Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Kirstein Biography by Martin Duberman


Recommended Posts

[Admin note: The first seven posts on this thread were moved from the thread on Lincoln Kirstein Centennial thread in the "New York City Ballet" forum.)

Martin Duberman's biography of Kirstein, The Worlds of Lincoln Kirstein, is being offered for advance sale at Amazon. Release date is April 17.

http://www.amazon.com/Worlds-Lincoln-Kirst...5960&sr=1-1

Duberman is the real thing, a very talented biographer with serious aesthetic interests, fidrst-rate academic background, and an intimate knowledge of the New York City scene in the period when Balanchine and Kirstein were creating NYCB. He has made a distinguished career partly by politiciizing sexual identify and behavior, especially gay and lesbian, so I imagine that theme will figure prominently -- possibly too prominently, for some tastes -- in the book.

Taper, Garis, etc., suggest that the Balanchine/Kirstein relationship was a complex mixture of shared vision along with qhat were sometimes extraordinarily different aesthetic impulses. I hope Duberman goes into this in depth.

Here's the "Publishers Weekly" pre-review:

“A central figure in 20th-century American modernism, Lincoln Kirstein edited a pioneering literary magazine and was the driving force behind George Balanchine’s revolutionary New York City Ballet. Bancroft Prize—winner Duberman reveals in his absorbing biography a man blessed, agonizingly, with great artistic taste and vision unaccompanied by artistic talent . . . [Kirstein’s] was a high-wire life sustained by a stupendous manic energy (later darkening into demented fits that necessitated electroshock) and enlivened by a parade of lovers of both sexes . . . Kirstein met everyone from Martha Graham to General Patton. Through Kirstein’s funny, perceptive diary jottings and letters, Duberman paints an engaging portrait of bohemian New York and its high-society patrons . . . Duberman conjures an indelible sense of a creative urge that became a torturous pilgrimage toward an enigmatic muse.â€

–Publishers Weekly

Link to comment

In the April 16 issue of the New Yorker, online and in print, there is a very long and dense review of the book by Claudia Roth Pierpont. I won't quote from it (I'm terrible at touch typing) but I'll say that Pierpont deems Duberman equal to the task of writing about Mr. K., while slashing through the underbrush of what apparently was a jungle created by Kirstein's tendancy to "obfuscate, exaggerate and lie."

It sounds marvelous!!

Link to comment

Bart and ViolinConcerto, thanks so much to you both for the news. The book will be out in a week! I've been doling out Carolyn Brown's memoir in small dessert portions to myself after more difficult reading. But Kirstein is one of my favorite historical personages, and with a long awaited bio of the guy finally set to arrive, I'm going to start eating more dessert.

Link to comment
...

In the April 16 issue of the New Yorker, online and in print, there is a very long and dense review of the book by Claudia Roth Pierpont. I won't quote from it (I'm terrible at touch typing) but I'll say that Pierpont deems Duberman equal to the task of writing about Mr. K., while slashing through the underbrush of what apparently was a jungle created by Kirstein's tendancy to "obfuscate, exaggerate and lie."

It sounds marvelous!!

Here's the whole article, almost a book in itself!

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/04/16/prince-of-the-city-2

[Admin note: the New Yorker changed the URL, and it's been updated here]

His view of the importance of technique, or lack of it, in modern art:

...“It is not enough to be able to see, to have personal vision, an original eye, and the ambition to be an artist,” Kirstein wrote in 1948...about the general state of modern art. The all-important missing element was technique: “digital mastery,” as he later put it.... But for all the awe this anxious and awkward man expressed before any sort of technical virtuosity, he did not regard technique as an end in itself. It was, rather, the necessary start of an internal chain reaction: technical precision implied a respect for tradition, which in turn presumed a reverence for the masters who had come before, which defeated the common tendency toward romantic narcissism (the ruin of so much modern art and dance) and opened one’s eyes to the world and to the God-given nature of genius—which, in culmination, made the truly great artist a truly moral human being.
Link to comment

Thanks, drd, for that Link to the New Yorker review. I learned a great deal from it, and I'm looking forward even more to the book itself. About Duberman's achievement:

"The happy news is that Duberman has proved equal to the difficulties both of the job and of the highly outspoken, often irascible man. He dispels the fog of myth that has appeared around Kirstein's early years; he gleans had facts from tricks and poses; he stands up to Kirstein's prejudices and carefully explicates his most gleefuly outrageous opinions ... in a way that informs us broadly about the subject as well as about the workings of Kirstein's mind and psyche. [ ... ] Like all good biographers, Duberman is part detective and part judge, but the most appealing aspect of his book, if on occasion the most problematic, is that he seems to love his subject more than Kirstein ever loved himself.
An area of disappointment for Ballet Talkers will be the following:
One learns very little about Kirstein's relationship wtih Balanchine from Duberman's book, because -- as Kirstein openly avowed in later years -- no relationship existed. ("We never had any disagreemnts because we never talked about anything," Kirstein told this magazine in 1986. "Whatever he did he did by himself." ... ) Accordingly, we learn almost nothing about the body of work that was the reason for everything that happened [...] This emphasis is not Duberman's failing; it is his job, and he performs it best when not pushing against its (or Kirstein's) limitations.
An area of great interest for NYCB fans:
... [H]e focuses a great deal of attention on the fraught selection of a successor -- from the early fastening on Jacques d'Amboise to Kirstein's anointing of the young dancer Joseph Duell to the ascension of Peter Martins ...
Link to comment

Ditto! And, from what I know about Kirstein -- a strange combination of the private and restrained, combined with a willingness to expose himself to others -- I think he would have appreciated it as well.

Link to comment

Did anyone find Macaulay's review a bit, well, chaste? He says "Although the book’s first half charts a few more of Kirstein’s homosexual liaisons than it needs, Mr. Duberman is never salacious." How many, pray tell, does it "need"? After all, as Dwight Garner (the other NYT reviewer) observes, "Kirstein's own complicated sexuality provides the emotional core of this new book, which is about how a quintessential outsider -- 'a queer, Jewish intellectual,' in Duberman's words -- became the century's consummate cultural insider." So what are Macaulay's criteria for "need," besides his own sense of propriety?

Link to comment
Did anyone find Macaulay's review a bit, well, chaste? He says "Although the book’s first half charts a few more of Kirstein’s homosexual liaisons than it needs, Mr. Duberman is never salacious." How many, pray tell, does it "need"? After all, as Dwight Garner (the other NYT reviewer) observes, "Kirstein's own complicated sexuality provides the emotional core of this new book, which is about how a quintessential outsider -- 'a queer, Jewish intellectual,' in Duberman's words -- became the century's consummate cultural insider." So what are Macaulay's criteria for "need," besides his own sense of propriety?

Sometimes, Ray, such things are like Justice Potter Stewart’s definition of pornography: ‘I know it when I see it.’ And such reactions will differ from reader to reader. (I haven’t read this book yet, but in my experience Duberman knows how to handle these matters.)

And, from what I know about Kirstein -- a strange combination of the private and restrained, combined with a willingness to expose himself to others -- I think he would have appreciated it as well.

Well....I doubt if Kirstein’s ‘willingness to expose himself’ would have reached this degree - but biographers can't necessarily worry about that too much.

Link to comment
Well....I doubt if Kirstein’s ‘willingness to expose himself’ would have reached this degree - but biographers can't necessarily worry about that too much.
On the other hand, he was remarkably frank in his personal correspondence, and must have known that these might be published eventually. He also did retain some very intimate papers, now included in the Lincoln Kirstein Papers at the Dance Division of the NY Public Library for the Performing Arts. It doesn't seem that he did much to sanitize the image that posterity would have of him.

I agree Kirstein may not have wanted his life to be featured in the mass media. But, on the other hand, from everything I have heard, he was exceedingly (if selectively) open about himself in the artistic and donor communities in which he lived. Many of his friends and contacts shared their memories and experiences with Duberman.

Incidentally, Duberman, a distinguished historian and prize-winnng biographer, as well as a novelist and playwright, has 69 densely-packed pages of sources and footnotes.

Link to comment

I didn't intend to question the legitimacy of Duberman’s enterprise or the quality of his research. I meant that no prospective biographical subject would be likely to regard such revelations without some ambivalence, if he were around. Frederick Ashton and John Gielgud, for example, knew what kind of books were coming and who was going to write them and they didn’t mind and they did. Unless you’re dealing with a total exhibitionist I’m sure any subject of a candid biography would have such feelings.

I’m not quite sure that I would regard the destruction of papers as ‘sanitizing’ if it’s done by the original possessor of those papers. Ava Gardner gave her maid a package of papers to destroy (the maid believed they were Frank Sinatra’s love letters). That’s not sanitizing, it’s keeping something precious to yourself private, surely.

Link to comment

MARTIN DUBERMAN WITH SUZANNE FARRELL

Following the performance of Friday, June 8 at the Kennedy Center by the Suzanne Farrell Ballet, Mr. Duberman and Ms. Farrell will discuss "The Worlds of Lincoln Kirstein." The program that evening is: Mozartiana, Divertimento Brillante (music by Glinka, part of Suzanne's Balanchine Preservation Initiative), the love scene from Bèjart's Romeo & Juliet (music by Berlioz), and Slaughter on Tenth Avenue. The discussion is scheduled for 10 p.m.

Link to comment

Now THAT will be a special occasion, Farrell Fan. Thanks.

