I'm gonna say it . . .

. . . cuz I know you're all thinking it.

Sondheim is the Shakespeare of the American Musical Theater.

(Wait for it.  Wait for it.)

Like Bill's, Sondheim's material is so incredibly rich.  It demands attention.  It needs to be studied by anyone who wants to pursue a career in the theater.  It needs to be read, listened to, and dissected so we can debate and learn from every little detail.  It's that brilliant.

(Here it comes.)

But like Shakespeare's, it's not that exciting to watch.

Ok, ok, before you call me a heathen, I know that most of you think the same thing, so don't even start.

I've got the attendance and recoupment records for all of Sondheim's prior productions to back me up.

Brilliance doesn't always work on Broadway.

Comments

[George Frankley]

You're not a heathen. You're totally right. I consider myself a huge Sondheim fan, but I have a real tough time making it through Passion.
But: is it complexity by itself that is the problem with Sondheim's shows? Or can the lack of commercial success be blamed on wholly different things, like story, or tone? Or the fact that, musical complexity aside, Sondheim uses more modern musical structures that sound alien?
Whenever I think of this question, I think of Mozart, whose lovely tunes were very successful with the public while his development of those tunes was complex enough to be interesting to modern music theorists.
Is complexity itself the enemy? Or can we have our cake and eat it too? We want to avoid leaving the audience with nothing to care about. If the story is very slow, then a complex lyric can be alienating. But if, at a particular moment, the story is clear and compelling, will the artfulness of a lyric detract from the experience?

[George Frankley]

You're not a heathen. You're totally right. I consider myself a huge Sondheim fan, but I have a real tough time making it through Passion.
But: is it complexity by itself that is the problem with Sondheim's shows? Or can the lack of commercial success be blamed on wholly different things, like story, or tone? Or the fact that, musical complexity aside, Sondheim uses more modern musical structures that sound alien?
Whenever I think of this question, I think of Mozart, whose lovely tunes were very successful with the public while his development of those tunes was complex enough to be interesting to modern music theorists.
Is complexity itself the enemy? Or can we have our cake and eat it too? We want to avoid leaving the audience with nothing to care about. If the story is very slow, then a complex lyric can be alienating. But if, at a particular moment, the story is clear and compelling, will the artfulness of a lyric detract from the experience?