Alastair Macaulay @ NY Times
Posted 18 February 2007 - 02:27 PM
Well, them's the pre-Tina Brown laurels they rest on, anyway.
Posted 18 February 2007 - 03:32 PM
I don't agree, either, that it is a bad thing for a pair of relatively fresh -- but educated -- eyes to review the New York scene. How often did we read Kisselgoff reviews wondering if she'd written it before the show, or without having been there? We expect to see certain things from familiar dancers in roles familiar to both them and us. We bring our expectations and prejudices to our seats, and I think they sometimes get in the way of seeing what is actually taking place. A critic who arrives without this baggage can be a very good thing.
Posted 18 February 2007 - 03:58 PM
There's plenty more that can be done to inform readers of the best quality work being done in the rest of the country, in Europe, and all over the world.
Posted 18 February 2007 - 08:52 PM
Perhaps, like the so-called "stiff upper lip," his British style of writing translates as "disinterested" to Americans.
Excuse the grammatical quibble, but a critic should always be disinterested (impartial). However, he should never be uninterested (indifferent).
I stand corrected, but I know that my meaning was understood.... Now that I think about it, I should have said "distant," "uninvolved," or "remote" because what I was referring to was tone, not professional approach.
Posted 18 February 2007 - 10:21 PM
I'd like to hear who people wished it were instead.
Posted 19 February 2007 - 01:25 AM
Posted 19 February 2007 - 05:54 AM
Overheard mindless remarks regarding Frederick Ashton when I had the misfortune to be sitting behind A.M. at Covent Garden recently, confirmed that this particular leopard hasn’t changed his spots.
Posted 19 February 2007 - 11:09 AM
Posted 19 February 2007 - 03:00 PM
In that same publication he rhapsodised about the Royal Ballet dancer Marguerite Porter, lauding her in the most extravagent terms. Then he suddenly fell out of love and attacked her for deficiencies which had always been there. It must have been most distressing for the poor girl.
His book about Fonteyn is a very slim publication and I know that he never saw her dance - he has said as much in print. And I do rather question his list of "leading experts" on Ashton. I think there are others who might claim as much expertise and certainly more personal knowledge.
Posted 19 February 2007 - 05:14 PM
Alymer, I haven't read Macauley's Fonteyn biography, but I thought (writing from memory) that it was part of a young people's series and thus I'm sure it is slight. I agree with you on the list of Ashtonians. Mine would be longer and include those who'd seen the premieres and actually watched Ashton's work over four decades.
I'd echo Leigh's question above: "I'd like to hear who people wished it were instead." (Surely speculation on something that has already happened would be all right )
Posted 20 February 2007 - 12:38 PM
scoop, I’d suggest, respectfully, that Scherr has a right to speak of her own experience and that of others she knows, as do you. That hers is less positive doesn’t make her Miss Pittypat. She is not the first to voice such observations and I would hesitate to take the line of ‘they’re complaining because they can’t cut the mustard.’
I'd have liked to see Laura Jacobs in the spot, had anyone asked me, but for some reason nobody did.
Posted 20 February 2007 - 03:59 PM
Posted 20 February 2007 - 08:43 PM
Posted 21 February 2007 - 05:39 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
members, guests, anonymous users
Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases: