Ari

Well, yes, I think it is. I like it when I watch the Kirov and see dancers who are all from nations of the former Soviet Union, or POB and see all French dancers. When I saw the Danes last month, the foreigners really stood out -- in a negative way, they weren't the same. One of the miracles of the RDB used to be that such a tiny country could consistently field a troupe of world-class dancers. And they did it for 200 years. The Royal also represents a small country, but it always included dancers from Commonwealth countries, in much the same way that Russian companies include dancers from outside what is strictly Russia. But there's enough similarity there, and not just in training and style, to present a cohesive picture. Besides, leaving aside for the moment the question of how well foreigners can dance "Americana" ballets (which ABT doesn't do anymore anyway), I think that young American dancers should be able to dream of becoming a star in a world-class company in their own country. But as long as ABT continues to purchase most of its stars ready-made instead of developing its own talent, these stars are going to be mostly foreign.

It's funny you should bring this up. A couple of weeks ago I was looking at an ABT brochure in which they had a spread of their principals, and the information given included their birthplace. I couldn't help noticing that of the 17 principals pictured, only 3 were American. Now, I value the contribution of artists based on their talent and not on their birthplace, but at the same time I wonder whether the word "American" in the company's name is valid any longer -- and whether the company cares about it. It's hard to say in ABT's case, because eclecticism has for so long been their hallmark. When foreign dancers join NYCB, they adapt to the company's style, so their nationality is not so important -- no one doubts that Nikolaj Hubbe and Sofiane Sylve are NYCB dancers. But what happens when a dancer does not adapt, but dances in a style contrary to that of the rest of the company, or (in ABT's case) has no company style to adapt to?

When NYCB's Beauty was new, they cast principals as the Rose Adagio cavaliers. I remember that Jock Soto, who is part Native American, was cast as the Prince from America. Nowadays, they still put soloists in these roles, and announce the casting along with the divertissement and character roles, which indicates that they consider the parts important.

From the NYCB web site: http://www.nycballet.com/nycballet/html/tickets_casting.html NEW YORK CITY BALLET AT THE KENNEDY CENTER MARCH 3-7, 2004 WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 3 AT 7:30PM Serenade: KISTLER, BORREE, KÖRBES, NEAL, FAYETTE Intermission Apollo: BOAL, ANSANELLI, BOUDER, RUTHERFORD Intermission Symphony in C: 1st Mov.: RINGER, MARTINS 2nd Mov.: KOWROSKI, ASKEGARD 3rd Mov.: FAIRCHILD*, DE LUZ 4th Mov.: van KIPNIS, EVANS THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 4 AT 7:30PM Concerto Barocco: BORREE, van KIPNIS, HÜBBE [Rylatko, Lee] Intermission Prodigal Son: WOETZEL, KOWROSKI, FAYETTE, GOLBIN, ABERGEL, CARMENA, FROMAN Intermission Tschaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2: WEESE, ASKEGARD, BOUDER, TINSLEY, RUTHERFORD, SUOZZI, ORZA [Walters] FRIDAY EVENING, MARCH 5 AT 7:30PM [Quinn] Jewels: Emeralds: WEESE, HANNA, RINGER, FAYETTE, TINSLEY, van KIPNIS, HIGGINS Intermission Rubies: ANSANELLI, WOETZEL, REICHLEN [Grant] Intermission Diamonds: KOWROSKI, NEAL SATURDAY MATINEE, MARCH 6 AT 1:30PM Concerto Barocco: BORREE, van KIPNIS, HÜBBE [Rylatko, Lee] Intermission Prodigal Son: BOAL, KISTLER, FAYETTE, GOLBIN, ABERGEL, SUOZZI, HENDRICKSON Intermission Tschaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2: WEESE, ASKEGARD, REICHLEN, TINSLEY, RUTHERFORD, J. STAFFORD, RAMASAR [Walters] SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 6 AT 7:30PM Serenade: KISTLER, BORREE, KÖRBES, NEAL, FAYETTE Intermission Apollo: BOAL, ANSANELLI, BOUDER, RUTHERFORD Intermission Symphony in C: 1st Mov.: RINGER, MARTINS 2nd Mov.: KOWROSKI, ASKEGARD 3rd Mov.: FAIRCHILD, DE LUZ 4th Mov.: van KIPNIS, EVANS SUNDAY MATINEE, MARCH 7 AT 1:30PM [Quinn] Jewels: Emeralds: RUTHERFORD, HANNA, van KIPNIS, FAYETTE, EDGE, RIGGINS, CARMENA Intermission Rubies: WEESE, HÜBBE, LOWERY [Grant] Intermission Diamonds: KOWROSKI, NEAL SUNDAY EVENING, MARCH 7 AT 7:30PM [Kaplow] Jewels: Emeralds: RUTHERFORD, HANNA, van KIPNIS, FAYETTE, EDGE, RIGGINS, CARMENA Intermission Rubies: WEESE, HÜBBE, REICHLEN [Grant] Intermission Diamonds: KISTLER, ASKEGARD

Baryshnikov's role in this series has been curious. When he was brought in, all the publicity indicated that Carrie was supposed to end up with him -- that he would open her eyes to a world beyond Cosmopolitans and Manolos. But when he actually began filming the show, it became more and more apparent that he wasn't working out. He had a distant and lachrymose quality that was offputting -- there was nothing joyful or life-affirming for Carrie (and the audience) to embrace. So they seem to have altered their original plan and turned him into a selfish artist from whom Carrie had to liberate herself. Everyone seems to be assuming that Carrie walked off into the sunset with Big (or should I call him John? ). But I'm not so sure about that . . . he's moving back to New York, but they've still got a feature film to plot, and I can't see a happily ever after for those two.

The Richardson Hockey Fan referred to was Mandy Jayne (I think that's how she spelled it) Richardson, who was in the company for a couple of years with her husband, Lindsay Fischer. I never saw her Carabosse but vividly remember both Ashley's (very feminine and chic) and Lopez's (scary, like Margaret Hamilton in the Wizard of Oz). I don't think it's a punishment to cast a dancer in an evil character role. If she can bring something to it, by all means give her the part. But I do wonder why Kowroski isn't dancing Aurora. Is it her height? They have Askegaard to partner her.

Pugbee, the role of Little Red Riding Hood has always been danced by a child from the school -- one of this production's nice touches. They cast a tall man as the Wolf, so the difference in size is quite alarming!

I was the out-of-town companion Carbro mentioned on Saturday night and, as she intimated, I thought Fairchild made a smashing (New York City) debut. As others have said, it was a strikingly mature performance for so young and inexperienced a dancer. Not only did she meet the dancing challenges, but she looked as though she had thought out her entire performance. I couldn't help but compare it to Alexandra Ansanelli's debut in the same role last spring. While Ansanelli also danced it very well, she hurtled through the ballet with sheer, unmodulated force, resulting in a one-note performance that gave Swanilda's gulling of Coppelius in the second act a rather nasty edge. Fairchild, by contrast, showed a variety of reactions -- playfulness, pique, warmth, wit -- as each situation developed. And she commanded the stage like a veteran. The only thing she lacks now is stamina, for she seemed to run out of steam by the third act. I think it was simply weariness that made this act less impressive than the first two, not a lack of grand ballerina style. And, as Michael said, de Luz is not the solidest of partners. As for de Luz, he gave a thoroughly ABT performance, selling his dancing and mime like a pitchman on the Shopping Channel. He is not a classical dancer in the NYCB Frantz tradition of Helgi Tomasson and Peter Martins, and it pained me to see the way he tore into the beautiful choreography Balanchine made for Frantz in the third act. His aggressive approach would be better paired with Ansanelli, although that's not a partnership I'd like to see. The company looked better rehearsed than they had last spring, but the demisoloists dancing Swanilda's friends lacked the big, juicy attack that is the hallmark of Balanchine style. I kept hearing the Master's voice in my head saying, "More!"

