Yesterday, Larry Stempel, the author of the new book “Showtime: A History of the Broadway Musical Theater,” answered readers’ questions about lyric writing, guilty pleasures and other topics. Today Mr. Stempel takes a look at the music vs. lyrics debate, short runs and more. His final set of answers will be posted tomorrow.
Theater Q. & A.
Ask About Broadway Musicals
Q.
It’s sometimes said that the plot of “Oklahoma!” turns on whether a certain young man will take a certain young lady to a community social event — and that’s it. In other words, the music is what makes the show soar. But in this and other cases of enduring musicals, is it strictly true that music trumps story? — Ivan Webster, New York
A.
“Oklahoma!” may lack the gravitas of later Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals. Yet to disparage its plot without at least a twinkle in one’s eye is to miss the point, I think. Not all shows depend on plots to succeed. (“Cats” anyone?)
“Oklahoma!” does crucially, however lightweight it may seem. Consider the score on its own. A song like “Lonely Room,” a dance like “Laurey Makes Up Her Mind,” even the underscore at the end of the first scene (when Laurey replies “Nothing” while the orchestra indicates something’s afoot) — these make little sense and pack less of a wallop without the setup for them that the plot provides. Yes, music makes this show — any show — soar. But if it trumps the plot in a show like this, it’s simply less of a show. That’s not the case with “Oklahoma!”
Q.
Is there any figure — writer, performer, director, designer — who you feel has not been given enough credit for his or her influence on musical theater, or the quality of his or her work? Similarly, is there anyone you think gets too much credit? — Zev Valancy, Oak Park, Ill.
A.
Too little credit? Yes, but may I call attention to a category of show contributors rather than to any one figure? I speak of the musicians who create the sound of Broadway. These are the more or less unknown men and women who take the work of a show’s songwriter(s), usually written at a keyboard, and flesh it out instrumentally (and sometimes even compositionally) to arrive at the way we hear it in the theater.
Among orchestrators I’d single out for starters Hans Spialek, Don Walker, and Jonathan Tunick; among arrangers, Genevieve Pitot and, above all, Trude Rittmann. Leonard Bernstein once referred to such musicians admiringly as the “subcomposers who turn a series of songs into a unified score.”
Q.
Is there any reason why Broadway runs used to be much shorter than they traditionally are today (at least for successful shows)? Did shows close for the same reasons they do today — lack of sufficient ticket sales to cover weekly costs — or was there some other reason? — Brian J. Heck, Queens
A.
There are many reasons; they also shift with time. But here’s one. In the 1920s and 1930s shows rarely ran longer than a year on Broadway. I believe that, in part, this was because shows tended not just to feature stars but to be built around them. As stars were usually unwilling to sign contracts that committed them to a single vehicle for more than a limited period of time, when their contracts ran out and they moved on to something else, the shows usually closed behind them.
With the rise of such book-based shows in the 1940s as “Oklahoma!” and “Carousel,” however, the leads were more or less unknowns. And so, as the stars were now in a sense the shows themselves, the leads could be replaced many times over and the shows continue to run.
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php
Five Filters featured site: So, Why is Wikileaks a Good Thing Again?.
No comments:
Post a Comment