November 30, 1998
Publication title: BC Report, vol. 10, Iss. 2, pg. 25
Place: Vancouver
Writer: Unknown
Prodigy or package? The cult of Sarah endures even as she is accused of stealing credit for songs
Her fans lurk in the lobby, waiting for a break in the trial that has captivated the nation. When Sarah McLachlan finally emerges from Courtroom 44 of the Supreme Court of B.C., a gaggle of teenage girls flocks to her. They are students from Comox, part of a high school law class touring the Vancouver courthouse. Ms. McLachlan smiles and chats quietly with them, all the while furiously signing autographs. After a few minutes she departs, leaving them breathless. “That was so cool!” exclaims 17-year-old Ashley Clark.
A decade after her uncertain debut, Touch, singer-songwriter McLachlan sells millions of albums and is the revered godmother of Lilith Fair, the feminist music festival. She is both idol and icon to innumerable teenaged girls like Miss Clark. And if you be lieve Darryl Neudorf, she is something of a thief. Mr. Neudorf is suing Ms. McLachlan and Nettwerk Productions, claiming he was robbed of songwriting credits for four songs on Touch. As this magazine went to press, the defence had just begun it case and Ms. McLachlan was on the witness stand, defending her reputation as a songwriter.
Ms. McLachlan was a Grade 11 Halifax student who skipped a lot of school and sang in a band named October Game when she was spotted by Nettwerk executive Mark Jowett in 1985. Two years later the fledgling Vancouver label signed her to a five-album deal. When she moved to Vancouver in September 1987 she was 19 and had no songwriting experience. She admitted in court, “[Nettwerk] said, ‘We’re going to give you six months, let’s see what you come up with.'” Mr. Neudorf, a former drummer with Vancouver bands Moev and 54-40, said he was brought out to Vancouver in late 1987 by Mr. Jowett to help rescue the slow-moving “Sarah project.” Ms. McLachlan was a natural musician and vocalist but not a natural songwriter, he said. He testified that the classically-trained young woman did not even know the difference between a verse and a chorus. According to the plaintiff, his ro le was clear: to give direction to an easily distracted young singer. “There was a core talent there that was begging to be tapped,” Mr. Neudorf testified. He claimed he instructed her to write simpler chords and wrote parts of songs himself. “She had a lot to show me and I had a lot to show her, and we worked together developing songs,” he declared.
While Ms. McLachlan disputes that Mr. Neudorf’s contribution constitutes “songwriting,” she conceded their relationship was a valuable one. “The most important job he did was to put a fire under me and get me there every day and get me focused and working on the songs,” she testified. Touch was released in the fall of 1988 and rereleased in the U.S. the following spring. It did poorly at first, but has since sold more than 625,000 copies worldwide.
Mr. Neudorf says Nettwerk made it clear they wanted to sell Ms. McLachlan as the complete package: singer, pianist, guitar player and songwriter. “[Mr. Jowett] explained to me that it was Nettwerk’s intention and their interest to approach the marketing of Sarah in such a way that she was to be a bit of a prodigy,” he said. Mr. Neudorf said Mr. Jowett convinced him to give up songwriting credit in return for extra “producer points.” (Mr. Jowett is expected to deny he made any such deal.)
As it turned out, Mr. Neudorf was given just one producer point-worth a 1% royalty on the retail price of each album sold. To date, he has earned about $30,000 from that arrangement. But he said he always believed he did not receive enou gh money or credit for the work of whipping those songs into shape.
The songs which Mr. Neudorf claims he co-wrote are not the ones that elevated Ms. McLachlan to superstar status. Those were on her next three albums: Solace, Fumbling Towards Ecstasy and Surfacing. But the redheaded chanteuse risks losing more than money i f the court rules against her. Her popularity is directly related to her uncanny ability to touch the hearts of women, particularly younger ones. “Her music and words almost speak to you in a way,” says April Kamensek, a 19-year-old fan from Port Moody who came to watch the trial. “A lot of it deals with teenagers and the hard times they go through.” Ms. McLachlan has been many times recognized by her peers; she has won four Junos, three Grammys and was named songwriter of the year at the West Coast Music Awards November 8.
Paul Attallah, a professor of mass communications at Carleton University, says Ms. McLachlan’s credibility will be damaged if it is decided that Mr. Neudorf co-wrote those songs on Touch. “I think there’ s no doubt anybody whose reputation or public persona is based on a reputation of authenticity or sincerity has to suffer if it is revealed…they cheated,” he says. Authenticity is particularly important in rock music, he adds, because it appeals largely to those who rebel against “phony.”
Musicians who are revealed to be somewhat less than they claim often find their careers terminated. The Monkees, of 1960s television fame, earned the derisive nickname “The Pre-Fab Four” when it was revealed they did not actually play on their records. Eighties teenybopper sensation Milli Vanilli broke up as soon as word got out that their musical contribution was restricted to dancing and lip-synching.
No one has suggested Ms. McLachlan is not talented. A packed courtroom listened rapturously as Ms. McLachlan, as part of her testimony, sang and played a keyboard. But the trial may yet explore whether Ms. McLachlan has taken credit for songs on other albu ms that were really co-written or written by someone else. In a pretrial examination for discovery, Mr. Neudorf’ s lawyer, Jonathan Simkin, asked Ms. McLachlan about her relationship with Pierre Marchand, the man who produced her last three albums and co-wrote the title track of Fumbling Towards Ecstasy. ” Have you signed any agreements related to songwriting with Pierre Marchand?” Mr. Simkin asked. “Don’t answer that question,” advises her lawyer, Jennifer Conkie. Even if Ms. McLachlan loses, teenaged admirer Kamensek is ready to forgive. “My thoughts about her and her records aren’t going to change,” she says, “no matter what happens. ”
