Sondheim: His Life, His Shows, His Legacy (Book Review)

On one hand, there could never be too many books about Stephen Sondheim. On the other hand, each book should be able to justify its existence through untold stories (are there any?), a new point of view, or access to previously un-interviewed people. 

Sondheim: His Life, His Shows, His Legacy, by Stephen M. Silverman, justifies its existence in a number of ways. It's thorough (though not quite complete, since Here We Are opened too late to be included, except in passing). It is a large and handsome book, with dozens of photos, many of them in color. It includes a bibliography, source notes, and index, and is all in all a classy book. And yet.

It's just not that good a book. 

Silverman is frequently inaccurate. For example, he writes that Mandy Patinkin won a Tony as Best Actor in a Musical for Evita, when he actually won for Best Featured Actor.

Here's another example, about Night Music: 

A musical duel, set in waltz time, between Fredrik and the Count, "In Praise of Women," takes place before an actual duel with firearms. Said duel leads to young wife Anne running off with Henrik, Fredrik's sexually frustrated seminary student son.

Well, no. The duel takes place after Anne and Henrik run off. In fact, the only reason Fredrik agrees to the duel (Russian roulette, actually) is that he is in shock from losing his wife and son and not thinking straight.

The quote above can also be used as an example of another weakness of the book: an oddness in presenting information. Why specify that "In Praise of Women" is in waltz time when the whole show is in waltz time or variations thereof? Isn't that the more salient point?

And some of Silverman's conclusions are just bizarre. Here is an example:

It was said, just as it later was of Sondheim, that Babbit's "difficult music" required repeated listening before it could be appreciated, even comprehended.* [Asterisk in original]

[The footnote:] *Which might explain the line in Merrily We Roll Along, when the producer tells the crestfallen theatre hopefuls, "It's not a tune you can hum."

Why attach that line to Babbit when it was completely and 100% about Sondheim and his work--and is based on, at least to some extent, Sondheim's experiences getting his foot in Broadway's door?

Here's another example of the klutziness of the writing:

"One of the things I couldn't care less about is posterity," said Stephen Sondheim. "If you can't enjoy life while still alive, what is the point?"

As usual, he gave the statement a quick second thought.

"However, while I'm still alive, I'd like my shows to be done as much as possible.

That's not a second thought! That's more of the first thought!

And, and this is a big and, Silverman tells the famous story about Ethel Merman, Loretta Young, and the swear jar, and makes it not funny. (I guess, in its own way, that's an impressive accomplishment.) Sondheim tells the story here.

Am I picking nits? Yes. But there are an awful lot of nits in this book. Here are some more:

• Pacific Overtures: [The song being referenced is] "Next," of which it could be said that it is to Tokyo what Company's "Another Hundred People" is to New York City. 

• Merrily: The theme of the 1934 play and the 1981 musical and, presumably, the 2040 movie is that ambition trumps friendship. 

• In keeping with the narrative structure of Merrily We Roll Along--which is told in chronological order but backward--this book's account of Sondheim's musical begins in the the future, with what will be [the movie's] 2040 premiere ... 

• Pacific Overtures: The placid "Pretty Lady" is sung by three foreign sailors positioning themselves to take unfair advantage of an innocent Japanese woman. 

• Sweeney: [Mrs. Lovett's] business success is short-lived, however, when Mrs. Lovett herself ends up in the oven at the hands of Sweeney, who disposes of her for having kept secret that the insane beggar woman on the street is, in fact, Barker's wife. After this horrible moment, the apprentice, Toby, slits Barker's throat out of an act of love for Mrs. Lovett. 

• Pacific Overtures: "Chrysanthemum Tea, like A Little Night Music's "A Weekend in the Country," advances the action, but this time with lyrics delivered by a shogun's mother as she slowly poisons her son.

 Completist Sondheim fans may want to own Sondheim: His Life, His Shows, His Legacy. It does cover Sondheim's whole life, and nearly all his work. It does allow a trip down "Memories-of-Sondheim Lane." If only it were better.

Wendy Caster

Suffs

First, how cool is it that Suffs exists, and that it's so good, and that it's been recognized and rewarded? And how sad is it that the show is still timely? But things are changing. The night it became clear that Kamala Harris would be the democratic nominee for president, the audience chatted "Kamala, Kamala, Kamala" as the show started. The cast had to freeze to wait for the audience to wind down, and how moved they must have been! History honoring history. (You can watch a video here.)

Shaina Taub's book, music, and lyrics have been compared to those of Hamilton, and the show has even been called "Hamilton for women." Ignoring the fact that Hamilton is Hamilton for women, and that Suffs is Suffs for women and men, there are certain similarities. Both are excellent shows. They share a more-or-less-historically-accurate depiction of a scrappy, outspoken protagonist; the humanization of people from the past; some nontraditional casting; and occasional similarities between songs. 

But Suffs is its own, unique, excellent show. It is full of joy, comraderie, warmth, and humor. It also depicts the mistreatment suffered by suffs both in jail and on the street--and it acknowledges just how long it took for suffrage to be achieved. 

(And who kept women from having suffrage in the first place? Those ostensible heroes of Hamilton!)

It seems to me that there is something missing from Suffs, some song or scene or something that would unify the show and bring it home. But while it's not perfect, its quality is undeniable, and the festive feel in the audience--full of women and girls when I saw it--is inspiring and moving. The cast is wonderful, and the all-female orchestra is fabulous.

I tip my hat to Shaina Taub for her talent and her heart and also for her ability to make this show happen! To get it to Broadway! 

Suffs depicts history and it makes history. It's a hell of an accomplishment.

Wendy Caster

Illinoise

A lovely, if somewhat overlong, dance revue about humans telling stories and being oh-so-human, Illinoise is based on the beautiful songs of Sufjan Stevens and an original story by choreographer Justin Peck and Jackie Sibblies Drury. The singers, musicians, and dancers are nearly all wonderful, and watching the show often feels like being bathed in warm bath of emotion. 

The content of the various episodes is not always clear. The billboard/screen that is part of the scenery is wasted most of the time; it could  be announcing the names of the various songs/stories. Parts of the show take place on the stage floor and cannot be seen clearly by much of the audience. As a result, the people in one row must move their heads to see past the people in front of them, and then the people in back of them must move their heads, and then the people in back of them must move their heads, and so on. From row G, seat 13, it felt like I was part of klutzy choreography that blocked and distracted from the actual dancing on stage.

However, whatever its weaknesses, Illinoise is a unique theatrical experience that is well worth seeing.

Wendy Caster

The Transport Group: Follies in Concert:

The Transport Group's Follies in Concert had all the makings of a magical evening, but for many of us, the magic was intermittent at best. For a fascinating, multifaceted discussion of the evening, I suggest that you read this All That Chat thread, here. Beside the many incisive comments in the thread, it is also vivid proof that nothing is objectively good or bad, no matter what some critics would have us think. 

I don't want to harp on the many negatives (okay, one: the oboe player was seriously out of his depth), so here are some positives:

• A lovely "In Buddy's Eyes" by the incomparable Christine Ebersole
• Alexander Gemignani's thoughtful, moving version of "The Road You Didn't Take."
• "The Right Girl," forcefully sung and danced by the wonderful Michael Berresse
• The gorgeous "One More Kiss," performed by Harolyn Blackwell and Midaela Bennett
• The delicate "Losing My Mind" by Kate Baldwin

As you can see, it's not that long a list of highlights. I think the main problem was that, while some people (see above) were performing Follies, others were performing songs from Follies, with little attention paid to where the characters were at that point or what they were thinking. Christine Ebersole was Sally, Alexander Gemignani was Ben, and so on. Many of the others did irrelevant interpretations, or flat-out shtick, without bringing anything new or interesting to the table.

Jennifer Holliday is an exception. She was not being Carlotta from Follies but she was being a survivor with a convincing, compelling take on "I'm Still Here." I'm not a fan of hers, but she did bring something new and interesting to the table.

Despite the disappointment, I still thank Transport Group for making it happen, and with accessible ticket prices!

Wendy Caster

Breaking the Story

Second Stage's Breaking the Story (closing today) has a lot of goals for its 85 minutes: depict the PTSD of a war journalist, discuss the meaning and ethics of journalism, show a woman trying to turn away from what she wants most, and explore the effect on her family of the journalist's constant absences and seeming attraction to danger. It succeeds to some extent with all of these goals, but the play has a certain hollowness. The characters are bundles of traits that don't quite cohere, so it is hard to be totally invested in their lives and stories. 

