This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stephen Sondheim article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other concerns about the biography of a living person, please report the issue to the biographies of living persons noticeboard. If you are connected to the subject of this article and need help with issues related to it, please see this page.

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if there are other concerns about the biography of a living person, please report the issue to the biographies of living persons noticeboard. If you are connected to the subject of this article and need help with issues related to it, please see this page. WikiProject Biography (Rated B-Class) BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WPBiographybiography articles Biography portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. WikiProject Musical Theatre (Rated B-Class) Musical TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject Musical TheatreTemplate:Musicals-projectMusical Theatre articles Musical Theatre portal v • d • e Stephen Sondheim is part of WikiProject Musical Theatre, organized to improve and complete musical theatre articles and coverage on Wikipedia. You can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. WikiProject LGBT studies (Rated B-Class) LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:LGBTProjectLGBT articles LGBT portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies (talk), which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. WikiProject New York City (Rated B-Class, High-importance) New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:Project New York CityNew York City articles New York City portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.  B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.  High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contents 1 Opera houses 2 Classy but 3 Homosexuality never stated 4 Bump on his head 5 Homosexuality 6 Sotto voce? 7 Directors on list of major works 8 Picture 9 Foxy 10 "Losing My Mind" 11 Harmonic style 12 NPOV and fact tags 13 ""Sond" means sound, or body of water" 14 "We don't know if this is really true," etc. 15 Some random cites = 16 Personal life beyond childhood 17 Only child? 18 Only listens to Bach? 19 Trivia section 20 Opening sentence - weasel words? 21 Expansion 22 Numbers 23 Enchanted? 24 1993 Great Performances broadcast of Carnegie Hall concert

[edit] Opera houses

"Sweeney Todd (1979), Sondheim's most operatic score (and his only show to find a definite foothold in opera houses)..." Didn't A Little Night Music play at NYCO? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.255.41 (talk) 00:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

¿Is he panning to do a new musical?

[edit] Classy but

Good work but needs fantastic much touching up as readability is extremely low.

I found it a bit confusing that some of his works are in the text while others are in the list below. Should this get unified? Sebastian 03:07 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)

Made works list unified. This may be redundant, but I think the complete works list is beneficial. Minor works will be blurbed on the main page and not linked, I think. Dreamword 00:07 Jan 26, 2003 (UTC)

The Lloyd Webber bit is a bit misplaced. They are entirely different artists. Sondheim hasn't been commercially successful but don't think the Webber reference really gets to that point in a pithy way.

[edit] Homosexuality never stated

Could someone please reinsert a section on Sonheim being homosexual, preferably with a source? He's listed in categories of gay musicians, LGBQ public figures, ectera - but it is NEVER mentioned in this version of the article. Thanks. Zakolantern 01:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe everyone thinks it's obvious.

I know typically we're not supposed to edit other user comments but- well, come on. ChrisStansfield 10:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, it's ludicrous this is never mentioned; it smacks of homophobia that such a central part of the man and his life is missing. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 19:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed - I just found out Bob Fosse was straight (surprise) by reading the article and having details of his personal life mentioned. The omission of any personal details (relationships, etc.) after adolescence is silly in this case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.55.112 (talk) 05:51, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bump on his head

What's with the bump on his head? It's pretty pronounced and I've done lots of searching and have found no answer except to find I'm not the only one to wonder.--Jhlynes 23:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Homosexuality

Is it really relevant to mention a highly questionnable hypothesis on the cause (if any could be found) of his homosexuality ??

No, it would be discrimination. I mean, you don't put a hypothesis of Francis Ford Coppola, or any other, for beign straight

User:Intones

.

[edit] Sotto voce?

I think that's really odd phrasing for one's sexuality. Any suggestions to change that? IvanP 14:35, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Directors on list of major works

I really think the list of major works should include the director. Harold Prince made a HUGE contribution to the shaping of those shows. Anyone object if I add it?

Directors of musicals are usually an integral part of the authorship team. Please do add directors to the list. TheScotch 07:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I've now added directors for most of these myself. TheScotch 19:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

Definately needed in my opinion MikeyB! 19:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Foxy

Is it necessary to go into such detail about Foxy's alleged "sexually predatory" behaviour towards her son?

Yes, it was a mjor factor in the shape of Sondheim's life. She was one of the major reasons he ended up spending so much time with Hammerstein. -Luke Callahan

[edit] "Losing My Mind"

Did Liza Minelli's version of "Losing My Mind" ever hit the top 40 in the United States or Europe? I think it might have, which would mean that "Send In The Clowns" wouldn't be his only Top 40 hit. Can anyone verify that? ChrisLK 23:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

According to Liza Minelli#Hit Singles it reached #6 in UK in 1989 and #11 in US Dance charts footie 20:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I think I'll change the "Send in the Clowns" thing then. ChrisLK 20:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I realize this is an old discussion, but many of the songs for Madonna for Dick Tracy did quite well.... —  MusicMaker 17:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Harmonic style

I have never heard someone's harmony described as being "angular" the way it is here: "He also displays a penchant for angular harmonies and intricate melodies..." Lush, dense, complex, open, etc., but how can harmony be angular? Is there a better word to use? Wspencer11 17:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The passage currently reads "He also displays a penchant for angular harmonies and intricate melodies reminiscent of Bach....".

Not only do I not know what an "angular [harmony]" is, I also don't see how Sondheim's melodies are "reminiscent of Bach" (or of Bach's melodies, for that matter). I suspect that the writer doesn't either, and that this is merely blowing smoke. (Actually, I think "intricate" would work better to describe Sondheim's harmonies than to describe his melodies.) TheScotch 09:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

That whole section is typically pretentious - in a sophomoric way - of the entire article. Yea, of almost everything at Wikipedia where experts fear to tread and only fools contribute.

[edit] NPOV and fact tags

I did a little bit of work on this article; there are many unsourced quotes and statements that need sources. I also tried to work on the POV stuff, if anyone else wants to take a crack at it, feel free. It's a very detailed biographical study, and someone (or several people) obviously took great time and care in writing it, some of the language just needs to be toned down. Ckessler 03:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The unsourced statements are definitely all from Meryl Secrest's biography of him from about 10 years ago.

[edit] ""Sond" means sound, or body of water"

"Sond" is not a German word.

Yes it is, halfwit.

[edit] "We don't know if this is really true," etc.

Don't these count as "weasel words?"

[edit] Some random cites =

stuff about his mom being a bitch. She said her only regret in life was giving birth to him. http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0786412690&id=BfWyQ39xk0wC&pg=PA109&lpg=PA109&ots=nqequ0AxI0&dq=%22Stephen+Sondheim%22+biography&sig=GCsJh0C2fH3KsSbRM2NPwvmbl7o#PPA109,M1

[edit] Personal life beyond childhood

It seems that fears about controversy have really done damage to this entry- there is virtually nothing regarding Sondheim's personal life beyond childhood, and even the details of his childhood are lacking. The facts of Sondheim's relationship with his mother may be disquieting, but they are well-referenced and confirmed by Sondheim himself, so there's hardly a worry about libel. Considering the fact that the most common criticism of Sondheim's output during the 70's and 80's was "coldness," I think his troubled childhood has real relevance to the article. What about his relationship with Mary Rodgers, which both have described as a major turning point in their lives? Or the fact that even though the two were close, Sondheim and Richard Rodgers couldn't stand each other? The complete skirting of the fact of Sondheim's open homosexuality is also more than odd. Sondheim gave a pretty open and revealing interview to the New York Times Magazine a few years ago and there have been other articles that spoke at some length of his long-term relationship with a younger composer (whose name escapes me at the moment.) They were together several years- if Sondheim were heterosexual and had married a long-term lover, especially one of note herself, that would be considered important and appropriate in a biographical entry. It should be considered appropriate in this case, too.

I'd put all of this stuff back in myself, but looking over the history and the talk pages, I feel it would br promptly removed. Could somebody explain why? This deserves real discussion! ChrisStansfield 06:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

A wikipedia biographical article should concern itself chiefly with the subject's professional career, and it should be pithy. In particular it should refrain from psychological analysis of the subject, whether or not that analysis may be grounds for "libel". Sondheim's friendship with Mary Rodgers and difficult relationship with Richard Rodgers are fairly trivial matters. Yes, they do come up in book-length biographies (Sondheim & Company, etc.), but even there they are typically dealt with only very briefly.

Good christ I can't believe I just read that. So in other words there's your torpedo - there's the person who promises to revert anything you contribute. 'Wikipedia - history in the making. Over and over and over again.'

Re: "and there have been other articles that spoke at some length of his long-term relationship with a younger composer (whose name escapes me at the moment.) They were together several years- if Sondheim were heterosexual and had married a long-term lover, especially one of note herself, that would be considered important and appropriate in a biographical entry.":

If the "younger composer" is the one I'm thinking of (mentioned toward the end of Secrest's book), he wasn't with Sondheim very long, and he wasn't especially a person "of note" in his own right (which is why I can't remember his name either). I think you'll find that most wikipedia biographical articles don't mention spouses at all (certainly none of those I've chiefly authored have), even when the marriages in question have lasted many decades, and judging by Secrest's book Sondheim doesn't appear to have had any really long-term romantic relationships. He lives alone (except for his cook), and appears to have lived alone most of his life. TheScotch 10:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

With no mention of Mr. Sondheim's personal life as an adult, especially of a romantic/dating/sexual (pick your word) life, this article is guilty of turning him into a metaphorical eunuch, so often done to gay men previously, less so today. It reminds me of how famous gay men, especially Hollywood actors, were treated and reported on in the 50s: girlfriends/wives were arranged, male love interests were never mentioned or referred to as friends, etc. This omission in the current article is retrograde. Savacek (talk) 17:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Only child?

Speaking of lack-of-detail in the childhood section, he is not an only child, he has a brother named Walt.

Just to clarify the family situation. Sondheim's father, Herbert, and Alicia Babe had two sons, Herbert Sondheim, Jr, (born in Autumn 1943) and Walter Sondheim (born in Feb. 1946). Herbert Sr. and Alicia were married in a registry office in Stamford, Connecticut, in 1943, having obtained a Mexican divorce earlier. There was a legal separation between Herbert Sr and Foxy (Sondheim's mother) in autumn 1941, and a New York divorce was obtained in 1946. This rather long-winded account is just to set the stage for this: Herbert Jr. and Walter are Stephen Sondheim's HALF brothers. (reference: Stephen Sondheim, A Life, Meryle Secrest, 1998, ISBN 0-385-33412-5, pages 28-30).JeanColumbia 19:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: "Herbert Sr. and Alicia were married in a registry office in Stamford, Connecticut, in 1943, having obtained a Mexican divorce earlier.":

That sounds like Merrily We Roll Along: backward. I take it you mean, "Herbert, Sr having obtained a Mexican divorce from Foxy earlier". TheScotch 10:15, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked up some relevant portions in the book via Amazon's 'search inside,' and it indicates that Stephen and the younger kids lived in the same house for several years after Stephen moved in with his father. I was not assaulting the family tree with my original question of only-child-hood, just pointing out that I didn't think the statement in the article was accurate. I personally do not think that children with half-siblings can accurately be described as "only children" ... don't half siblings count as children? Is there another word; can you be a half-only-child? Sure, he was the only child for the first few years, but that's always true until the second child is born. The sentence in question seems to be from the book review at amazon.com, anyway, rather than a direct source (like the book). I propose changing it to reflect the family situation. Again, I'm not taking issue with your distinction about the parentage of the younger two, just saying that the description "an only child" doesn't fit -- not by the definition provided at the linked-to page on "only child." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.197.31.27 (talk) 16:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Only listens to Bach?

The part in the Maturity section about Sondheim saying he only listens to Bach really needs a citation. Especially since Sondheim donated his record collection of over 13,000 recordings to the Library of Congress and they were not all Bach.--Timmyk0385 16:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I heard Sondheim speak today (6 July 2007) in Sydney and he seemed bemused by the suggestion that Bach was his favourite composer. He expressed a preference for composers from Brahms to Stravinsky, including Ravel and Racmaninoff. 125.255.8.224 15:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)QP

[edit] Trivia section

I have removed the Trivia section - please see WP:BLP for Trivia sections and living persons. --Ozgod 04:31, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I have temporarily reverted the edit. According to WP:BLP: "Biographies of living persons should not have trivia sections. Instead, relevant sourced claims should be woven into the article." (Emphasis mine.) According to Trivia Section: ...Trivia sections are considered by some contributors to be a poor method of laying out an entry and believe that the information would better be presented in the body of the article instead of within a separate section...

