Gottlieb on ABT's Sleeping Beauty

[atm711]

Ah--g-g-! I just read Gottlieb's review. He really hits many bases...he starts off by saying how his life was changed by seeing the Sadlers Wells production of SB in 1949 with Fonteyn. (I still look very fondly back on that performance, but MY life certainly wasn't changed---I don't know what kind of ballet he was watching at the time, but Font eyn had a lot of competition in NYC--(i.e.); Alonso, Markova, Danilova and the young Tallchief.) He then goes on to write of Veronika Part's "relentless smile pasted on her face"--and finishes up with a reference to the "misguided" Kirov restoration. His favorite is Petrer Martins version.....I shall swear off paid critics for the rest of ABT's season.

[From Tuesday, June 5 Links]

[dirac]

Ah--g-g-! I just read Gottlieb's review. He really hits many bases...he starts off by saying how his life was changed by seeing the Sadlers Wells production of SB in 1949 with Fonteyn. (I still look very fondly back on that performance, but MY life certainly wasn't changed---I don't know what kind of ballet he was watching at the time, but Font eyn had a lot of competition in NYC--(i.e.); Alonso, Markova, Danilova and the young Tallchief.)

You could get the impression from some accounts of that fabled event that New York was a sort of primitive outback locality that had never seen ballet before until Sadler’s Wells came along to enlighten the backward natives.

[Helene]

His assessment of Martins's Sleeping Beauty wasn't that bad -- or I should say wasn't that good. Gottlieb calls it "the best of his full-evening ventures" which could be seen as damning it with faint praise, since the other candidates are Swan Lake and Romeo + Juliet. Gottlieb was, in my opinion, almost right in his summary, that by comparison to McKenzie/Chernov/Kirkland's "concept," Martins's is "loyal to the text." I would say "loyal to the synopsis,"at least until the end, as its speed is, in my view, counter to its setting, and the "passing on" is counter to its point of restoration, not evolution.

[vipa]

His assessment of Martins's Sleeping Beauty wasn't that bad -- or I should say wasn't that good. Gottlieb calls it "the best of his full-evening ventures" which could be seen as damning it with faint praise, since the other candidates are Swan Lake and Romeo + Juliet. Gottlieb was, in my opinion, almost right in his summary, that by comparison to McKenzie/Chernov/Kirkland's "concept," Martins's is "loyal to the text." I would say "loyal to the synopsis,"at least until the end, as its speed is, in my view, counter to its setting, and the "passing on" is counter to its point of restoration, not evolution.

Thank you -- well said!

[richard53dog]

You could get the impression from some accounts of that fabled event that New York was a sort of primitive outback locality that had never seen ballet before until Sadler’s Wells came along to enlighten the backward natives.

This is true and a bit annoying for Americans .

But the flip side is that there was also the feeling floating around that the Sadler's Wells first season in the US gave the company a big boost in presence. To use a 21st Century term they became a "world class" player in one fell swoop.

Same thing for Fonteyn. Fonteyn was the lead ballerina in London, the US was looking forward to Shearer because of

The Red Shoes. But NY fell in love with Fonteyn and she became a world star.

[dirac]

You could get the impression from some accounts of that fabled event that New York was a sort of primitive outback locality that had never seen ballet before until Sadler’s Wells came along to enlighten the backward natives.

This is true and a bit annoying for Americans .

But the flip side is that there was also the feeling floating around that the Sadler's Wells first season in the US gave the company a big boost in presence. To use a 21st Century term they became a "world class" player in one fell swoop.

Same thing for Fonteyn. Fonteyn was the lead ballerina in London, the US was looking forward to Shearer because of

The Red Shoes. But NY fell in love with Fonteyn and she became a world star.

It is interesting to speculate on what might have happened if de Valois had surrendered to the pressure to feature Shearer in the lead on opening night instead of Fonteyn. Not that Fonteyn would not have made her impact eventually, but such things make all the difference sometimes.

[richard53dog]

It is interesting to speculate on what might have happened if de Valois had surrendered to the pressure to feature Shearer in the lead on opening night instead of Fonteyn.

LOL. Between "Madame" and Sol Hurok? No contest. I would have put on money on NdV every time!

[Alexandra]

And why didn't DeValois "surrender to the pressure"? To prove a point? Or because she, rather than an impresario, knew what that role needed. Shearer was a movie star and a lyrical, light dancer (and certainly not the only dancer who believed she was undervalued!). Fonteyn was not known in New York to the general public -- which doesn't have any bearing on her merits as a dancer. "Sleeping Beauty," by Royal Ballet standards, meant a classical ballerina, and that's why Fonteyn was cast. From what I've read, the reaction was that after they saw Fonteyn they understood why the decision was made.

