Writer's Block: Time in a bottle
Nov. 21st, 2009 07:03 pm[Error: unknown template qotd]
This is actually tough. I know instantly who springs to mind, but there are two of them - and they were on opposite sides of the Atlantic singing almost completely different styles so it's not like I could sneakily arrange a dual concert.
One the one hand, we have Freddie Mercury, great showman and martyr to AIDS. Wembley's where an awful lot of people want to have been. I love a nice bit of Queen, and I am told - of course I can't know because I was five years old when the frontman died - that they are one of the few bands in the history of time who were every bit as good live as in the studio.
And on the other, Jonathan Larson, brilliant young composer with all the skill and genius of Sondheim but actually listenable, martyr to a heart attack and the American healthcare system. Who knows how much music he had left in him? Sure, dying the night before RENT's first public performance was great publicity and gave Tick... Tick... BOOM! a skin-puckering atmosphere of premonition, but I think I'd rather have more rock operas, even if he did eventually run out of material like Lloyd Webber. Imagine if HE had died right after Superstar. Ok, his quality has steadily declined, but even his most boring show has glittery bits and stays above mediocre. So I'd like to go and see Larson performing TTB himself. And tell him to get a cardiogram.
I think overall Jonathan Larson wins, only because there are oodles of miles of footage of Queen, but no-one was Mark to Larson and recorded him.
This is actually tough. I know instantly who springs to mind, but there are two of them - and they were on opposite sides of the Atlantic singing almost completely different styles so it's not like I could sneakily arrange a dual concert.
One the one hand, we have Freddie Mercury, great showman and martyr to AIDS. Wembley's where an awful lot of people want to have been. I love a nice bit of Queen, and I am told - of course I can't know because I was five years old when the frontman died - that they are one of the few bands in the history of time who were every bit as good live as in the studio.
And on the other, Jonathan Larson, brilliant young composer with all the skill and genius of Sondheim but actually listenable, martyr to a heart attack and the American healthcare system. Who knows how much music he had left in him? Sure, dying the night before RENT's first public performance was great publicity and gave Tick... Tick... BOOM! a skin-puckering atmosphere of premonition, but I think I'd rather have more rock operas, even if he did eventually run out of material like Lloyd Webber. Imagine if HE had died right after Superstar. Ok, his quality has steadily declined, but even his most boring show has glittery bits and stays above mediocre. So I'd like to go and see Larson performing TTB himself. And tell him to get a cardiogram.
I think overall Jonathan Larson wins, only because there are oodles of miles of footage of Queen, but no-one was Mark to Larson and recorded him.