So your real objection is to the quality of the company's work, then, not the solicitation? I sympathize -- I've often felt the same when I see bad performances from companies whose normal standard is higher. The trouble is that companies need money to survive regardless of current artistic levels, and you can't use each performance as a test of whether you're going to continue to support its work. Or, rather, you can, but whether that's a wise long-term strategy is questionable. If you believe in a company, if it has a history of artistic integrity, if it's achieved things that you want to see preserved and built on, then I think you have to grit your teeth and hope that things will improve. Of course, that's hard when you see artistic policies and performance levels that anger you on a consistent basis. By all means make your displeasure known, to the company, to newspaper letter columns, to boards like this, to whatever outlet you can find. But companies still need money to exist. Whether you contribute to them above the cost of your tickets is of course up to you. But instead of thinking of a contribution (or the purchase of a ticket) as an endorsement of existing policies and standards, think of what might happen if the company's funds dried up. Then there would be no possibility at all of getting it back on the right course. In writing this, I've been thinking as much about the current situation at the New York City Ballet as that at the Royal. I know there are people, some on this board, who are so opposed to Peter Martins's leadership that they've stopped giving money to the company. While they are of course entitled to do as they wish, my own attitude is what I just wrote.

I remember reading in the last decade or so that recent British governments have been reducing the amount of money given to the arts, and that the Royal Opera House, which has always relied on public funds for the bulk of its budget, has been among those hardest hit. The articles I read indicated that this trend is expected to continue, and that British arts groups are going to have to reach out to new sources of funding. So I think that the type of solicitation you received, Simon, is just the tip of the iceberg. One aspect of the situation that differs sharply from that in the States, though, is that contributions to non-profit enterprises such as cultural institutions are not tax deductible in Britain. This is a huge difference, as tax deductibility is a major attraction for many American donors. In fact, end-of-tax-year appeals (such as Giannina's Christmas card) are standard over here. So I don't know how successful this approach can be without such a lure. I can understand that to someone who isn't used to this kind of appeal it can seem tacky, but to those who are, the offer of autographed toe shoes and photos is actually quite restrained. There have been a number of discussions on this board about commercial tie-ins and other gambits by American companies to bring in cash, some of which make toe shoes and photos look like the acme of dignity. There's always a tension between the aristocratic heritage of ballet and the other high arts and the modern liberal culture of capitalism, and for one to exist in the world of the other involves compromises and conundrums. It's one of the major issues in the arts today.

I attended today's matinee with a lead cast of Irina Dvorovenko, Jose Manuel Carreno, and Michele Wiles. I have to say that in all the years I've been watching ABT do this production -- over twenty, plus the six years before that when they did only the Shades scene -- I've never seen a flatter, more dispirited performance. The pull of Bayadere in the ABT repertory for me has always been its artistic unity and stylistic integrity, which were Makarova's great gifts to a company not known for either. Somehow, she managed to pull all those people from different backgrounds together, and make them committed to what they were doing. Today, it looked like just another day at the office. No one except the three principals -- well, make that two principals -- seemed to know or care what they were doing; it was "if it's Sunday this must be Bayadere." Natasha, come home. You're needed. I haven't seen much of Dvorovenko, so I wasn't sure what to expect. Knowing that she was trained in Kiev, I did think that she'd have been exposed to this ballet from an early age and come to it with an understanding that some of her colleagues lack. So I was taken aback by what I saw. Nikiya has to establish herself as an icon of purity, which the ballerina shows through her classical style. From her entrance, Dvorovenko, all wriggly plastique, looked like a modern/character dancer. And her manner towards Carreno's ardent Solor was glacial, which made me dislike her almost at once. And when Wiles came out, so upright and true in her classicism, my sympathies immediately went to her. In the confrontation scene between the two women, I was rooting for Gamzatti. This has never happened before in all the performances of Bayadere -- by ABT and other companies -- I've seen. I didn't think the Shades scene was as chaotic as some of the other posters; perhaps by today's performance they'd got it together. But other aspects of the scene did bother me. DancingGiselle has already mentioned the varying heights of the legs in arabesque, but more serious I think was the fact that when the girls stepped into the position, the legs just went up, instead of the whole body dipping and blooming into arabesque. Perhaps it's just that their backs are inflexible, but I suspect there are more secrets there that a Makarova or another experienced coach could reveal to them. The Shades were sketchily danced by Anna Liceica, Carmen Corella, and Melissa Thomas (replacing Veronika Part), and someone should tell Corella to save her happy grin for Don Quixote. Carlos Molina doesn't know how to walk across a stage and show majesty and authority, or even paternity (if I hadn't known the story I'd never have guessed that he was Gamzatti's father). In fairness I should say that the audience seemed very happy with the whole thing. Their applause and cheers sounded heartfelt.

Yes, I remember that Croce wrote about Diamonds, "Apart from its presentation of the multifaceted Farrell, the ballet is paste." :yes:

Marc raises the issue of stature in the Pavlenko/Sarafanov partnership, and I'd been wondering about this. From what I've seen of them, it appears that Pavlenko is fairly tall, and Sarafanov short. I should think this would be a problem for them in the difficult partnering in Swan Lake.

Teachout elaborated on this point in his ArtsJournal blog a couple of weeks ago: Scandal

Good morning, CIA. Aren't you learning a lot about ballet, CIA?

I agree that there are too many pictures of Baryshnikov. Anyone looking at this book who was unfamiliar with NYCB history would assume that he spent much more time with company, and was much more important in it, than he actually was. However, I also noticed that there are many photos of the ballets videotaped for PBS in the late 70s. Costas may have been the official (or non-official) photographer for the project and that might be the explanation.

That's City Ballet's problem with all of its new choreography: it's being matched against an impossibly high standard. In companies whose base repertoire is the older classics -- Petipa, Ivanov, Bournonville, Fokine -- choreographers are not chastised for failing to live up to those standards, perhaps because styles have changed so much that no one expects another Bayadere or Les Sylphides. That's one reason I've always thought commissioning new work that is non-Balanchinian in style would be good for NYCB. But apparently people will still compare. I haven't seen Double Feature, and unless the company does it in Saratoga it's unlikely that I will. I might hate it, who knows. But I think it's healthy for them to try something different. It's not as though Double Feature is going to supplant Serenade and The Four Temperaments in NYCB's repertoire, just add to it.

She also played Jean Arthur's ballet dancing sister in You Can't Take It With You (1938).

mini cooper, Balanchine is thought to have been exposed to the disease during surgery for tubercolosis in the early 1930s -- CJD can have a very long latency period. When he was sick, the doctors could not be sure that he had the disease because his symptoms were somewhat atypical: usually, patients become mentally disoriented before their motor functions become impaired, but Mr. B was mentally alert until quite late in his illness. He also tried to hide the illness's effect on his ability to walk and move around from the doctors.

I'd pick 4 Ts, too. I've always thought of it as my "desert island ballet," if such a thing were possible. (Imagine being marooned on a desert island with only a ballet company. ) It's my choice just because it's so thrilling -- it never fails to send shivers up my spine -- and because there's nothing else like it in the ballet repertoire. Other choreographers try, but they don't come within shoutin' distance of this.

In the early days of Ballet Review, Arlene Croce wrote a very funny article about bad dance criticism that included a list of hackneyed phrases, such as "Markova is Giselle." She said something like, "Markova is Markova. What the critic probably means is that he was moved." Another chestnut she singled out was, "There is only one [name of dancer]!" She quoted a review that exclaimed, "There is only one Tallchief!" and pointed out that there were in fact two (Maria and Marjorie).

Ravenna Tucker grew up in Hong Kong, but I believe she was of British parentage. She always looked somewhat Asian, however. Someone posted here recently that she is now back in Asia -- Singapore? -- teaching.