There is no official ruling on trivia sections. It is a matter of style of presentation that is up for debate by wiki contributors. (Emphasis mine). I agree with you that a trivia section in this case is poor style, but rather than simply delete it, I feel that, as per recommendations, the relevant info (of which there is some) should be incorporated into the main article. If you can't be bothered to do so, than at least leave it alone for a couple of days until I or someone else can set aside the time necessary to do so. ChrisStansfield 18:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

The only entry here I can see being reasonably worked into the article proper is the reference to the "Theatre Arts" school. TheScotch 10:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I've now "removed" the others. TheScotch 10:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Now I've gone further and removed the last remaining bit of trivia and with it the section heading (since there's nothing left). I really did try to incorporate it in the article, but after investigation it appeared to me not worthy. It would be different maybe if Sondheim were on the faculty, but he seems to be only nominally connected with the organization. TheScotch 19:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opening sentence - weasel words?

Sondheim is widely seen as his generation's leading writer of the stage musical...

Wouldn't it be more encyclopedic to open it with something like "Sondheim is an American composer?"

Thoughts? Springreturning 20:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the comments of Springreturning, and rearranged the opening to be less POV and to omit the "weasel" words. JeanColumbia 23:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion

I have expanded some sections a little bit - adding the "work away from Broadway" section, for example, which I think could stand expansion itself. I would really like to add a section on his later personal life, since that bit ends pretty much when he's 16. I have Secrest's biography as a source, and all I want to see is a couple of paragraphs, just to round the article out. I see this was a bone of contention before, so I'll wait on it in case somebody objects.

Also, I am noticing a really adoring tone in a lot of the prose of the article which isn't really appropriate for an encyclopedia; there's also a lot of show jargon ("concept musical" and the like) that I'm trying to either define or eliminate. -67.85.180.72 14:49, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Numbers

From the Manual of Style: "In the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers (from zero to nine) are spelled out; numbers of more than one digit are generally rendered as digits, but may be spelled out if they are expressed in one or two words (sixteen, eighty-four, two hundred, but 3.75, 544, 21 million)." [1]

I have therefore changed the "numbers of more than one digit" to comply with the prescribed MOS. JeanColumbia 10:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no way in hell ten should not be spelled out except within an arithmetic problem or an accounting spreadsheet. Nineteen could conceivably rendered as a numeral but generally should not be. TheScotch 10:51, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I concede to your obviously rather emotional argument, which seems to mean a great deal to you. You certainly may override the MOS-it's not set in stone, anyway, and I am not the style police. The world is certainly full enough of shoulds. Have a nice day. JeanColumbia 11:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

As you quote it, it may be written with odd emphasis. The point of these sorts of stipulations is that the smaller numbers should be spelled out, not that the larger numbers should necessarily be rendered as numerals. (There is no precise cut-off point.) It seems to me you're looking at this backward, and the unfortunate wording of the quote may have helped to give you the wrong impression. TheScotch 11:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

At risk of belaboring the point, here, for perspective, are some citations:

Donald Hall, Writing Well, p.299:

"Print out the figures except when they are long to the point of being ridiculous. If you can write that a town has 'one hundred and four thousand inhabitants,' write it. If necessity requires precision, '104,627' will do, and 'one hundred and four thousand, six hundred and twenty-seven' might be precious."

Margaret Shertzer, The Elements of Grammar, p. 125:

"Spell out numbers from one through ten, except in a series of related numbers. In formal writing, numbers that can be expressed in one or two words are spelled out, but figures may be used in letters or reports."

Hodges and Whitten, Harbrace College Handbook, p. 100:

"Although usage varies, writers tend to spell out numbers that can be expressed in one word or two; they regularly use figures for other numbers."

I submit that since wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, it needs to use formal prose, and thus the rule should not be worded such that it implies that spelling out one-word or two-word numbers greater than nine is an exceptional practice. TheScotch 05:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Enchanted?

I was watching the Academy Awards and heard that he did work for the 2007 movie "enchanted". Can anyone back up this claim or am I going senile at only 14 years? Thanks, Lazylaces (Talk to me 01:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you're thinking of Stephen Schwartz? AJD (talk) 02:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 1993 Great Performances broadcast of Carnegie Hall concert

I was surprised to see that their is no mention of Sondheim - A Celebration at Carnegie Hall on this page. It was released on DVD and CD as well as being aired on PBS on Great Performances and had a lot of great performers involved.Nrswanson (talk) 19:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)