Threaded Order Chronological Order
| The notion of "Square One" in Sondheim's work | |
| Posted by: peter3053 05:52 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| It struck me the other day that much of Sondheim's work has included this notion of returning to square one, with second chances and "so many possibilities". It has been a structural staple in his shows. Company, of course, keeps returning to the birthday party. Sunday in the Park with George returns to the painting which ended Act One as well - admittedly a "theme with variations". Sweeney Todd begins and ends at the graveside. Into the Woods begins and ends with a narrator figure recounting a "once upon a time" tale (Narrator in Act One and the start of Act Two; The Baker, to his baby, during the finale). Road Show (and Bounce) begins and ends in the netherworld beyond. A Little Night Music originally was to have shown divergent possible outcomes through Madame Armfeldt re-shuffling her cards, and all the characters would go back to the start and follow paths which wound them up with different partners. As it is, it begins and ends with the waltz, and with the lieberslieder playing a first and final note on the same piano. While at first this would suggest no human progress, it seems in some cases to promise new hope - Sondheim is insightful about the ambivalence of existence, and how the return occurs often signals crucial development of the central characters. Also, at one time he was drawn to the idea of musicalising Groundhog Day; enough said. While of course much of the structure of the show is the provenance of the book writer, we know that Sondheim collaborates at every step of the way. So it becomes a rather exciting dimension to look forward to in his future work - the examination of feelings of confinement in existence, along with opportunity for liberation. |
|
| reply to this message |
| “We can never go back to before!’ (nm) | |
| Posted by: TheHarveyBoy 08:33 am EDT 10/01/21 | |
| In reply to: The notion of "Square One" in Sondheim's work - peter3053 05:52 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| ! | |
| reply to this message |
| A 'look back' at Sondheim's lyrics | |
| Posted by: WaymanWong 02:10 pm EDT 10/01/21 | |
| In reply to: “We can never go back to before!’ (nm) - TheHarveyBoy 08:33 am EDT 10/01/21 | |
|
|
|
| ''One More Kiss'' from ''Follies'': ''On then with the dance. No backward glance. Or my heart will break. Never look back.'' ''Merrily We Roll Along'' from ''Merrily'': ''Why don't you turn around and go back? .... How did you get to be here? ... Never look back.'' |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sondheim's work | |
| Posted by: Dale 08:39 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
| In reply to: The notion of "Square One" in Sondheim's work - peter3053 05:52 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| Seems to me Sondheim is following the script he was given ( George Furth, James Lapine, John Weidman, Arthur Laurents, etc ) | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sondheim's work | |
| Posted by: Singapore/Fling 10:42 pm EDT 09/30/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Sondheim's work - Dale 08:39 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| Perhaps in some cases. But there is a good deal of documentation that shows us that Sondheim has either originated ideas for his shows or collaborated with his book writers on gestating ideas and material for a good number of the shows he's created. And, of course, he wouldn't agree to work on something if it didn't resonate with him, especially once he's in the part of his career where he can choose what to make. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sondheim's work | |
| Posted by: Someday 10:41 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Sondheim's work - Dale 08:39 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| I’ll offer a friendly dissent, Dale. I think Peter is onto something quite interesting here, certainly worth remarking. Of course, it’s true that Sondheim must collaborate with his book writers, and seems to relish doing so. By most accounts, their collaborations are very organic and two-way — with Sondheim contributing to show structure and other book-related elements, as much as he raids the writer’s speeches for song ideas and exact words and phrases that become lyrics. But more to the point, for many decades, he’s been at a level of stature that he can choose to work on almost any property he wishes. So if he repeatedly works on properties that include the “square one” concept, that means he’s consciously or subconsciously seeking that out — not just passively following scripts he’s been given. Equally notable is that he is then emphasizing the square one concept in his work. For every example like Merrily — where simply choosing a play that runs in reverse meant he would be playing with a return to square one — there are other spots, where he has chosen to double down on the concept when it was not preordained. Often, I think his take is that we end up returning to square one in some area of life (love, work, financial health), but we’ve “learned things now” to inform our journey going forward. To flip it, most writers focus on characters who learn something and have an arc. But Sondheim gravitates to and creates characters who have to learn things the hard way, only after having their life totally collapse and reset in some dimension. This is probably part of creating high stakes, to make the drama most compelling. Anyway, there are many examples. Certainly Red, who has to almost die to learn nice is different than good. Giorgio’s alone and back to square one in the end, but now wrecked by having learned the all-consuming power of an obsessive love he wishes he could forget. Modern George’s cathartic visit from Dot has taught him to move on and keep creating, despite facing square one literally every time he begins a new piece. The more I think about it, this issue is part of why we all had such a hard time discerning whether the new show entitled Square One was synonymous with the Buñuel show, or the marital play that runs backwards. It’s because they both feature a theme of returning to square one. And as Peter has pointed out for us, that’s nothing new! |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| The Miller's Son | |
| Posted by: stevemr 11:21 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Sondheim's work - Someday 10:41 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| The idea of returning to an alternate path is even embodied within a song --- The Miller's Son comes to mind. The Road You Didn't Take. I'm sure there are many more. | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sondheim's work | |
| Posted by: writerkev 10:02 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Sondheim's work - Dale 08:39 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| Do you really think that's how it works? Really? | |
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
| re: Sondheim's work | |
| Posted by: comedywest 10:47 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
| In reply to: re: Sondheim's work - writerkev 10:02 am EDT 09/30/21 | |
|
|
|
| Right...there is a lot of give and take before they commit to it. David Ives said that Sondheim called him about the Bunuel project. And when Ives showed up to talk about it, Sondheim had a lot of ideas written out already. |
|
| reply to this message | reply to first message |
Time to render: 0.029153 seconds.