Unfotunately, there's relatively little in the biography about Kirstein's relationship with Farrell, though she is mentioned a number of times. Here's the only really significant reference:

The brilliant dancing of Suzanne Farrell was another source of comfort to Lincoln as he struggled to find the money for new ballets that would feature her.

Following Farrell's departure from the company:

Lincoln was in England at the time and felt 'horribly upset' at the news that they'd lost 'the best dancer we have ever had.' 'I have no sympathy for him [balanchine]' Lincoln wrote Jerry Robbins. The company's chief lighting designer, Ron Bates 'got good and drunk' with Balanchine one night, and Bates reported to Lincoln that Balanchine 'said he had behaved abominably and would of course let Paul [Mejia, Farell's new husband] stay and he should not have behaved this way anyway.' 'You can imagine what a relief that news was to everybody,' Lincoln reported to Fidelma [his wife], 'not the least I think to him [balanchine,] as he was being consumed by it. Anyway, we all hope he will stick to what he said.'

He didnd't Mejia was not invited back. Lincoln stayed out of th controversy, though privately he referred to Farrell an Mejia as 'two deluded children.'

Link to comment

Thanks, Bart.

In her book, Holding on to the Air, Suzanne recalls her farewell perormance with NYCB: "At the end of Vienna Waltzes I stood in my white satin gown in the center of the stage while Lincoln Kirstein and Peter each gave me roses, some red, some white. As the curtain lowered, Lincoln, ever-present and ever-absent in his own omniscient way, tried to leave the stage, but I held his arm and pleaded with him, 'Don't leave me now.' It was only then, when the curtain rose again and we were standing alone together, that I thought emotion would overwhelm me, but I held on to him and did not fall."

Link to comment
MARTIN DUBERMAN WITH SUZANNE FARRELL

Following the performance of Friday, June 8 at the Kennedy Center by the Suzanne Farrell Ballet, Mr. Duberman and Ms. Farrell will discuss "The Worlds of Lincoln Kirstein." The program that evening is: Mozartiana, Divertimento Brillante (music by Glinka, part of Suzanne's Balanchine Preservation Initiative), the love scene from Bèjart's Romeo & Juliet (music by Berlioz), and Slaughter on Tenth Avenue. The discussion is scheduled for 10 p.m.

This sounds exciting, and I plan on going--but first, can you tell me where you saw this event announced? I've looked on both the KC and SF websites and didn't see it. Thanks.

Link to comment

I learned about the Duberman event the old-fashioned way: by U.S. Mail from the Suzanne Farrell Ballet. There were several "Additional Events" listed during the forthcoming Farrell season, June 6-10, and this is one of them. I'm a supporter of the company, which I believe accounts for my having received this.

Link to comment
In her book, Holding on to the Air, Suzanne recalls her farewell perormance with NYCB: "[ ... ] Lincoln, ever-present and ever-absent in his own omniscient way, tried to leave the stage, but I held his arm and pleaded with him, 'Don't leave me now.'

I love that phrase. It seems to capture some of the elusive and ambiguous qualities that Kirstein really did project. Thanks.

Link to comment

bart and carbro contributed these comments in the General Reading forum:

bart wrote:

He's still in his mid-20s at this point in my reading, but he knew just about everyone in the arts in New York City. And had sex with not a few.

Duberman's access to Kistein's private papers, including diaries more intimate than I would have dared to write (if I had kept a diary), make this fascinating. The young man, at least, is nothing like the remote, rather aloof figure he presented to the world at City Center, Lincoln Center and other cultural institutions later in life.

He had so many interests, knew such a variety of creative and important people, dabbled in so widely in the arts. For example, at 24 he began dance lessons in Mikhail Fokine's studio at 4 Riverside Drive.

As Fokine made clear early on, Lincoln would be wasting his time if he held out any hope of becoming a performer -- he was too big, too awkward, to old. But -- although the occasional fanasy lingered -- Lincoln already knew that. He was there primarily, as he later wrote, 'to learn the structure' of Fokine's work, having finally realized (an awareness he credited to Muriel) that what he wanted to do more than anything else in life was 'something connected with dancing.' And the time he spent in Fokine's classes (he attended regularly for more than 4 months) allowed him, he later wrote, to learn from the barre exercises 'a modicum of what is necessary in the schooling of professionals. I learned the consummate logic in the progression of academic exercises from first steps to ultimate virtuosity"

It's all there in embryonic form -- perculating slowly -- even when he was 24 and 25. The love of classical, structured dance (as opposed to modern); the development of a personal aesthetic that valued form over random self-expression; the recognition that there had to be a school; the search for an appropriate theater; and the effort to learn how to separate the good from the bad.

And this was going on before he had seen much in the way of real classical ballet.

carbro wrote:

And as history now turns on itself, Mikhail Fokine's great-grandson is studying ballet at Kirstein's "studio."
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...