1958 Balanchine Nutcracker Television VersionPlayhouse 90
#1
Posted 21 December 2011 - 06:35 PM
I sat in the Paley Media Center research room for 1-1/2 hours listening and watching to this period piece. My first impression, especially of Act one, is that he stage was too small for the dances (a reflection of the City Center staging?) and the involved setting, with two different rooms, complicated the action more than necessary. A highlight of the performance was the chance to see George Balanchine play Drosselmeyer. The production softened the frightening aspects of Drosselmeyer's entrance. By the way, the introduction by June Lockhart and her constant, intrusive voiceovers during the action were unnecessary and treacly. Balanchine's Nutcracker needs no voiceover to make the action intelligible even to a four year old.
The children in Act one were ragged. The boys were played mostly by girls - not even bothering to disguise them with short hair - two of the girl/boys had buns! Balanchine really suffered from the lack of boys taking ballet. The prince/nutcracker looked so familiar to me. I wondered if he could possibly be Eliot Feld - but no, it was Robert Maiorano, who went on to a career in the company and whose book Mozartiana graces my bookshelf.
Some of the staging decisions were downright annoying. While the polichinelles were dancing, Clara and the prince were standing in the foreground blocking the view of the dancing children. The snowflakes were nearly invisible due to the heavy "snowfall" which practically concealed their choreography.
Allegra Kent as Dewdrop stole the show. At 20, at her peak, she was simply lovely and overflowed with the joy of dancing. Her technique was perfection. A pity in her later career she was so ambivalent about dancing, and had three children while still in the company, That Balanchine kept her on and continued choreographing for her (Bugaku) says a lot about her luminous talent and beauty.
Diana Adans was always for me a mystery, an unknown quality. I had seen few pictures of her and no video at all. Now was a chance to assess her dancing as Sugar Plum. First I was struck by her regality, and by her more than passing resemblance to the then-young Queen. Perhaps Balanchine noted this and highlighted it in the role of SPF. She wore a calf length gown in the first act as is the present practice, but the last pas de deux (actually, pas de quatre) at the end of the ballet was rather odd. She still wore the long dress, not a tutu as SPF does now in Act II, and strangely enough, instead of a cavalier, Balanchine used four danseurs as her partners - Candy Cane, Hot Chocolate, Coffee (played with charismatic panache by Arthur Mitchell), and a Chinese dancer. Diana Adams floated from one to the other. (Where was Jacques D'Amboise?) So different from the pas de deux with one cavalier that we are used to now. Shows Balanchine made substantive changes over the years.
I was very annoyed at the cramped conditions of the sound stage - it inhibited the dancing, especially in Act one, and the gratuitous narration by the dulcet-toned June Lockhart. Shows what a difference the 1964 move to Lincoln Center made to Balanchine's artistic possibilities.
I noticed Balanchine particularly. He hammed at times, but he moved with such theatricality. He disregarded his own dictum, "Don't act!" When he produced the walnuts for the Nutcracker, his hand all but danced - the movement of his hand was artistic. The editing cut down the magical/mystical moment when Drosselmyer takes the place of the owl on top of the grandfather clock, it passed by momentarily.
Although we complain about the corruption of Balanchine's standards now, I feel so grateful that on the stage of the Theater Formerly Known as State we have totally professional, spacious performances, with the children rehearsed to perfection. No ragged performances now.
Also, now Act II opens with the floating by of the angels. Act II in the Playhouse 90 version opened with gingerbread houses and candies - reminded me of Hansel and Gretel. Balanchine certainly improved the 1954 version of the Nutcracker over the years.
I'm seeing it with Mearns, Peck, Catazaro in the last performance of the season and am almost sated by all this Nutcracker. But the chance to see it on the capacious stage of the Theater Formerly Known as State, up close, to see the amazing Mearns and Peck and to assess a new talent, Catazaro, are too tempting to miss.
So if you want to compare now and then, go to the Paley Media Center, 25 West 52nd Street off Sixth Avenue. They have a wonderfully comfortable set-up on the 4th floor for seeing classic television setups, and their librarians (archivists?) are very helpful. You can skip the commercials, and much of June Lockhart. It's less then 1-1/2 hours. Seeing this dated and cramped production has made me very grateful for what we have now at NYCB.
#2
Posted 22 December 2011 - 07:26 AM
#3
Posted 22 December 2011 - 11:16 AM
(BTW, the Nutcracker "tradition" of girls playing boys is also maintained by MCB here in Florida. Staging that ballet, you use who you've got, evidently.)
#4
Posted 22 December 2011 - 12:41 PM
The reason NYCB has so many boys is they are able to finance a program of full scholarships for boys. Boys pay nothing to attend, and admission is still competitive. If MCB could afford to let boys study for free, they would also have actual boys playing boy parts. Balanchine worked with what he had until the Ford Foundation grant came through in the early 60's, which allowed him to send his dancers out to scout for the best ballet students, one of whom, Roberta Ficker, became Suzanne Farrell. Then the scholarships for boys in later years under Martins improved the school and its performances enormously. Even in the 60's, in an interview, I remember Balanchine saying, "We have Jacques D'Amboise, he is married and has children. We have Edward Vilella, he is also married with children. So we're doing 100%." This was obviously to reassure parents who were afraid for their sons to be ballet dancers. So Balanchine knew exactly what he was up against. Vilella's father insisted he abandon ballet and join the Merchant Marine Academy. Luckily he went back to ballet in time.
I'm very concerned about MCB without Edward Vilella. It seems insane, or at least counterproductive, to fire the founder at only 75 when he has so much knowledge and experience. If Balanchine had been fired at 75 in 1979, we would not have had Mozartiana! I'll check out the MCB forum to see what Miami and Fort Lauderdale audience members have to say.
#5
Posted 22 December 2011 - 01:31 PM
#6
Posted 23 December 2011 - 11:36 AM
Further on the Nutcracker TV film:
The Library of the Performing Arts at Lincoln Center (NYC) has some interesting Balanchine Nutcracker material, including apparently the entire 1958 television recording. Here is a link to a documentary on Balanchine's Nutcracker, and if you read the entire description, you will find a reference to their having the entire film and a classification number.
http://nypl.biblioco..._the_nutcracker
#7
Posted 23 December 2011 - 12:34 PM
#8
Posted 23 December 2011 - 02:11 PM
#9
Posted 25 December 2011 - 01:12 PM
Did he create the mime for the little prince after 1958? Or was it in the original 1954 choreography? Does any Balanchine scholar know?
#10
Posted 25 December 2011 - 05:22 PM
Eileen, on 25 December 2011 - 01:12 PM, said:
I was 11 in 1958 and had been going to the NYCB Nutcracker for years by that age. I certainly remember it existing in the productions I saw with my mother each year. Being as young as I was, it was likely something I paid close attention to as I always had a crush on each year's nephew of Herr Drosselmeyer.
#11
Posted 25 December 2011 - 07:36 PM
#12
Posted 26 December 2011 - 06:56 AM
#13
Posted 26 December 2011 - 06:13 PM
#14
Posted 26 December 2011 - 11:01 PM
#15
Posted 27 December 2011 - 12:26 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:



