| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | MockingbirdGirl 09:43 am EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - Budinsky 09:24 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| (initially sung, for accuracy's sake, by Gladys Knight, Elton John and Stevie Wonder as well as Dionne Warwick) Well if we're going to be accurate, then let's note that it was initially sung by Rod Stewart for the soundtrack to the movie Night Shift, and when written, had absolutely nothing to do with the AIDS crisis. I'm glad it raised money for a worthwhile cause, but I also find it pretty treacly, and invariably switch stations when I hear it. Sorry. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | MikeR 11:19 am EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - MockingbirdGirl 09:43 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| >I'm glad it raised money for a worthwhile cause, but I also find it pretty treacly, and invariably switch stations when I hear it. Sorry. Yeah. Me too. The money raised is a wonderful thing, but we don't all have to think it's a good song because of it. | |
| reply to this message | | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | Thom915 (Thom915@aol.com) 12:53 pm EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - MikeR 11:19 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| If you read the original poster (heaven forbid!) he did not criticize Isherwood for not liking the song but rather for the remark that he wished Bacharach hadn't written it. His point was that treacly or not, the song thanks to Bacharach's work in writing it and generosity in letting it be used to raise money for the charitable cause should be applauded no matter what one thinks of the artistic nature. The song had its purpose served its purpose and accomplished much more good in the world than many of Bacharach's more successfully artistic achievements. I appreciate what all the artists involved contributed rather than wish they hadn't. (And if any of us seem a bit hysterical it is because so much work still needs to go on to be done.) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | enoch10 04:52 pm EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - Thom915 12:53 pm EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| >> His point was that treacly or not, the song thanks to Bacharach's work in writing it and generosity in letting it be used to raise money for the charitable cause should be applauded no matter what one thinks of the artistic nature. This is wrong on so many levels. A bad song is a bad song and this is a bad song. It may have been used to raise money but that just makes it a bad song used to raise money, exactly what Isherwood wrote. The decision was made to use pop singers to raise money. If they hadn't chosen this one they could have chosen another. The song had bombed on its own. The performers were all by this time in their careers selling primarily albums, not top 40 singles. The song was a hit because it was being used (and promoted ) as a fundraiser. Someone mentioned "You've Got A Friend" - which I agree is a better song - I'm sure had they used it it would have been a hit as we'll. Isherwood is right. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | Budinsky 11:29 am EST 12/07/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - enoch10 04:52 pm EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| RE "A bad song is a bad song and this is a bad song": Thank you for your definitive and irrefutable assessment. I had no idea you were the ultimate authority. RE "It may have been used to raise money but that just makes it a bad song used to raise money, exactly what Isherwood wrote": Not exactly, your highness. What he wrote was: "I didn’t know that Mr. Bacharach wrote the music for this treacly Warwick hit from the 1980s (with Carole Bayer Sager as lyricist), and frankly I wish he hadn’t." There's not a word about the song's role as fundraiser. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 11:44 am EST 12/07/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - Budinsky 11:29 am EST 12/07/13 |
|
| |
| Re the first point, it seems to me you always have to assume that the person calling a song "bad" is implicitly adding "to me" to the sentence. A song is only bad if no one responds to it positively, so the most that someone can say is that they don't like it. I really don't understand what strength some people apparently gain from pretending they have some formula for discerning everyone else's taste. Re the second point, what we have is a classic case of a premise that exists only on ATC, that somehow takes on a life of its own. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | Budinsky 12:41 am EST 12/08/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - ryhog 11:44 am EST 12/07/13 |
|
| |
| RE "...you always have to assume that the person calling a song 'bad' is implicitly adding 'to me' to the sentence": No, I don't have to always assume anything. If he/you meant "to me," then he he/you should have clearly stated such -- which he/you didn't. RE "A song is only bad if no one responds to it positively, so the most that someone can say is that they don't like it": That makes no sense at all. RE "...what we have is a classic case of a premise that exists only on ATC, that somehow takes on a life of its own": This is even more senseless than the previous quote which would seem an impossibility as that one made no sense. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Peter Allen's | |
| Posted by: | StageDoorJohnny 11:19 pm EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - enoch10 04:52 pm EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| Love Don't Need a Reason is a much better song and more in keeping with the AIDS crisis, tho' I don't believe it was written for that reason either -- tho it sure could have been, given the lyric | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 11:29 am EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - MikeR 11:19 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| For what it's worth, I don't think there's anything especially treacly about the music of "That's What Friends Are For." Hum it without the lyrics, and see if you agree. The lyrics start out very well with a nice, fresh-sounding sentiment: "And I never thought I'd feel this way," but then they do sort of deteriorate into cliche: "Keep smiling," "You can always count on me," "I'll be on your side forevermore," etc. Since Isherwood felt it necessary to criticize the song as treacly, he might have been more specific in blaming the lyrics, rather than seeming to take a swipe at Bacharach's music. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 12:28 pm EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - Michael_Portantiere 11:29 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| This thread is superficially amusing but it actually is revealing fundamental questions: should a song be evaluated based on its association with noble (or ignoble) causes,or independently? should a song's music (when written collaboratively with the lyricist) escape criticism if it would (arguably) be more palatable without the lyrics? I think the answer to both ought to be no. Regarding the latter, which is the point you raise, we spend a lot of time here arguing about whether music and lyrics are integrated in a satisfactory way. I don't think a composer can or should be let off the hook when the product of his or her work ends up in a song that some would define as treacly. This is not a case where someone's music is appropriated to support someone else's lyrics. I think it is important (and time-honored) that both members of a songwriting team hold each other's feet to the fire. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | Michael_Portantiere 02:35 pm EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - ryhog 12:28 pm EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| I agree, ryhog. Also, as others have pointed out, "That's What Friends Are For" was not originally written as an anthem in support of people with AIDS, but as a song for the movie NIGHT SHIFT. I never knew this, or maybe I had just forgotten, but I would say the original intent has a large bearing on how "treacly" the song is or isn't. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | ryhog 02:48 pm EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - Michael_Portantiere 02:35 pm EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| I think it has to. Think of all the beloved songs that have recently been heard in really embarrassing context in TV commercials, and that kinda make you sick at the stomach. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | BruceinIthaca 11:45 am EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - Michael_Portantiere 11:29 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| Well, I say it's spinach, and I say the hell with it! | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| Thank you for this. n/m | |
| Posted by: | TimDunleavy 10:35 am EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - MockingbirdGirl 09:43 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| n/m | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
| re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! | |
| Posted by: | truefan 10:13 am EST 12/06/13 |
| In reply to: | re: Hey, Charles Isherwood: SCREW YOU! - MockingbirdGirl 09:43 am EST 12/06/13 |
|
| |
| Thanks for adding a little history to this post. Historically music has use to promote good causes and bad causes. It seems harsh to blame Isherwood so violently for his reaction to that song. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message | |
All That Chat is intended for the discussion of
theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions of the Terms of Service. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)
Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.
[ Home | On the Rialto | The Siegel Column | E-Opinions | Cabaret | Tony Awards | Book Reviews | Great White Wayback Machine ]
[ Broadway Reviews | Barbara and Scott: The Two of Clubs | Sound Advice | Restaurant Revue | Off Broadway | Funding Talkin' Broadway ]
[ Broadway 101 | Spotlight On | Talkin' Broadway | On the Boards | Regional | Talk to Us! | Search Talkin' Broadway ]
Terms of Service
[ © 1997 - 2013 www.TalkinBroadway.com, Inc. ]
Time to render: 0.904697 seconds.