Psycho Point-Counterpoint and Mauceri Letter

Compiled by Lukas Kendall

First things first: Here's a letter that John Mauceri (conductor of the Hollywood Bowl Orchestra) wrote which was printed in the Sunday New York Times a few weekends ago. This was (obviously) responding to several other letters, which I'm afraid I haven't seen so I can't fill in the background. But here's John's -- always neat to see movie music hit the mainstream press:

To the editor:

Most people who consider themselves nice would like to think that great art is created by good (or at least, nice) people, but alas, genius is rather indiscriminate when it comes to the characters of the people it pours through.

No case is more difficult for our time than that of Richard Wagner. And no one is more passionately wounded by this than his courageous great-grandson, Gottfried. But artists, especially great ones, don't know what their art is really about.

If Wagner thought of Alberich as a Jew, I never did. Alberich is merely a villain who is both physically and spiritually repulsive, like many other villains in myth and literature who were created by non-anti-Semites. Those who love Wagner's music are not being seduced by its inherent evil but by its transcendent truth about the mysteries of human love. Even Wagner himself, when looking at his completed score to Tristan, commented on not knowing how he had actually done it. And this would be the most honest thing he ever said.

Both Joseph Horowitz and Gottfried Wagner's arguments notwithstanding, the ultimate truth of the efficacy of Wagner's musical genius and the ironic medium through which it ultimately conquered the world can be found in the film music of Max Steiner, Erich Wolfgang Korngold, Franz Waxman, Miklos Rozsa, Bernard Herrmann and Alfred Newman. All of them were Jews, and three of them had to flee Europe to avoid being murdered by the Nazis. All of them used Wagner's harmonic language as well as his method of telling epic tales by associating a recognizable musical theme with an object, character or action.

This is now known as "movie music," and it was an astonished Gottfried Wagner who sat in my house a year ago and heard recordings of the scores to "Gone with the Wind," "A Place in the Sun" and "Vertigo." "But that is my great-grandfather!" he said incredulously.

When Steiner was once given credit for inventing movie music, he said: "Don't be ridiculous. Wagner invented it." He wasn't kidding, either. 

John Mauceri, New York

From: MaestroJW@aol.com

Isn't there anyone that is as offended as I am that Psycho was remade, and especially how it was remade. The film itself is a tribute to Hitchcock... ok, that's great. But what about Herrmann? Song scores were the very bane of Herrmann's career, especially in the breakup of him and Hitch. Psycho is celebrated with a song score album, songs that weren't even used in the movie, songs that were written and attached to the movie soley to make money. Herrmann detested this tradeoff in artistic integrity... I picked up the Psycho CD in the store today just to look at it, just wanting to see Herrmanns name. Wasn't there! Prelude, Danny Elfman... The Murder, Danny Elfman... Finale, Danny Elfman. Wow, thanks for a great score Mr. Elfman. Isn't Elfman some kind of fan of Bernard Herrmann's, why would he not give credit to one of the greatest composers of this century?

If it weren't for song soundtracks and the greed of the people that run Hollwood, Herrmann wouldn't have been ousted from Hollywood, who knows how many great scores he could have written during the years of his absence from film scoring. No one has made mention of this. Instead of bringing attention to the composer of one of the greatest film scores ever, the new remake just ignores him.

Now you see how tired I am in putting together this column, in that I thought this was a pasting of the movie, when instead it's a pasting of the record. All I'll say is that the Danny Elfman credit is following the popular music tradition of crediting performers rather than composers, and in this case Elfman (along with Bartek) adapted and re-recorded Herrmann's music.

From: William V. Malpede, WVM64@aol.com

I have recently returned from viewing Gus Van Sant's remake of PSYCHO, and wish to perhaps open up a dialog with other devotees of Hitchcock's 1960 film and its score by Bernard Herrmann.

I must admit, after plunking down my eight bucks to see this film (thereby contributing to its built-in box-office), I kinda wanted to dislike it. Well, I soon found myself experiencing an undeniably interesting and thought- provoking time at the cinema. No, not because I was viewing an original new film, but because of the contrasts and comparisons with Hitchcock's original. To 'cut to the chase,' I found the actors' interpretations of the script and characters most interesting and refreshing, and was also reminded about how we cinemagoers have been enriched because of the artistry of of Alfred Hitchcock and Bernard Herrmann.

I have been a devotee of Herrmann since age twelve when I first viewed David Raksin's documentary about his friend and colleague in 1976. I have always been struck by the ferocity of many of Herrmann's film scores, PSYCHO being a good example. I felt that overall, PSYCHO 98 features a pretty slick performance of Herrmann's score by Mr. Elfman and Mr. Bartek. (those subtle, added violin lines and figures do not go unnoticed). I found interesting the treatment of the whole "cleanup" sequence, which included a variation on a cue not heard in Herrmann's original, but recorded by Joel McNeely on his album of the score (just what were the original cues/spotting for these scenes?).

One area of dissappointment for me, however, concerned the re-scoring of the celebrated murder cues. Whether it was because of Herrmann's direction, added reverb, a "grittier" recording, or simply a hotter mix/dub, the original PSYCHO's biting and piercing murder cues seemed more effective. I believe that PSYCHO 98's decision to delay the first murder cue until moments AFTER we see Mrs. Bates/the killer, softens the cue's effectiveness. By beginning the cue just as the shower curtain is opened (PSYCHO 60), the cue more effectively serves its function as an almost sonic extension of Norman Bates' psychosis.

By delaying the music until the actual stabbing - the cue loses its psychological edge, and becomes an accompaniment for the "physical" murder act, rather than a sonic expression of Bates' madness turned to murder. I must applaud Mr. Elfman and the PSYCHO 98 team for bringing Herrmann's music to the screen again, but I do feel that in many instances, Hitchcock's film more thoroughly acknowleges and utilizes Herrmann's presence as an integrated, active participant in the psychological effect this film has on its audience. During the murder scenes, the drive in the rainstorm, and Lila's walk up to and through the house, inevitable comparisons to PSYCHO 60 arise. Suffice it to say here, that by simply doing what their unique artistic senses told them, Herrmann and Hitchcock created a classic cinema experience. While I do feel that PSYCHO 98 is thought-provoking, for me - it is so only because of the original. And after all, this is probably one reason Mr. Van Sant made his film.

Through discussing with myself and others all these comparisons and contrasts, I find that I did have a good time at PSYCHO 98. Maybe all that really matters, is that my friend, who didn't know the score so intimately, turned to me at one point and said, "this music is REALLY scary." What does anyone else think? What was your experience? (BUT - do we really need all those crickets and cicadas?)

So, here are the Reader Mail Bag questions:

1) What did you think of this remake? If you hated it, give specific reasons why, so that I can't write a point-by-point rebuttal.

2) What did you think of the use of Herrmann's score?

Let it all hang out. Also, see the new poll, because I'm interested in how many die-hard Herrmann buffs are out there. Send to:

MailBag@filmscoremonthly.com