sandik

Hmmm, this is a big, big shift. If they open on Friday night, it's quite possible that they won't get a print review from the Seattle Times until the Monday edition (they'd have to turn something around overnight for the Saturday edition, which is tricky timing, and the Sunday arts section is printed earlier in the week) I wonder why they would drop the first Thursday and not the second, though there may be union issues involved. I'll see what I can find out tomorrow morning, and post what I learn...

I really liked Streep in this, but felt that the other half of the film was pretty meh, which makes it tricky. Streep has such a gift for voices, and the technical aspects of creating a person -- it was a real pleasure to see her tackle a character that we all feel we know in a televised version. It used to be almost impossible to see all the nominated shorts, but the last few years the Academy has been circulating these compliation programs, and one of our local theaters runs them. Animated in one show and live action in the other -- they're available on DVD later in the season as well.

I agree about Avatar -- I thought the special effects were indeed special, but they were used in the service of a mediocre script. Or as a local critic said on one of those year-end wrap-up shows, "Fern Gully with Smurfs." I didn't see Hurt Locker either. I can't manage that level of tension in a theater, but my partner and our son saw it as well as Avatar, and agree that the better film won. Up in the Air has the double tweek of being a very topical film with a highly likeable actor in a major role. I saw Clooney in The Men Who Stare at Goats earlier in the year (they were promoting Air in the previews at the time) and thought he did a fabulous job in a role that combined deadpan comedy with some historical commentary. I appreciate his ability to ride than line between foolery and bombast, like his role in Burn After Reading. I haven't seen the film, so can't say much about her performance, but I do think it's hard lines on anyone who has to compete with Streep -- she's such an accomplished actress. Ditto Helen Mirren.

Alongside the thrill of dancers being paid, I do like the distinction between dancing and choreography. I would like to add dance-friendly camerawork to that list -- it seemed that there was more going on in the theater than we were able to see on television. I know it's difficult to work in a situation that is both live and televised, but it's certainly possible to do better than we got. Back to films -- I saw all the animated shorts on an Academy circulated program, and was very impressed with them all. I know most people figured that Loaf or Death would win -- it's another chapter in the ongoing Wallace and Grommit saga from Nick Park and Aardman Studios, but Logorama was a witty, cutting and dead-on commentary on consumer culture. It absolutely deserved the award. The preview is -- the full film is available on iTunes, apparently.

You could borrow my sister's philosophy -- buy it, read it, sell it.

The music and especially dancing were particularly bad this year. As always, my mantra is "dancers are working and being paid." And was that Mr Wiggles in there?

And I vote that we hold it here on Ballet Talk!

If only the airlines would take a lesson. The most frustrating thing is the inconsistency -- the rules change arbitrarily, they're different in different airports, and it's worth your life to find someone who can actually tell you what's allowed and what's forbidden.

And eventually we will all travel stark naked, all the better to make sure we aren't carrying 3.5 ounces of liquid soap.

Thanks so much for the link -- I don't get to see much Kudelka, and am glad to have another look here.

This was indeed very sweet -- I'm so glad that they aired it!

I worked for a consortium of presenters several years ago, helping to put together block booking, which is pretty much the equivalent of touring. Most of these performances were slightly better compensated than the orchestra in the NYT story -- the individual presenters would negotiate with the artists for fees and content, with the savings on travel money being the big incentive to work cooperatively with other presenters. For smaller venues in more isolated locations, it meant the difference between doing two or three shows a year rather than just one. The situation described in the Times is pretty grim, and I hope that the public attention helps to change their situation -- I just wanted to raise my hand for presenters too.

Oh, this sounds so much like the grueling tours of the 1930s-40s Ballet Russe companies!

For me, the use of the Chopin makes a big reference to Fokine and Les Sylphides -- I have trouble not thinking of that work and the place it holds in dance history whenever I hear anything using Chopin. Robbins certainly seemed to be interested in him, and unafraid of whatever baggage that comes with him.

Oh this is fascinating -- do you have any idea where she is when she's sitting on that roof? I loved her comment about a choreographer knowing what they're destined for from birth, that they are making dances from the start. It reminded me of Mark Morris, who claims he was making up dances in his parent's backyard when he was a small boy.

Maybe this needs to be a thread of its own (there was an NPR piece yesterday about Chopin and his predilection for piano work) but I'm always fascinated by the works that different choreographers make to Chopin. I do think that it's interesting that Robbins started with The Concert, started with something that made light of the "traditional" Chopin ballet, and then later on came to use the composer for a set of beautiful and serious works.

Ah, this opens up an interesting direction. I've been thinking lately about what actually makes a group into a company, and what the differences are between modern dance and ballet companies, especially as we get more groups like Morphoses that seem to want to borrow from both "sides" of the field. (And yes, I think it might be a helpful resume credit to have forged a major, international peace accord. Either that, or to be a heavyweight boxer) In some ways I think it helps to not be a very driven choreographer if you are hoping to run a mixed repertory ensemble. If your best creative energy is focused on your own artwork, it might be difficult to make the kind of choices that best serve your ensemble if it means making room for other artists. Good intentions aside, it sounds like one of Wheeldon's complaints about the current state of Morphoses is that it doesn't serve his needs as a dancemaker, not necessarily as a collector of other choreography. Robert Joffrey made dances, more toward the beginning of the company's life than at the end, but ultimately his biggest influence was as a collector and a commissioner of other people's choreography. For Wheeldon, perhaps this role is not what he really wants to do.

sandik, what I great image in that 2nd sentence. I'm saving these words. It opens up a whole new time-centric way of organizing "art" in my mind. Thanks. This is very kind -- there's some real use in being old enough to have watched the long-term development of something! I do want to say, though, that there are other works in the repertory that seem to float along with that leading edge, so that we use them as a lens to understand whatever developments are going on. I think several of Balanchine's works do this (4 T's is my personal favorite, but your mileage may vary), a lot of Cunningham does this. I'd like to add an element to this discussion, if people don't feel they've already said everything they have to say. I think it's very important that "Dances" is made to Chopin piano music -- I don't know that it would have had quite the same effect at its premiere if Robbins had used a different composer. Since this is Chopin's bicentennial year, I've been listening for him more carefully, so perhaps I see this out of its balance.

I wondered if "clone" would feel too judgmental, but I was in a rush. The gist of what I'm trying to say is that as well as being an extraordinary ballet in its own right, "Dances" inspired a lot of other work, some of it not as distinguished. I've always thought that Peter Anastos's "Yes Virginia, Another Piano Ballet" for the Trocks really caught some fundamental elements of the style, loving them as well as poking some gentle fun at them.

Performing for International Ballet Theater in their production of Don Quixote March 12-14 here Mara Vinson is guesting as well.

I hope that ksk04 is correct, and this will be a brief hiatus, but I'm very disappointed. It seems, looking at it from the other side of the country, that ABT had found a great balance between mostly mixed rep shows in the fall and the big, program-length shows in the spring. This change seems like a shift towards the latter.

It's been great to follow along with this conversation -- I think “Dances” is a very important work in the repertory, as well as being a truly lovely ballet, and I'm always interested in responses to it. I've been thinking lately about what makes a dance look “old,” I was at a rehearsal of Charles Weidman's “Brahms Waltzes” a couple months ago, and one of the other people there asked me if it had looked old when I had performed it in the late 70s. And although I don't think we meant the same thing by “old,” it did look different to me in 2009 than it had in 1978. But all that means, really, is that the context I saw it in those two times was different. Some works are very clearly examples of their time, their style or their genre. They represent something about the artists involved, and their view of what dance should do. They may be on the forward edge of the art form when they are made, but that edge continues to travel while the work itself remains in its place. We sometimes refer to these things as “dated,” which is an apt description, because they are attached to a specific time, representing the date they were made. And as we get further away from that date, as it recedes in the rear view mirror, the work attached to it feels less contemporary. But at some point, the art isn't so much out of date as it is about a different date. It's gone from old fashioned or tired or outmoded to being historical. And sometimes, to be valued more highly than it was at its inception, just because it is still around. When I was growing up, my parents had one of those boomerang-shaped coffee tables. It wasn't particularly valuable at the time, and my sister and I grew to value it even less as time passed and tastes changed. So when her art teacher needed a coffee table, we were happy to give it to him. Of course, if we'd saved it, we could sell it now and send our kids to college -- mid-century modern is doing very well in the consignment and vintage shops. All of this is a long-way-round way of getting to this -- I think that “Dances at a Gathering” is one of those works that is a clear example of its time. Robbins's work was a tour de force of the concerns that permeated the ballet world at the time. It was a very innovative work, but the very elements that made it so (its seamless blending of technical dancing and pedestrian movement, the allusive nature of the characters/story, its intimate quality) became all tied up with the dance boom of the 1970s. When you think of the incredible number of clones this ballet has inspired it's easy to see how firmly rooted it is in its time. But that time is 40 years ago, and I think that some people have had a difficult time letting go of the period -- we may dance works from that period, but we aren't making work that looks like than anymore and calling it new. As far as the question of narrative and character -- I don't know this for a fact, but I think that Robbins was responding to the expectations that many people had of him based on his musical theater work. Compared to “West Side Story” or “Fiddler on the Roof,” “Dances at a Gathering” doesn't “tell a story,” but it does evoke a series of moods and suggest a wild variety of people. I love the ballet, and was thrilled to see PNB pick it up last year. I'm hoping it comes back soon.

Me too. And, alongside the beavers, a kid dressed as a hockey puck, set down among all those jumbo-sized cutouts of hockey players. I don't know about you, but on my television, the kid looked pretty worried.

Oh, that's such a lovely tribute. Thanks for the heads-up!

Ouch!