It doesn't help that Time Stands Still, written by Donald Margulies and starring Laura Linney, covers similar territory and is so much better. I have a more emotional response to Time Stands Still 14 years after seeing it than I had at any point during Breaking the Story. I don't think it's completely fair to judge a play in the light of a previous work, but sometimes you just can't help it.

Wendy Caster

Tony Awards Show 2024: A Very Satisfying Event

Well, this is an opinion piece, so I should perhaps make the subtitle "A Very Satisfying Event for Me." A quick glance around the web reveals that I was not in the majority. 

I do, of course, mark my satisfaction on a curve. Before the show even started, I accepted that (1) it would be at least a partial ego-a-thon; (2) Ariana DeBose would be annoying; (3) the Tony people would not give a full spotlight to many winners, delegating lifetime achievement and various other awards to an earlier show before the show-show. Jack O'Brien, George C. Wolfe, Billy Porter, and Best Book should not be treated as second class! None of the awards should, of course, but Lifetime Achievement? That's huge!

I would usually add that I accepted that there would be horrible non-witty repartee, but I'm glad to say that it was much less of an issue than in the past. And, although DeBose's opening number was truly terrible, her screen time was kept to a minimum.

As for the ego-a-thon moments: I agree that many of the winners are as wonderful as they think they are. And theatre does save lives--or if not lives, hearts and sanity. (A friend and I texted about what it would have meant for us to see the Illinoise number when we were closeted teens!) But the back-and-forth-and-sideways adoration of each other and themselves at the awards, as though they are curing cancer rather than acting, can really be a bit much!

So, stipulating that certain negatives come with the territory, I am able to focus on the positives--and there were so many!

Many of the numbers came off really well. I am now considering seeing Illinoise, The Outsiders, and Water for Elephants, and I hadn't been. The number from Merrily seemed insufficient to represent the show, but I can't think of how one could represent that show in less than two hours. Also, having stars such as Alicia Keys--and, years ago, Carol King--in numbers for shows that they do not appear in seems a little dishonest to me. (Oh, and if I ever had any interest in seeing the current version of Cabaret, the number on the Tonys nipped it in the bud.)

The winners were great choices. Not everyone I wanted won--I wish Leslie Odom, Jr., had won for Best Actor in a play, for example--but there were no outright miscarriages of justice (eg, like not awarding Tonya Pinkins for Caroline, or Change!)

I loved that people mostly got to talk for as long as they wanted to--even the people who really did go on too long. It takes decades of work and sacrifice to get to that podium; let them have their moments (or minutes, as it turned out).

I was glad Maria Friedman lost. I have nothing against the woman, but she has received way too much credit for reviving Merrily in the "bringing back from the dead" sense. The main credit must go to Jonathan Groff, who didn't find the heart in Merrily so much as he brought the heart to Merrily. (And as for those who say that Merrily was a masterpiece back in the 1980s, well, no. The score was mostly fabulous, of course, but the show was truly unpleasant and, uh, lousy.)

What fun that Shaina Taub and Danya Taymor won! And Jonathan Tunick! And, in particular, Kara Young. What an incredible talent she is, and I hope she gets cast in at least one show every year from now on--and that they're shows I can afford to see. I was sad that Kelli O'Hara lost and that her one Tony so far is for her least interesting performance in her least interesting show--Anna in The King and I. But, good for Maleah Joi Moon!

I think an important point that is generally ignored in giving awards--and in hiring people for shows and for regular jobs--is that there is rarely, if ever, one best. Look at the incredible nominees this year. Jessica Lange beating Sarah Paulson would hardly have been an injustice. Groff may be truly and really one of the rare actual "best bests," but Brian D'Arcy James was also extraordinary. Broadway is magical because the most talented people on earth want to be here, so why wouldn't each category have more than one possible winner? We are blessed in this city!

One little churlish nitpick: Winners often say, "Never give up!" as though perseverance is sufficient for success. Yes, they never gave up, but they were also incredibly talented and incredibly lucky. I'm glad they want to inspire people, but their comments are almost mathematically equivalent to a lottery winner saying, "Never give up!" The odds are bad. 

But, in 20 years, a winner will be telling us how hearing that "Never give up" speech changed their life!

Wishing us all a great Broadway season with accessible prices.

Wendy Caster