Barbra Streisand: Release Me

In Streisand’s voice, every song is about Streisand’s voice.

Barbra Streisand

Release Me

Label: Columbia
US Release Date: 2012-10-09
UK Release Date: 2012-10-08

In her mind she holds the whole thing, the song and its nuances.

She sees where each syllable will fall in her voice, whose contours and abilities she knows more intimately than she knows her lover, maybe more intimately than she knows herself.

She anticipates how she’ll modulate the flow of air to produce the specific timbre she’ll deploy for the word “youuuuuu,” the exact rate of vibrato for that note, how she’ll climb from there to the phrase “start anew” and its falling transformation into the next phrase, the “ooo” of “anew” eliding into “I’ll solve the mysteries .. .” – and only then the calibrated pause! – “ ... if you’re the prize.”

She knows where she’ll take liberty with the song’s rhythms, transforming straight eighth notes into different sorts of tuplet – enough to imprint the song with her name, not so much that the effect wears out its welcome – all the way up to the climax, “I’d learn to CHAAANGE the stars and CHAAAANGE our fortunes too!”, a girlish rasp in her voice. (Does she think to herself, “This is the girlish spot?” Even if it’s just a subconscious thing?)

Don’t ask me how close this interpretation hews to the reality of Barbra Streisand’s mind – you’d have to ask her. But that’s the impression you get from this particular song, “With One More Look at You” (from A Star Is Born, recorded in 1977), and the others on Streisand’s new archival album Release Me. Plenty of singers sing their songs with personal nuances (it’s sort of the price of admission), and since fans listen to their recordings over and over, we memorize those nuances as though they were part of the songs. Streisand is different from most pop singers, if a pop singer’s what she is, in that her nuances sound planned rather than improvised. She approaches every song like raw materials that she’ll mold into structures, precise and glistening. In her voice, even a simple song like Randy Newman’s “I Think It’s Going to Rain Today” (‘70) sounds like classical art song. She deviates from the notes on the page, but her deviations sound notated; her interpretation is the whole story.

Pauline Kael back in 1980: “When Streisand sings, her command of the audience is in her regal stillness; she distills her own emotions. You feel that she doesn’t need the audience – that she could close her eyes and sing with the same magnetic power.” This rings true, but then how has she harnessed such a huge audience? And it isn’t just a cult audience, though one of those famously exists (ahem “Coffee Talk”). She’s sold tens of millions of albums, and Release Me entered the Billboard album charts at No. 7, making her the only person to score multiple top 10 albums in each of the last six decades. She’s basically the patron saint of Glee, which is funny because it’s true. (Seriously, back in high school show choir I knew a girl with a Rachel-level Streisand obsession.)

The main attraction is her voice, which nobody can deny is a glorious gift that she’s honed into a powerful and delicate instrument. She can coo and belt her way through any song she wants, including Antonio Carlos Jobim’s difficult bossa “Lost In Wonderland” (‘68). She tackles different genres with authority, as when she gives a warm, Anne Murray-ish reading to Larry Gatlin’s “Try to Win a Friend” (‘77). But besides her talent itself, audiences love Streisand’s command, how she radiates the sense that every song must be sung as she is singing it in this moment. Because she uses an array of different vocal techniques without exhausting them, each song becomes a landscape. Even if you know better than to imitate her singing, it’s tempting to memorize the way she sings a particular song, to write yourself into every nuance as though charting your course on a map. My high school euphonium teacher was a Streisand fan. At one lesson, trying to teach me how to temper my vibrato, he jumped up and turned on a Streisand CD, skipping ahead to the exact teachable moment.

Streisand’s style has its downside. Listening to her sing can be like watching a home run derby – an impressive display of physical prowess, but nothing’s at stake. The narrator of her 1967 “Willow, Weep for Me” has never been sad. People like to say she’s “acting” when she sings, but with her unmistakable voice and technique, her unwillingness to let herself go, who exactly is she portraying besides Barbra Streisand singing a song? (Her fine, loose movie acting is a whole other thing.) The most actorly song here is Alan and Marilyn Bergman’s “Mother and Child” (‘73), a horrifically cloying duet between Streisand as doting mother and Streisand as scaredy cat child; both Streisands finally sing together in multitracked counterpoint. The song becomes reasonably interesting if you hear it as Mom entering a psychotic fugue state, a prelude to infanticide. It is not interesting otherwise.

And that’s the other downside: Streisand’s musical taste. For every great selection here – like Newman’s searing “Rain Today”, accompanied by only Newman’s piano – there’s an overwrought cringe machine like “Mother and Child”. The musical theater pieces are exclusively ballads – in fact, everything’s a ballad except for the annoying and childish “Wonderland”, and this lack of variety makes the album more one-sided and boring than it should be. Sometimes it seems like she views life through the prism of This Business of Show. When her relationship ends in the Bergmans’ “If It’s Meant to Be” (2011), she first thinks to ask, “Why was there no applause?”

Of course, if you share her taste or you’re part of the cult, you’ll enjoy this album. It’s well-sung without exception. Three times Streisand sings songs originated by black singers: “Willow”, “Home” from The Wiz, and “Being Good Isn’t Good Enough” from Hallelujah, Baby! Though composed by White people, “Being Good” is particularly relevant to the African-American experience, since it’s sung by a young black starlet who must “be the best, or nothing at all” just to get ahead. But it’d be a stretch to call these songs minstrelsy, since Streisand simply overwhelms them as she does all others. “Being Good” becomes an ode to her perfectionism; “Willow” studies how to simulate weeping through purely musical devices; and she could use “Home” to open shows at a reconstructed Bon Soir. In Streisand’s voice, every song is about Streisand’s voice.


The year in song reflected the state of the world around us. Here are the 70 songs that spoke to us this year.

70. The Horrors - "Machine"

On their fifth album V, the Horrors expand on the bright, psychedelic territory they explored with Luminous, anchoring the ten new tracks with retro synths and guitar fuzz freakouts. "Machine" is the delicious outlier and the most vitriolic cut on the record, with Faris Badwan belting out accusations to the song's subject, who may even be us. The concept of alienation is nothing new, but here the Brits incorporate a beautiful metaphor of an insect trapped in amber as an illustration of the human caught within modernity. Whether our trappings are technological, psychological, or something else entirely makes the statement all the more chilling. - Tristan Kneschke

Keep reading... Show less

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.