[RainbowJude]

In Frank Rich's conversation with Stephen Sondheim this past weekend, Sondheim had the following to say about why why adapting Pygmalion into My Fair Lady wasn't necessary: "They painted the lily. They painted it really well, but it's painted."

Ce n'est pas la vérité?

Later days
David

[jackrussell]

I think it's fair up to a point, but My Fair Lady is a very different beast to Pygmalion.

After all, Shaw was very keen for Pygmalion not to be interpreted as a romance, with the insinuation that Eliza and Higgins were going to get it together. As people continued to interpret the play that way he wrote a prose epilogue making it quite clear that Eliza ends up with Freddie, not Higgins.

The musical, by contrast, clearly enjoys playing on the romantic element, albeit in a way that is much more subtle than most musical romances. It works very well as such, but it is not Pygmalion.

[Salome]

My Fair Lady .. like Pygmalion is not a love story. and asm uch as I love Sondheim.I think he may be just subtly feeling a bit of jealousy knowing that MFL is te only show that consistently beats his shows for the top goal of best musical ever written. LOL

[Pannic]

Well, I can sort of see what he's getting at. Really, with My Fair Lady, all Lerner and Loewe did was take Shaw's Pygmalion, add in some songs, and change the ending. Of course, My Fair Lady is a great piece of theatre, because Pygmalion is a great piece of theatre.

[Salome]

its a greta piece of theatre because of Lerner as well. He wrote some of the most brillaint lyrics ever seen on stage and integrated the songs into Shaw's plot immpeccably.

The script as well is not all Shaw. Lerner did some significant changes. Introducing Alfie early..expanding his role, cutting out alot of things that would slow down a musical.
although Shaw is guiding..Lerner is the Maestro of MFL.

[jackrussell]

True. The book of the musical deviates from the play quite a lot, and is very well done.

However, most of the best jokes are Shaw's.

[Salome]

oh i know..and Rex Harrison insisted on that LOL

[Apples2for10]

[dolbinau]

Yes, I don't understand- he just randomly said that "My Fair Lady" shouldn't exist?

I thought Sondheim generally did not critise other work, composers, performers etc.

[EricMontreal22]

It was an interview between Frank Rich and him so it was in reply to Rich's question. Since we've only gotten random quotes and, as of yet, no transcription I'm not sure exactly what the comment was but it's certainly not Sondheim's way to ranomly make negative comments about shows so don't all jump on him. LOL He's said in the past that he enjoys My Fair Lady but feels "why" when watching it often, so it doesn't completely succeed for him.

here's the whole random list of quotes to put it in SOME context:

On using Spanish lyrics in some songs for the upcoming West Side Story revival: "'I Feel Pretty' and 'A Boy Like That'/'I Have a Love' are not among my finest work. And there are others I wish were in Spanish."

"The tune of 'Somewhere' is one of those Lenny had been trying to get into shows for a very long time. And Lenny found a sucker."

"Anyone Can Whistle is written by the two smartass kids in the back of the classroom."

"Hofstra College once played Merrily backwards. We didn't find out until it was over or else we would have been there with the sheriff and shotguns."

"Then there was a production of Company where Bobby shot himself at the end." (Rich's response: "He shot himself after 'Being Alive'?")

On how Assassins was a hit in London after the first American production was ill received: "In England they just loved the idea of a musical about assassinating American presidents. We should have opened it there!"

"If the theatre can't have bad taste..." (Pause, followed by audience applause.)

On why South Pacific isn't to his taste: "It's the happiest war I've ever seen."

On musicals that may not have great material but artistically succeed anyway: "One of my favorite shows is The Wiz. It's the only show I wasn't involved with that I saw six times. It works."

On why adapting Pygmalion into My Fair Lady wasn't necessary: "They painted the lily. They painted it really well, but it's painted."

"Green Grow The Lilacs is a very bleak play about homosexuality. Would you get that from Oklahoma!? I don't think so." (Rich responds: "From some productions...")

