Schwartz vs. Sondheim- Page 3

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:39am

*Claps for Caleb*

[DramaDork925]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:39am

Schwartz writes, in my opinion just ok music. No matter how often I try, I can't make it through the Pippin or Godspell cast recordings. I like Wicked, to a degree. I mostly pay attention to Wicked because I like to see the different takes on the characters, I'm not a huge fan of the music.

On the other hand, when I started listening to Sondheim I didn't like it. I thought it was weird and irregular and pretentious. Then I listened more and realized, yes it's irregular but not in a bad way. Sondheim has true musical style and I truely enjoy just sitting and listening and focusing on his music.

I think Sondheim is an artist and I think Schwartz is an entertainer. Sondheim's music requires a focused ear, Schwartz's is much more accessible. You can argue that makes Schwartz better, but I prefer Sondheim anyday.

[nobodyhome]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 1:51am

Just wanted to mention that Sondheim has always considered himself first of all a composer, not a lyricist.
Updated On: 4/19/06 at 01:51 AM

[TheatreMonkey]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 2:36am

I agree that they are different types, with different working esthetics. And yes, I agree Sondheim is much superior. However, I find "Pippin" to be an amazing work. Going on just the recording alone doesn't begin to capture the entire piece; when seen live it's a captivating piece. It's very opinionated -- dealing with war and it's follies; the notion of sex , heodonism, and it's simple pleasures; and ultimately a great coming of age story. I think it's topical even in today's society, what with the war, power struggles, and sexuality.

~Sam

[acrocksyo]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 2:49am

Wow how can you even compare Sondheim to Schwartz? Sondheim has revolutionized musical theater while Schwartz has bastardized it with Wicked. Yeah some of the songs in Wicked are impressive, and yeah Pippin has it's good points, but compared to the catalog of Sondheim it pales in his brilliance. And to whomever said that WSS doesn't compare to Pippin, needs to go back and look at the vocal difficulty of WSS and the complex lyrics, it changed musical theater by incorporating dance, book, lyrics, and music to tell a complete story, and to say that Pippin had that kind of effect on musical theater is just asinine!

[buffyactsing]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 2:52am

I like Pippin in terms of plot, just not musically.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 3:15am

RENTBoy and JudasIscariot make the baby Jesus cry. Truly, the antichrist will win. Hating Follies? Why? Why?

It's pretty hard to say who's a better composer than who. After all, isn't it a matter of taste? I think it's pretty clear that Sondheim has a bigger range than Mr. Schwartz, but they both have their appeal. But come on, Judas. You're acting like Stephen Schwartz is George Gershwin. There's a difference between pleasing and genius, and quite a few more knowledgeable people than you or I seem to think the prior Steve deserves that title. Some don't, hey. I'm not sure why you place so much emphasis on melody, but god knows Stephen Sondheim has written his fair share of gorgeous melodies. Both Steves have. As a person who admires craft, I would say Sondheim wins the battle, but that's just me.

I like Pippin too, it's my favorite Schwartz musical, but I don't know if I'd accuse it of genius.

[TheActr97J]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 3:25am

It's like comparing Rainforest Cafe to Tavern on the Green.

Fabulous! I love it!

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 4:19am

Rainforest Cafe? More like McDonalds...

[kgee30]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 8:18am

You like Cabernet, or you like light beer, or you like both, but don't confuse the two by trying to compare them when there's no comparison. They are completely different things. Sondheim has a depth Schwartz has never attempted to achieve, and Schwartz has a flair for appealing to the masses that Sondheim has never seemed *that* interested in courting.

I've always thought Sondheim wrote mostly to please himself, which is why I adore him (and I'm not saying it's true, just the way I've always seen him -- he's an artist in a popular form that doesn't view *art* very highly). A show like "Passion," or even "Sweeney Todd," is a risk, and he's never been afraid to aim high and take risks. Schwartz's music seems designed to appeal to the pop culture crowd, which is to say the middle ground. Again, there's nothing wrong with that -- it's just a different thing.