All this Royal bashing! It is true that many people saw the Royal and felt it was a different level of dancing than what was then available in New York. There were also many people then, as now, I'm sure, who thought that "Sleeping Beauty" was a children's fairy tale and didn't see what all the fuss was about. But the Royal's "Sleeping Beauty" was a huge hit, and when ABT mounted "Swan Lake" about 15 years later, Chase cited the need to "compete."

Edited June 7, 2007 by Alexandra

[Old Fashioned]

It is interesting to speculate on what might have happened if de Valois had surrendered to the pressure to feature Shearer in the lead on opening night instead of Fonteyn. Not that Fonteyn would not have made her impact eventually, but such things make all the difference sometimes.

I've thought of that, also. By many accounts, Shearer was a wonderful Aurora as well.

[Alexandra]

I forgot to address atm's original point I do think one can argue that a performance that took place nearly 60 years ago might not be relevant to most of the people reading that piece, although it certainly places the writer and shows his aesthetic. But I do think it's relevant to mention that PRODUCTION -- not the designs, which, although very admired then might seem fussy now -- but the text. It's long been a measuring stick in the West.

[eabock]

And why didn't DeValois "surrender to the pressure"? To prove a point? Or because she, rather than an impresario, knew what that role needed.

Perhaps to demonstrate that Anton Walbrook was not running Sadlers Wells, no matter what movie audiences may have thought

[Alexandra]

Exactly! Hello, eabock! Good to read you again. Don't be a stranger

Ah, Anton Walbrook. I think he became the model, rather than Diaghilev.

[Paul Parish]

That night in 1949 may have been a mass hallucination -- but nearly all agree on how they felt, and there were lots of them.

Thre are two other important factors-- 1) Constant Lambert was conducting, and even those who weren't crazy about Fonteyn (Balanchine and Kirstein in especial) thought Lambert was out of this world, and that he and the music made the dancers look better than they were.

I went on a pilgrimage to see what Lambert was like and found a recording of him conducting Giselle (in the UC Berkeley music library), and that explained a LOT. He's like Barbirolli or Beecham, it's unbelievable, the way that music breathed -- the overture sounds like Beethoven's Pastoral Symphony all over again. He's a GREAT romantic conductor.

and 2) de Valois insisted on getting the background right. Like Disney, she felt that the surest way to erode the fascination of a fantasy was to have small mistakes in the background. There is a lot of truth to this. Look at the video of RB's Aurora's Wedding -- yes Fonteyn is almost awful, but look at the polonaise at the where the COURTIERS enter -- it's fabulous! the QUEEN! They are so HAPPY!!! It';s not a bunch of stiff nameless aristocrats - -these are real people, and they're ecstatic to see each other again, and today! Only Disney, and Lavrovsky, can get this stuff right like this.

Given the way the Ballets Russes was performing, looking tired and tattered by many accounts, and the completely different aesthetic of Ballet Society, Americans may have never seen a production as polished and "static-free" as Saddler's Wells's Sleeping Beauty.

[atm711]

Given the way the Ballets Russes was performing, looking tired and tattered by many accounts, and the completely different aesthetic of Ballet Society, Americans may have never seen a production as polished and "static-free" as Saddler's Wells's Sleeping Beauty.

All very true, Paul. The BR appeared to be operating on a shoestring--but Danilova more than compensated, and not too many people saw Ballet Society--but, you fail to mention the giant of the times, Ballet Theatre. And what a wonderful Company they were, at that time. I often 'rue-the-day' when the English and Russians invaded us with their full evening classics. Of course, I am as guilty as anyone, I flock to see them. But we lost so much when we started imitating the European repertoire.

[Helene]

Last night at the Patricia Barker farewell performance in Seattle, Francia Russell spoke. During her speech, she quoted Danilova, who told her (and I hope I'm not botching this too badly): "I gave my life to dance [art?] and it repaid me a hundred times over."

[dirac]

And why didn't DeValois "surrender to the pressure"? To prove a point? Or because she, rather than an impresario, knew what that role needed.

Perhaps to demonstrate that Anton Walbrook was not running Sadlers Wells, no matter what movie audiences may have thought

Good to hear from you, eabock. Also, I suspect, the worry not that Shearer wouldn’t score a success – but that she would.