Sondheim talked about how "The Ladies Who Lunch" was a rare case where he wrote a song more for the actor playing the role than for the character. He asked George Furth for some insight on Elaine Stritch, as the bookwriter knew him better than he did. Furth told a story about how the two of them were on an all night drinking binge when they stumbled into a bar at 3am. Stritch looked at the bartender and said... "Just give me a bottle of vodka and a floor plan."

At the end of the evening, after the two men had taken their bows, Rich walked off stage for Sondheim to take in his standing ovation from the large, cheering crowd. As he gave a few bows back to us, I began to wonder if he would keep on bowing after the applause had died down, only to be interrupted by Frank Rich's clapping hands.

[RainbowJude]

[jackrussell]

[Salome]

wrong. even sondheim said a musical is only as good as its book.

[jackrussell]

Well it depends what your priorities are, doesn't it. There are plenty of shows with books of highly dubious quality that'd I'd still go and see.

[Barberous]

These are Arthur Laurents' thoughts on Sondheim and the musical vs book thing:
"In the old days the book didn't matter. There would be a silly story, what they considered 'nice tunes', and the show was a success. But when you take someone like Steve, whose music is directly related to the texture and meaning and character of the story, if that story is deficient, the score is not going to make the show work."
OK, he's hardly unbiased here - he then criticises the books of a few Sondheim shows that he wasn't involved in - but he has a point. (From 'Sondheim & Co' by Craig Zadan, BTW.)

I far prefer Pygmalion to My Fair Lady, but I don't think that's because an adaptation of something already good is automatically doomed. In fact, parts of MFL are good examples of how an adaptation can skillfully riff on certain aspects of the original work in ways that fans of the original can appreciate. Peter Pan's adaptation from play to novel is another example IMO (I don't know the musicals).

Of course, it's always less risky to adapt something flawed. Then no matter how bad your adaptation is, you can say "at least we fixed x and y and z about the original"

[jackrussell]

Exactly. And I still say that for a musical to be "good", the music has to add something to the book. It should give an extra emotional or intellectual resonance that wouldn't be there if the book was performed with the songs removed.

The more perfect the source material, the more difficult it is for the music to add anything that wasn't already covered by the text.

[RainbowJude]

[Barberous]

Hmm, I interpreted Sondheim differently - not sure if I was correct or not. I thought Sondheim was using the phrase 'painting the lily' to mean futilely trying to improve something that was already very good, a la "The lily was already beautiful, why try to make it more so?". However he could as easily have meant complete in itself - "The lily's beauty was already complete, why try to add to it?" And obviously, being 'complete in itself' can be a factor that makes a work of art good!

If Sondheim meant completeness, again I disagree with him. Well, perhaps technically he's correct, but I'm not sure if any play text is "complete" to the extent that it excludes further creative input. If it's all right for actors and directors to continually find new insights in the same roles and plays, surely other interpreters of creative material - such as composers and librettists - should also be free to find new things to bring out of a play? *shrug* To me, the issue is more whether the material is suited to being musicalised or not. (And by that I mean, could the characters credibly sing/dance/etc.) In this case, Shaw was meant to be proud of how dry Pygmalion (supposedly) is, and disliked the idea of it becoming musicalised. That's being discussed a bit in this thread as well, but it's a different idea to "completeness".

[RainbowJude]

[Mark Walton]

Was the story of the Von Trapp family never meant to be turned into The Sound of Music? Were Shalom Aleichem's Tevye Stories never meant to be turned into Fiddler on the Roof? Has Sondheim ever sounded off on those 2?

[jackrussell]

[Hans]

I think it'd be interresting to compare the adaption of Pygmalion to MFL and the adaption of Smiles of a Summernight to ALNM.

Perhaps ALNM adds more to its source material, and kind of interpret the events i a slightly different ldirection. Because I'd say Smiles is pretty complete in itself, yet I think ALNM may be the abolute best example of adapting a play or movie into a musical.

Frankly, I don't understand what this "painting the lily" metaphor means.

[GungaDin]

[quote="jackrussell"]True. The book of the musical deviates from the play quite a lot, and is very well done.
[/quote]

Lerner actually worked from the original "Pygmalion" screenplay rather than the play text.

[LedZeppelinBarbieGirl]