[wickedobsessed]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 8:48am

They are two COMPLETELY different people, with two COMPLETELY different styles.

[devonian.t]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 8:50am

Anyone starting this thread was asking for trouble really.

I see Schwartz as a latter day Jerry Herman or Jule Styne- a tunesmith, rather than a composer of musical score. Nothing wrong with that- totally different job. Just don't try comparing. What is the point.

Incidentally, I love The Baker's Wife and Passion. Glad both exist.

[redhotinnyc2]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 9:14am

I've just never liked Schwartz' lyrics (too schmaltzy and terrible rhyme schemes, which make me shudder), but I suppose his music is ok, for pop stuff. Sondheim, on the other hand, is a genius.

[Eastwickian]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 9:32am

I think Sondheim is an artist and I think Schwartz is an entertainer

That, for me, was the most concise and intelligent quote of the thread

[sondheim78]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 11:37am

Judas, Judas, Judas...

....calm down now, son. This whole thread is making me giggle. The only thing it says to me about you is how young you are. When I was in high school in the early nineties I thought Les Miz and Phantom were the best musicals ever written. I thought Andrew Lloyd Webber was the greatest thing that ever happened to musical theatre.

Then I got older. I studied the history of the art form. I took classes where we analyzed structure of different pieces and compared them. We learned how to identify professional well-crafted musicals from touristy claptrap. Once you jump through these hoops you will know these few things to be true:

1. Sondheim is infinitely better than Stephen Schwartz. Although Schwartz is good in his own right he does not write with the wit, ambition, or complexity of Sondheim. This can best be evidenced by numerous historians who refer to Sondheim as "the complete history of contemporary musical theatre." Although Schwartz is his contemporary, these scholars apparently believe he has not even approached the benchmarks in the development of the artform that Sondheim has given us.

2. Pippin is a show for high schools, community theatres, and church groups. It is a solid and well put together show, but that is entirely the work of Bob Fosse, who by that point in his career was powerful enough to allow his production concept to railroad the book, score and lyrics. It is an entertaining, marginal show that is not particularly interesting or important without Fosse's contribution. Therefore, comparing it to

3. West Side Story is the most preposterous thing I've ever heard of. First of all, it doesn't prove your point, because West Side Story is not exclusively Sondheim's score. It is Leonard Bernstein's score. This show, however, is one of the most important benchmarks in the musical's development. Because of West Side Story musicals could be serious. They could deal with hard subject matter. The score is one of the most interesting and complex scores ever written (certainly much better than Pippin or Wicked), one of the most difficult to sing, and one of the most difficult for the poor pit musicians who have to play what is sometimes atonal, almost always polyrhythmic, and what is always, always, always, perfect. This score survives not only as a musical theatre piece, but in the classical music repertoire as well. Perhaps you don't find it entertaining, but it has always been and will always be more important than any contribution to the art that Stephen Schwartz has ever made or will ever make in the future.

I understand you're young. And you will learn as we have all learned what good taste is and how to acquire it. In the meantime, Judas, be careful. Some of these people are bobcats and they'll eat your young if they hear you say some of this stuff...

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 11:41am

Sondheim and Schwartz clearly have seperate ideas of what they think musical theatre should be. Sondheim's philosophy is the closes to mine, so I prefer his work. Schwartz's music and lyrics rarely impress me. He has a few songs that are real winners (Meadowlark, a few songs from Magic Show, his lyrics for Rags are supberb) but I generally find him to be a big to folksy for my tastes, and there are a few of his shows (Godspell, Children of Eden, a lot of Pippin) that I simply can't stand. His music just doesn't sit well on my ear.

Schwartz's music is more friednly to the ear, especailly the first listen, and his work clearly fits the agenda of many theatregoers.

Still...he can never match the artistry and detail of Sondheim.
Updated On: 4/19/06 at 11:41 AM

[sondheim78]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 11:41am

BSO...

I prefer Sondheim to LaChiusa, but I *love* LaChiusa, and that would be a much more interesting discussion.

[Actrss100]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 11:45am

"It's like comparing Rainforest Cafe to Tavern on the Green."

haha brilliant

[MisterRussell]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:21pm

Sondheim78:

Fantastic response, couldn't have put it better myself.

Judas:

A Sondheim bias? No. That's silly paranoid conspiracy theory being rationalized because you don't want your favorite composer to get the short shrift.

I've been a fan and student of musical theatre for three decades. I like and own recordings by both Sondheim and Schwartz. And Kander & Ebb, and Herman, and Coleman, and ALW & Rice...you get the point.

Every writer and/or composer brings something likeable and worthy to their work. That's diversity in its purest form. There are Schwartz scores I like, and Schwartz rhymes I love. There are also Schwartz scores and rhymes I despise.

On the other hand, and in my informed opinion, the lyrical and compositional output of Sondheim has the unique distinction of being note for note and letter for letter perfect.

I don't state this to bash your opinion, so please don't respond with a knee-jerk reactionary screed about having the right to your own; you have had (and taken) the opportunity to state yours (often) in this thread.

Do you realize that you are an unwitting link in an evolutionary chain? When I was what I'm assuming your age is, A CHORUS LINE was the new and fresh flavor-of-the-day show that a generation got hooked on. If there had been an internet in 1975, I'm sure there'd be countless threads titled "Marvin Hamlisch vs. Sondheim"

Moving forward, you find similar evolutionary (and I use the word in terms of exciting and introducing a new generation to musical theatre) milestones in SWEENEY TODD, CATS, LES MISERABLES, PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, RENT and WICKED, among countless others to lesser degrees.

So you love WICKED. Congratulations. Be proud. BUt don't forget that history and art exist to be eternal, and neither one will be allowed to be forgotten by those who have found a special personal resonance in them.

Don't compare apples to oranges needlessly; you won't win many hearts, especially on this board. What you will do is come across as uninformed and callow, and be dismissed by the majority of better-informed and matured posters.

BTW, when I referred to ACL as the "flavor-of-the-day," I meant in the sense that history (and the Pulitzer committee) had not yet bestowed the mantle of "classic" to it; of course, it was a major milestone in musical theatre history, and remembered and beloved alongside PORGY & BESS, ANYTHING GOES, PAL JOEY, SOUTH PACIFIC, WEST SIDE STORY, CABARET, COMPANY and the others listed above previously.

Updated On: 4/19/06 at 12:21 PM

[DancerGirl16]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:26pm

Ok are we actually defending Schwartz based on Bakers Wife?

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:39pm

I go both ways on this one, its like 60 Sond. and 40 Sch.

Sondheim because his shows are so deep and so moving and really make me wanna study them.

Schwartz because his music is more accessable and it's more "pop" sounding.

[MisterRussell]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:40pm

No, sadder still, we are acclaiming him based on WICKED.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:41pm

I like them both.

"It's like comparing Rainforest Cafe to Tavern on the Green."

Um, no. It's more like comparing a Caesar Salad to a Waldorf Salad. They are both good for different reasons. It just comes down to a matter of taste.

Why does EVERY musical theatre composer have to be compared to Sondheim? I like pizza, but I don't compare everything I eat to pizza. It's ridiculous and if pizza was my only choice, I would get sick of it very quickly. Give me variety in style, wit, emotion and composition, and I'll be a much happier musical theatre fan.

Posted: 4/19/06 at 12:56pm

Yes, Sondheim is brilliant. Just ask him and he'll tell you when he finishes knocking other composer, both living and dead. That's why I like Sondheim shows, but not the personna.

[sondheim78]

Posted: 4/19/06 at 1:18pm

"Ok are we actually defending Schwartz based on Bakers Wife?"

While the show doesn't work as a whole, it's certainly Schwartz' most mature and interesting score, so it only seems fair, doesn't it?