obbligato

I'll pick the book up again and see how it goes, since I really was enjoying it up until that point. Maybe once I get past the transition, the second section will be as compelling as the first. At least now I know what to expect. Thanks.

I loved this novel. It was one of the most absorbing stories I've read in a long time . . . until the author killed the main character a third of the way through the story. I felt somewhat betrayed that a character to whom I had grown so attached was suddenly and inexplicably dead, then replaced with another character I barely knew. I only read a few pages into the second section, then put the book aside in disappointment that the original story line was dropped. Does the third section make it all worthwhile? If so, maybe I'll pick it up again. As it is, it's been relegated to the stack of half-read novels that's accumulating by my bedside.

I also very much enjoyed the books I have read by Carol Shields: Stone Diaries, and, especially, Larry's Party. I was in the middle of Unless when I heard that she died. That was months ago, and I'm still in the middle of it, but only because I've been distracted by other things for the time being. I plan to get back to that book, which I did find to be very absorbing, despite the fact that I haven't finished it. The only book I started of hers that (for me anyway) was forgettable was one that she co-wrote with another author. The title escapes me right now. Despite that, I think Shields had a gift for making the ordinariness of life seem somehow extraordinary. Anyway, I don't visit here too often, and was glad to see a thread devoted to her. Just wanted to pop in and say that I enjoyed reading the links posted above.

Wow. Reading these book titles is bringing back a flood of memories. Doris R -- like you, I loved, loved, loved Little Women. I think I read it a dozen times. It got me through my adolescence, almost unscathed. The other books I read -- Pippi Longstocking, The Bobsey Twins, The Little Peppers and How They Grew (these were all inherited from either my mother or older sisters) -- I barely remember the plots. It was Little Women that I always returned to. Some of the other titles, I enjoyed more as an adult, reading them with my own daughters. Anne of Green Gables helped me through a post-partum depression. Black Beauty taught me that we all have a soul. Little House on the Prairie reminded me that life is sweet. glebb, I just finished a biography of Joan of Arc a few months ago. It was written by Mary Gordon, if you're familiar with her. She's written novels and travel essays. I've enjoyed her other books, so I decided to read her version of the Joan of Arc history as well. It was an interesting read. I'm looking forward to seeing how this forum develops. The on-line book club idea sounds great.

I just found out about this thread, and I know I'm getting in at the tail end of the conversation, but I think you've all made some very good points. I tend to think we do art a disservice by lumping it all into one category (art is art) and whatever meaning each person derives from it (or assigns to it) is a legitimate interpretation. I don't really know enough about ballet to comment (though so far that isn't stopping me). I know only slightly more about literature, so I know this debate also surrounds written works. When does a novel become literature? When it has historical value? Social significance? Literary devices? Alexandra mentioned earlier that appreciation of art is dependent on education. I agree that education is often a factor in understanding the significance of written work. Anyone slogging through one of James Fenimore Cooper's books may wonder how his meandering story-telling skills can be classified as "literature." Yet he not only captures a piece of American history that may otherwise be lost but started a whole new genre with the advent of the Western (which fans of the Western will recognize as a form that dominated American culture for generations). So his work has historical and social significance; hence, becomes "literature." A designation of "literature" almost immediately classifies a work as "high art," even if it may not qualify on its own merit. Then I think about people like Chaucer who wrote for the masses, and, for all he knew, was producing "low brow" or "middle brow" art, yet ended up with a universal message by capturing the subtlety, irony, and ambiguity of life, across generations and across cultures. I'm not so sure that some of the composers mentioned earlier were intentionally producing "high art." It was recognized as such over time because of the timelessness of the message, and the composers themselves became archetypal image of the form, creating a new genre. I know this is a terrible oversimplification, but I've heard that one of the main ingredients of "high art" is introspection. I agree that there is a transcendent quality to some forms of art which will transport the audience into another way of viewing the world. To me, that's art. It goes beyond evoking emotion to evoking change. Months ago (at BW's urging) I wrote a post about the new ballet, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. While I found the ballet entertaining, I didn't feel it had the transcendent quality that was in the original work. The story it was based on was far more haunting and ambiguous than the ballet. I'm not sure what that says about "high" and "low" art, but I think that "high art" acts as a catalyst for change (for good or evil) that "low art" can only mimic. And, sometimes, it is only in hindsight that we know which art is which.

lillianna, I very much enjoyed this version also. I hope this ballet enjoys a lot of success, and becomes to Halloween what the Nutcracker is to Christmas. Mel, You lost me with your ballet-ese, but your Irving facts are fascinating. I'm not sure I agree with your "un-Goth" observation, though that seems true for his satire (which I've never read, but I'll take your word for it). Not that I would want to make a science of categorizing and classifying art (though I'll attempt it anyway), but his short stories do seem to contain the elements that define the genre of early American gothic fiction. Anyway, I think its sort of fun to put these works in their historical and literary contexts. Knowing the history of the story helps me appreciate the ballet and vice versa.

Leigh, Your question about the lighter and darker aspects of ballet is a good one. I'm not familiar enough with ballet in general to even begin to answer it. Having said that (and answering anyway), I'd say that part of what enables ballet to endure is its ability to portray the entire human experience, across centuries and between cultures. What little I've seen of ballet, it seems versatile enough to provoke a wide range of emotion, even more so than other dance forms, in my opinion. Otherwise it probably would have gone the way of any number of other fads. Don't you think? Or am I oversimplifying a topic I know little about? Regarding Sleepy Hollow (and Nutcracker, and Sleeping Beauty), I wonder if the "darkness" of the original tale jeopardizes its marketability, more than its performability (if that is a word). If so, that brings up another related point about ballets in general: Is an artist/choreographer obligated (ethically, or in any other way) to maintain the integrity of the original work when translating it to another form (from legends to dance to television mini-series to whatever)?

BW, Yes, as Mel says, all the literary elements in the story point to Brom Bones as the headless horseman, although its not explicitly stated. I didn't word my post very well. What I meant by the "unlikely twist" is that the story focuses on a place -- Sleepy Hollow. As is typical in early American gothic writing, the wilderness is used as a metaphor for all that is dark and savage in man. In my reading of the story, it is about the power of superstition and how it can destroy lives, not the transcendent power of love (which is the theme of the ballet). At the point in the ballet where Brom Bones is identified as the headless horseman, the ballet veers from the story. The ballet begins to focus on relationships while the story explores the destructive force of superstitious (religious?) thinking. Of couse, as art, it's open to interpretation. Mel, Thanks for your perspective. Do you think Irving included the names of real historical characters (Ichabod Crane, Cotton Mather, etc.) to give his work credibility? He seems to take more than a few jabs at the religious establishment, or the lingering Puritan influence. I'm interested in hearing your view of the themes of the two works, if you care to compare them.

Thank you, Alexandra, for the welcome and for that very interesting link. I enjoyed reading the thread, and learning how the ballet unfolded for him. Leigh, my daughter's orchestra teacher has the program right now -- my daughter receives "extra credit" for any performance she attends. As soon as it's returned, I'll post who performed the lead roles. BW -- before the curtain even opened the music included the sounds of a galloping horse in retreat. The first scene showed a man lying by the graveyard, presumably dead. In subsequent scenes, a jack-o-lantern was used to symbolize the headless horseman. In an unlikely twist, the headless horseman was actually Ichabod's rival, who used his disguise to terrorize the town and win the affections of Katrina.

I’m not much of a ballet critic, but here are my impressions of the premiere of Sleepy Hollow, performed by CPYB. What began as a gothic tale ended as a wholesome romance which made the production suitable for the entire family, no matter how squeamish or prudish the members. Washington Irving fans may be disappointed, since it strays wildly from his story, but it was nicely choreographed and the plot was easy to follow. Instead of a tale that begins and ends in death, mystery, and suspense, the ballet started on that note, but quickly evolved into an adolescent love story. With no one dancer dominating the production, each performer was able to showcase his or her talents, making this production especially fitting for a youth ballet. The costumes and music both complemented the story line, and the set changes were cleverly handled. Has anyone else seen this production? I’m interested in hearing your impressions.

[Avant-propos added by LAW - this thread is an offshoot of a discussion that began in the "Legend of Sleepy Hollow" thread. Please jump in and discuss how ballet handles "darker" topics.] I’m not much of a ballet critic, but here are my impressions of the premiere of Sleepy Hollow, performed by CPYB. What began as a gothic tale ended as a wholesome romance which made the production suitable for the entire family, no matter how squeamish or prudish the members. Washington Irving fans may be disappointed, since it strays wildly from his story, but it was nicely choreographed and the plot was easy to follow. Instead of a tale that begins and ends in death, mystery, and suspense, the ballet started on that note, but quickly evolved into an adolescent love story. With no one dancer dominating the production, each performer was able to showcase his or her talents, making this production especially fitting for a youth ballet. The costumes and music both complemented the story line, and the set changes were cleverly handled. Has anyone else seen this production? I’m interested in hearing your impressions.