I saw both Saturday performances. La Sylphide I thought was a fine staging worthy of the ballet's position in the RDB repertory — something that can't be said of the current production of Napoli. The mime in the first act was very clear, quite a contrast to the muddied mime in Napoli. <br> <br> There were two fine Effys in Tina Hojlund (matinee) and Maria Bernholdt (evening). Hojlund, with her warm, down-to-earth quality and expressive dark eyes, is perfect for the part, and Bernholdt acted the role very well. Both Gurns were very good in different ways — Morten Eggert (matinee) was more obviously jealous and angry, while Nicolai Hansen (evening) was kinder, someone you felt would treat Effy well. Thomas Lund (matinee) is a good dancer, but neither physically nor facially is he the danseur noble type. James is within his grasp, though, because the character's internal conflict makes the role susceptible to interpretation by a wider range of dancers. Mads Blangstrup (evening) was much more the typical leading man type. What I missed in both performances was James's joy in being part of the sylph world in the second act. Other Jameses have danced his buoyant solo as an expression of intoxication with the fairy world — Baryshnikov was almost giddy with delight, Niels Kehlet could hardly believe his good fortune. The sylphs, Gudrun Bojesen at the matinee and Silja Schandorff in the evening, both took the innocent and playful approach, which is what I'm used to seeing. They were both good without being especially memorable. The female corps in Act II was perhaps too straightforward in its dancing. Accounts of performances in the 1950s all stressed how carefully each girl seemed to be holding her head, neck, and shoulders, and I would like to have seen some of that yesterday. Etudes was pretty awful. It's hard to believe that this thirty-minute exercise in bombast is a Danish ballet, but apparently this production was staged by a Frenchwoman who set the showy POB version on the company instead of their native interpretation. It was disheartening, too, to see not a single Dane among the principal cast. Actually, I have nothing against foreign dancers as long as they absorb the company style, but I didn't see that here. Caroline Cavallo at least tried, but Andrew Bowman and Jean-Lucien Massot gave aggressive, look-at-me performances that would have been right at home at ABT. The audience, sadly, lapped it all up.

I saw tonight's (Thursday's) performance and, sad to say, found it a pale replica of the ballet I once loved. The performances were mainly to blame: neither the dancing nor the mime was as robust as I remember it. Tina Hojlund was a gentle and charming Teresina, but her dancing wasn't as incisive as others I can recall. Thomas Lund was acceptable in both his dancing and acting, but unexciting. The first act ballabile passed off well enough, but the third act was an unhappy experience. What used to be an explosion of joy looked like a lesson dutifully but unenthusiastically learned, and some of the dancing was below what we should expect of a world class company. The men were especially disappointing. I was puzzled, too, by the reduced number of soloists in the third act — the same dancers did the pas de six and the tarantella, with a couple of extra boys for the latter. Perhaps this was just an economy of touring; I hope so. <br> <br> I don't recall the details of the earlier production well enough to do a point-by-point comparison, but one obvious difference here was the second act. This has always been the ballet's weak spot — famously, balletomanes in Copenhagen used to while away the time in a local bar. I don't know what Bournonville actually choreographed, but he was in the difficult position of having to make the Blue Grotto look unpleasant without alienating or boring the audience. Apparently he didn't succeed. Modern restagers are in an even more difficult position, because audiences have been trained by Petipa into seeing a supernatural atmosphere with a corps of girls and thinking, now comes the good part! But the eroticism Petipa brought to these scenes is alien to Bournonville's esthetic. Whoever choreographed this scene attempted a Petipa-style dream/vision/whatever scene (although the actual choreography, as Jeannie noted, is more Balanchine in style). But instead of being the artistic and emotional high point of the ballet, it has to be rejected in favor of the third act celebration. This would make it fall flat even if the choreography had been better. But it doesn't even work as mime: there's something unsatisfying about Golfo not being vanquished. He just kind of takes the attitude that, well, he lost out on Teresina but what the heck, he's got lots of others. But maybe that's a modern reaction, too, borne of too many Swan Lakes. Trouble is, we live in a post-Swan Lake world and can't go back. Time to go back to my tape of the 1980s production. :shrug:

Indeed yes. Last year I saw a mouse corpse in the Kennedy Center's Opera House. This was before the renovation, though, so I don't know what the explanation was!