24 replies to this topic

[rg]

the eakins press FIRST printing/edition is a most handsome production - about the size, tho' thicker and on heavier paper, of an encyclopedia britannica vol.
it has an acetate jacket and natural-linen-covered stiff board binding. very simply done w/ only the leclercq portrait of GB as the lone foto.
as i say beautiful production, very satisfying to turn its handsome pages.
the viking reprint is handier in size and includes SOME updating, as an appendix - the bulk of the production is essentially a reduced version of the eakins publication.
this latter is def. handier to keep at hand, but as i said earlier here, the binding of mine has cracked over the use from use -perhaps this vulnerability explains why it remains so reasonably priced.
as has been explained here, the eakins now ends handsomely situated on a book shelf while the cheaper viking is kept at one's desk, etc.
it was the bigger tome about which GB reported said: oh, the bible. and you can see why when you hold it.

[bart]

Thanks, rg.  You've given me what I need to make the choice.    

[atm711]

I can see where I will be spending a lot of my time     After a brief perusal I was surprised that the Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo 1945 'Concerto Barocco' did not show more details.  It was historic, in the sense that it was the first time the ballet was performed in "practice clothes".

[Ray]

One amusing find:  the entry for Serenade lists, among 1935's performances, "August 10-11 Philadelphia: Robin Hood Deli."  I know they performed in some crazy venues in the early days, but a deli?  (Perhaps the venue was really called the Robin Hood Dell?)  Good thing it wasn't created there--the production might've included pickles!

[Ray]

Helene, on Dec 8 2007, 04:18 AM, said:

It's so great to have this online, a format in which revisions can be made very easily when new material is found and vetted.

I meant to reply to this earlier.  Do we know that the database will be regularly and systematically updated (i.e., is there dedicated funding for that)?  The format of the original books included lists of all productions, which are growing exponentially with the passage of time.  And productions will be remounted and "refreshed," too.

[Helene]

The Balanchine Trust certainly knows to whom the rights have been assigned and to which companies repetiteurs have been sent.  A spot check indicates that the "Stagings" section is up to date to sometime in 2004.  There's nothing in the press release that indicates how often the site will be updated.

However, according to the site,

Quote

Updates, corrections, and other new material (accompanied by documentation) are invited: (information@balanchine.org).

http://www.balanchin...ntroduction.jsp

[Ray]

Helene, on Dec 9 2007, 04:26 AM, said:

The Balanchine Trust certainly knows to whom the rights have been assigned and to which companies repetiteurs have been sent.  A spot check indicates that the "Stagings" section is up to date to sometime in 2004.  There's nothing in the press release that indicates how often the site will be updated.

However, according to the site,

Quote

Updates, corrections, and other new material (accompanied by documentation) are invited: (information@balanchine.org).

http://www.balanchin...ntroduction.jsp

Thanks--I just sent them quite a list of corrections, such as that there was no "Joffrey Ballet Chicago" in 1967.  I bet they'll get a truckload more from the rest of the BT cohort!

[Helene]

Ray, on Dec 9 2007, 06:26 AM, said:

Thanks--I just sent them quite a list of corrections, such as that there was no "Joffrey Ballet Chicago" in 1967.  I bet they'll get a truckload more from the rest of the BT cohort!

I don't mean to be mean about such a monumental effort, and, frankly, when someone points out something like this in one of my 200-page functional specs I want to slap them silly, but this cracked me up.

[Ray]

Helene, on Dec 9 2007, 02:28 PM, said:

Ray, on Dec 9 2007, 06:26 AM, said:

Thanks--I just sent them quite a list of corrections, such as that there was no "Joffrey Ballet Chicago" in 1967.  I bet they'll get a truckload more from the rest of the BT cohort!

I don't mean to be mean about such a monumental effort, and, frankly, when someone points out something like this in one of my 200-page functional specs I want to slap them silly, but this cracked me up.

I know--I felt guilty as I am so hyperaware of how thankless these kind of research tasks can be (i.e., sometimes it seems that all anyone notices are the errors, no matter how few).  But since they're depending on us for updates, how can we possibly shut up?

[ViolinConcerto]

rg, on Dec 8 2007, 11:40 AM, said:

the viking reprint is handier in size and includes SOME updating, as an appendix - the bulk of the production is essentially a reduced version of the eakins publication.
this latter is def. handier to keep at hand, but as i said earlier here, the binding of mine has cracked over the use from use -perhaps this vulnerability explains why it remains so reasonably priced.

I seem to recall, and may be mistaken, that the Viking edition was originally about $25.00.  Then, like magic, it was changed to about $5.95 -- and the copies, on the promenade gift shop -- became ubiquitous.  I bought several at the time (gifts, etc.), though I already had a copy of the Eakins Press edition.  The smaller one did prove more handy.