Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

"All About Eve"


bdprovalone
 Share

Recommended Posts

>What probably sidetracked Olson's chances towards solid stardom was her marriage to the celebrated, American musical composer, Alan Jay Lerner.

 

Lerner wasn't a composer, he was a lyricist (in his most celebrated collaboration Fritz Loewe wrote the music).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok . . . :( No doubt you can get technical about that due to his collaboration with Fritz, but Alan did know how to write music. After all, Alan studied at Juilliard and one of his later college classmates was none other than Leonard Bernstein. While I will have to admit Alan is professionally credited with having been designated a great lyricist, he did compose music. I've always felt that such other greats as Yip Hardburg, Oscar Hammerstein II, Lorenz Hart, Arthur Freed, Gus Kahn, Al Dubin, Ray Evans, Sammy Cahn, Ned Washingon, Leo Robin and Ira Gershwin must have had a hand or two in the music process and therefore comes my reaction of sometimes saying they are in some effect assoicated to composing. Perhaps, I should have just said, "Songwriter" rather than composer. But then, if the overall entitlement is as a lyricist, so be it :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the reasons Oscar Hammerstein II ended his association with Lorenz Hart is because Hart had little discipline and was always late in providing the music for Hammerstein's lyrics.

 

Unlike Hart, Richard Rodgers had the music ready when Hammerstein wanted it. While there is always a certain amount of give-and-take in such collaborations, each man's role -- composer and lyricist -- is well defined. A good lyricist can craft lyrics for an equally good tune that meet the dramatic needs of a song, and vice versa when the pair's starting point is the lyrics and not the music. So it was with Lerner and Loewe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was Dick Rogers who walked out on a depressed, sickly, alcoholic Lorenz Hart and not Oscar. However, Oscar did know Lorenz during their college years and for a very short time, professionally worked with both Rogers & Hart. After Dick Rogers severed what was considered one of the greatest musical collaborations in American entertainment, and he joined forces with Oscar, not long after Lorenz died. Over the years, there have been all sorts of speculation on the issue of Dick Rogers' attitude towards Lorenz and his musical partnership with Hart. To some degree of thinking, Dick Rogers was never so comfortable with Lorenz's hidden homosexual lifestyle. Yet, because they were friends for such a long time, especially during their youth, Dick Rogers stayed devoted to the partnership, until Lorenz became too much of a burden to handle. Both Dick and Oscar did what they could to aid Lorenz. This was at about the time Dick had collaborated with Oscar for their legendary musical "Oklahoma." Upon leaving the hospital, Lorenz managed to come to see the opening of the show and then he died. It was said by some that Lorenz came to realize that evening of the show, Dick had now totally moved on with Oscar and their could never be a return to their once magnificent partnership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

; I have to agree with you on Larry Hart being the finest lyricist of that great generation of popular songwriters from the first haft of the last century. While the others are great in their own right, Larry had the flare, wit and sometimes a tragic pensive style to the songs he co-wrote with Dick Rogers. Oh, one more thing: perhaps you may have notice when watching "All About Eve," you can hear some of Rogers & Hart music during the segment of "Bill's welcome home party."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that describing the end of the "Rogers (sic) and Hart" partnership as "Rogers (sic) walking out on Hart" is completely inaccurate. Larry Hart was a depressive and an alcoholic and had become unreliable. Richard Rodgers had other opportunities. He walked out on nobody. Hart was just about done and everyone knew it, Hart included.

 

Best,

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well you have written something that is impossible to agrue with. Of course one could say that results are all that matter. In this case the actual lyrics one creates and that talent is just a word applied to people that don't produce results (or have limited results).

 

e.g. that James Dean sure had talent!

 

Since there isn't way to measure talent there is nothing much to discuss. I have to hand it to you for leaving me speechless (ha ha).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry

:0 . . . When you get to my old-age, it's sort of difficult to keep up with the keyboard. But, I have to accept the correction. I will also say that Dick (whom I knew) had to call it quits with Larry and thus the feeling among most in the entertainment community at the time was viewed as something of a "walk-out" on the partnership. Most everybody in show business admired Larry and felt that Dick could have held out, until Larry dry himself out. It's surmised that Dick just gave up on Larry. When asked about the situation by the press, Dick didn't give much in the way of any perspectives to the future of the partnership, remaining silent on various questions and thus the feeling around Broadway was that he was simply waiting for Larry to rise above his predicament. Right after their last show, "By Jupiter" in 1942, Dick was finally reunited with Oscar to consider teaming up with him. Those last two years, while Larry was in and out of rehab before his death were as difficult for Dick. He had no choice in the matter to leaving the partnership, if Dick was going to keep his career stable. The main point is that Dick never told Larry directly that the partnership was through. Larry was to find out, somewhat unexpectedly, when he left the rehabilitation center to discover that Dick had begun working on a show with Oscar. . .And, most us know what a great, smash hit that show would become. It was all a rather strange and shaky situation to consider just how Dick went about calling off the partnership. After all these years, it looks as if Dick just didn't want to really have to say "it's over," and so for a time he kept himself and his relationship with Larry in limbo, until Oscar showed up and the rest is history. In the end, no one could have ever imagined or predict what destiny awaited Dick and his songwriting partnership with Oscar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think unless one was there in 1942 and could be inside the heads of all the parties one really can't judge what happened and who was right or wrong or if anyone was right or wrong. I knew Mary Rodgers and only Richard Rodgers near the end of his life. The feeling I always got was that he had put with a great deal and had had enough. Sort of like an abused spouse. I can't blamed an abused spouse for "walking out." I just wouldn't call it that.

 

Every single person involved in any way in 1942 is either dead or over 95 years old. We'll never really know.

