean when you hear a Sondheim song the lyrics work so well that generally you think more about the music than anything else

When you think more about the lyrics, there's an intuitive brilliance to them unlike anything else on Broadway

And like can we all drop any pretense and agree that most lyrics of songs on Broadway sacrifice being musically sound for the story

Even some of my favorite musicals and lyricists sometimes set the lyrics so badly 

Like I love Elegies so much but freaking Mark's All Male Thanksgiving 

Amazing tune often great lyrics but so often you just hear that William Finn wanted to tell the story but didn't want to change the tune and it got in his way 

Sondheim had mentors such as Richard Rodgers and Leonard Bernstein who were way more musically inclined than him 

Some of the greatest composers of the last two centuries, I would say 

And Sondheim didn't grow up doing music so much

He once said, also, in that same interview you mentioned, that he would've been a playwright if he could be

I think music was more fulfilling for Sondheim because he knew exactly how to tell his story flawlessly and how to write lyrics to whatever he was given 

He thinks some of his lyrical work is poor when it was in his early career and still better than 90% of Broadway lyrics

He understands so well how to set lyrics and make them fit story and character purposes that it's second nature to him 

He said that language only takes you so far

The music is what makes it interesting 

And that's true that the music makes it interesting 

But the real Sondheim trick is how incredible his lyrics fit into his melody

Listen to the opening of Sunday in the Park with George and find the original monologue it was written for

It's eye opening 

Sondheim's mind is so brilliant 

The words seem to come off the page and then return completely written before he assigns a perfect melody to it

Even when the melodies aren't memorable, they're dramatically very appropriate

Sondheim was a dramatist first and foremost, and that is what made music so interesting for him 

That, to me, is also what makes him a better composer than anybody else on Broadway 

I think Bernstein is better than Sondheim at music by just a little

I mean the most unremarkable Bernstein tune is both musically complex and very memorable 

The most unremarkable Sondheim melodies are bordering on atonal and unnecessary 

That's not a criticism, mind you

It works incredibly well for characters

I mean listen to the opening of Finishing the Hat

Listen I know there's a key center

I know Sondheim is on record saying he never learned how to write atonally 

But I Sondheim often strattles the line with his tunes

I don't want to be misconstrued though: I know that Sondheim's songs never do this for extended periods

But the effect of it never really evolved much even as his composing style evolved 

I think its ultimate form was Another National Anthem in Assassins 

The trick with Sondheim is that his music is always reliant on a key center but in that key center it is extremely challenging as it often uses notes that no other composer would dare to use in that key 

I think that this started off as a habit and he got better and better at it but he never really got to the point of writing the types of melodies Bernstein or Alan Menken make 

Now, that being said, Sondheim is still probably my favorite composer on Broadway, or maybe William Finn, but I do think Sondheim is primarily a lyricist and a better lyricist than anything else

I mean go back and really think about how heart shattering some of his lyrics can be despite their simplicity 

Or how legible they can be despite their complexity 

Sondheim makes you wait on every word

And it's easy for him 

So yeah basically Sondheim is the best lyricist ever on Broadway but probably not the best composer ever 

[joevitus]

Posted: 11/14/23 at 12:22am

baritonewithtenortendencies said: "I think he is both one of the best lyricists and composers in Broadway history. However, there are composers that compete with him or even surpass him. Leonard Bernstein comes to mind. William Finn and Jason Robert Brown are similar quality at their best, as well. However, I don't think any other Broadway lyricist has ever reached the absurd heights of Sondheim. Lyrics were easy and effortless for him. He is to lyrics what Alan Menken is to melody. I think Sondheim is the greatest lyricist in Broadway history, and certainly amongst the best composers."

Personally, I think Sondheim was a vastly superior composer of musical scores than Bernstein. I can't speak to Bernstein's other compositions because, to be honest, I don't know any of them.

[joevitus]

Posted: 11/14/23 at 12:26am

kdogg36 said: "ColorTheHours048 said: "I’m going to assume you’re just joking around, but for argument’s sake, I’ll take this at face value. He clearly means “eye” in the context of something like “an eye for fashion.” "

For what it's worth, I've always taken it the way Jay does, and have never thought of your interpretation. The full phrase is "his skin was pale and his eye was odd," which seems to be in the realm of physical description.

I think it's been discussed here and elsewhere about the observations contained in "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" not being entirely in keeping with what we've seen in the show. Although many of those who sing the song are ostensibly characters from the show, it seems like they're telling the story as a received legend rather than as witness accounts."

Oh, I love that interpretation!

To me "his eye was odd" doesn't refer to either a deformity or his outlook on life, but the gaze on his face. Either the thoughts in his head are playing on his face in certain ways, or due to his traumas, he has a look on his face isolates him from most normal people. And I do think at least the original stage production bore this out. 

Edit: Ugh, and now I see other people have said this more succinctly than I did.

Updated On: 11/14/23 at 12:26 AM