 

But we have their glorious music and lyrics and, in the end, that's all that really matters.

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry . . . I can agree with what you just said . . . It's just that Larry Hart was a talent worth saving and this I think leads to all sorts of speculation that while Dick became fed up, he didn't do enough to save Larry from the reckless lifestyle that eventually consumed him. But then, when you read between the lines of those times long past, it stands to reason why Larry had so many demons to deal with and have to face. I heard it said that for Larry there would never be any peacefulness to his life, because 1. He was an ugly looking little man. And, 2. He was gay. In those days, that would have been enough of a burden to carry along life's beaten pathway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that is very funny!@

 

I have to agree with another poster here; At the end of the day what matter is we have these great songs. I play many of these songs since they are jazz standards and I just love them. Even though I play them as instrumentals I always learn the words since that helps get the melody just right. So when I play the melody I try to 'sing it' on guitar like Frank would sing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Movieprofessor: Yes, I agree with you here. But I do wonder how much responsibility Dick Rodgers or anyone else had for "saving" Larry Hart? He didn't seem all that interested in saving himself. You can't lead a horse to water .... It's one of those tragic cases and, in the end, since I believe in personal responsibility the only person ultimately responsible for Larry Hart's demise is Larry Hart.

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing I'll disagree with here are that Rodgers and Hart's songs are "Jazz standards." I love Jazz, these songs are often played by Jazz musicians, but Rodgers and Hart's songs are popular and musical theater standards. They were not written in a Jazz idiom and neither of them were Jazz composers (like Ellington or Strayhorn). Just a little quibble.

 

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rodgers was particuarly quick and efficient in coming up with his melodies (It was said that Rodgers "peed" melody). For that reason, Hart's procrastination was particularly annoying to someone with the work habits of Rodgers. An ideal partner for Rodgers would have been Sammy Cahn, who was equally quick in creating lyrics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

All the jazz players I know (and I know many), define a jazz standard as a song that is often played in a jazz style. It has nothing to do with the origins of those songs. Take Cole Poter. Most of his songs were written for plays but many are now jazz standards in that jazz musicians love to play them and we are 'required' to know at least the chord changes. (i.e. if someone calls out a 'standard' and I say I don't know it, I look like a bozo,,, and hey this has happened since I'm not a pro!).

 

For example, Autumn Leaves is a major jazz standard (as I define the term), but was a French Folk song before Mercer put words to it).

 

Thus there is a difference between a jazz standard and jazz music (music written by jazz musicians like the Duke or Miles). The latter can also be jazz standards depending on how popular they are with jazz musicians.

 

I have jazz standard song books and there are many Roger and Hart songs listed. Just my POV as a amateur jazz musician.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose you can define and use the term anyway you wish but you might choose to play the theme from Tristan and Isolde by Wagner in a jazz way and it wouldn't make it a "jazz standard." It's still a classical standard. The same is true for pop standards -- they may be played by jazz musicians but that still doesn't make them "jazz standards," -- just standards played by jazz musicians. It may seem like a semantic difference but there is a different. A standard is a standard in the idiom in which it originated not in the idiom which occasionally plays it.

 

I think my problem is that some people have come to use the term "Jazz" too loosely and put all sorts of things -- pop and theater songs in particular -- into that "Jazz" category when they don't belong there.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love Jazz. I love what Jazz musicians do with standards from other idioms but the actual number of Jazz standards -- songs created in the Jazz idiom -- are much smaller than one would think, but they're out there so there is no need to claim a pop or theater standard.

 

Best,

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

One key criteria which I mentioned was the number of times a song is featured by jazz musicians. Thus if a jazz record is released and it contains a pop song that is NOT a jazz standard. But if that same pop song is featured by jazz musicians on multiple albums over the years it then becomes a jazz standard. For example, the Beatles - Here, There and Everywhere is now considered to be a jazz standard because for a Beatle song it has been featured on multiple jazz albums over the years. It also uses a cycle chord progression in G (Gmaj, Amin, Bmin, Cmaj, F#m7b5, B7) that harmonically is interesting to solo over. A few Stevie Wonder tunes are also now jazz standards for their harmonic interest.

 

The reason is this: younger jazz musicians learn from the masters. When we hear a master play a tune we learn from this. If it was 'cool' for the master to play the tune it is cool for us. This is then passed on to the next generation and the next and a song becomes a jazz standard if it is play often enough.

 

So we can agree to disagree. As I said there is a difference between songs created in the jazz idiom (tunes by Miles, Coltrane, etc...) and non jazz idiom tunes that us jazz muscians must learn to say we know 100 common jazz standards.

 

i.e. a show tune can be a jazz standard but it is clearly NOT a song in the jazz idiom. Trust me this is how all the jazz players I know and have played with use the term jazz standard.

 

Oh, and a song in the jazz idiom isn't a jazz standard by definiton since it might not be well know. So What by Miles is from the jazz idiom AND a jazz standard by not every song Miles wrote is a jazz standard.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but I don't mind.

 

I have to chip in that my familiarity with the great songsters is due 100% to my being a big, big Ella Fitzgerald fan (I own nearly all the songbook albums) and Rogers and Hart is one of the best . Great versions of Bewitched , Blue Room , Mountain Greenery and A Ship Without a Sail (the last one is the saddest sad song ever.)

 

Plus there's a really nutty obscurity called To Keep My Love Alive about some Lucretia Borgia-esque chick who has murdered her seven ( ?) husbands- very clever lyrics, Wonder what show that was from.

 

Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 12, 2011 8:21 PM

 

Edited by: JonnyGeetar on Jul 12, 2011 8:24 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...