sandik

I did see this on one of the Nureyev and Friends tours in Vancouver BC in the late 1980s. 

As flattering as this might be, the fact that I live 3000 miles away from NYC would seem to make this idea pretty impractible.

As I understand it, it is not likely that the Times will hire a full-time critic.  As with many of their other departments, they are working with freelancers and part-timers.

11 hours ago, Ashton Fan said:

The failure to record the Gala and make the recording available to a wider public than the ticket holders who were present in the theatre is not simply a missed opportunity to give the resident ballet company a higher profile with the general non-ballet going public than it currently enjoys and to generate income. It also runs contrary to the ROH's season long claims, made in the context of the new facilities available to the general public, that it wants to make the building, and presumably the works performed there, accessible to as wide an audience as possible, rather than simply wanting to sell tea and other refreshments to non-ticket holders.

I have no inside knowledge, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were rights issues involved here -- lots of artists, lots of other contributors -- it may have just been one thing too many to deal with.

I'm wondering about the Humphrey rep as well.  Shakers is taught in universities pretty regularly, and the other notated works get reconstructed in an academic context, but I'm not sure that Charles Woodford has been actively promoting the rep to a professional cohort.  I moused around a bit, and found two different organizations that seem to be a position to safeguard the work, but possibly not to move it forward.

Doris Humphrey Foundation at Goucher College (Woodford has donated his papers to the library there)

Doris Humphrey Society in Oak Park

And that's what I know today.

Lots of thoughts here.  As far as the function of newspapers in our world, as Nanushka points out, they are curators -- from all of the possible sources and about all possible topics, they pick and chose what they cover, based on their own mission statement and their judgment about their readership.  Sometimes that readership is fairly narrow, in terms of economic interests (think Forbes or the Wall Street Journal), geographic concerns (think most local newspapers), or avocation (all sports publications).  This function is essential for their readership and their budget -- there isn't a publication that can cover everything for everyone and afford to stay in print, whether that print is on paper or on your screen.

(just pointing out that Ballet Alert curates its content for us -- as do all other specialty websites)

Of all the art forms, dance has traditionally been the one that is the least well documented, because it is the hardest to write about.  I've been participating in multiple conversations recently about reconstruction and repertory, and so I've been thinking about this even more than I usually do, which is a lot, but I'll try to keep it brief.  As many folks have pointed out, there is no easily accessible universal text to refer to (just click over to the "now you see them - now you don't" fish dive discussion about Ratmansky's SB), which makes writing hard.  If I had a nickle for every time I've had to insert a capsule description of Balanchine's repertory into a review or commentary I could fund this website into the next century.  (No, I'm not irritated, just experienced...). Add to this the private nature of dance watching -- the kinesthetic experience is very powerful and personal.  What moves me (literally and metaphorically) may mean nothing to you, and both of our experiences are legit.  Again, this kind of "I was there, and you weren't" pov makes writing hard.

(and again, I'm not complaining)

And we have all noticed that we are in the middle of a paradigm shift when it comes to media.  Just as the art being made today mirrors the social concerns of the society, the media we use to discuss these concerns deal best when they focus on the individual, the personal, the multi-layered and the intersectional.  We are trying to find a way to combine knowledge with humility -- I may know a lot about a topic, but I need to acknowledge that I don't know everything.  And so we put the individual or the personal in the primary position -- we are looking for the profile of the artist or the inside information about the project.  And because the current media is like a firehose, running full speed all the time, we don't have a lot of flexibility to look back, and that is, essentially, what reviews do.

So yes, we're all passengers on a really crazy boat, and we aren't always going to find ourselves at the front of the flotilla. 

This doesn't thrill me at all -- reviews are what I've always done best -- but this is the world I work in right now, and I can either sit on the veranda and sigh after the good old days, or I can keep educating myself so that when there is a chance to reflect, I've got something valuable to say.

I will stop now, and I know you're grateful, if you've read this far.  Thanks for the loan of the soapbox!

In general, publications are moving away from reviews, in favor of profiles and previews.  The NYT still runs more reviews than most, but even they are shifting their focus.  It's quite possible that they will run a season review after ABT finishes their Met run.

Thanks!

There still seems to be a fair amount of "to be announced," but it's more than we knew before.  Anyone here know when the Bejart "Songs of a Wayfarer" was last performed in the US?

1 hour ago, nanushka said:

True. After all, no reconstruction of history is definitive. I like that Ratmansky has remained engaged in it — and that continual engagement surely pays off in the quality of the performances in successive years, unlike with productions where the original creator takes a back seat in revivals.

Thanks for the FB posts btw. I’m not on there anymore so would miss these. 

For the most part, I'm happy to live where I do and see what I see, but I really envy those of you who have had the chance to watch this project unfold -- whether something is to your personal taste or not, we learn so much by watching this research.  Many thanks to all who see and report.

5 hours ago, nanushka said:

OT, but there's currently an exhibition at New York's Morgan Library of Sendak's stage designs. Zachary Woolfe has a write-up in the Times.

Oh thank you!  I would have missed this.

The grinning Nutcracker image is from the curtain -- at the very end of the ballet (when Clara wakes up in her bed in a "stage within a stage" setup) the "mouth" snaps shut -- it was very effective.

2 hours ago, fondoffouettes said:

My main criticisms of the reconstruction are more about the physical production itself. While I like the overall aesthetic of the production, there are some costumes I'm not so fond of (while not offensive, I find Aurora's Act I costume to be a bit of a letdown). Also, I think it's a real missed opportunity that the panorama was not reconstructed. I'm sure it came down to $$$, and perhaps moving backdrops wouldn't be exciting to modern-day audiences, but I think it could have been so magical. Perhaps it would have been an opportunity to use a modern-day technology -- projections -- to recreate 19th-century stagecraft.

I haven't seen Ratmansky's reconstruction yet, and so will not speak to that, but I did want to raise my hand for your suggestion about using modern-day stage technology to create a similar effect.  The panorama music is so lovely that I would hate to lose it, but most productions I've seen have a real "twiddling our thumbs" sense to the stage action during that scene.

And I will say that there's still an audience for the old-school effects.  Pacific Northwest Ballet's old Nutcracker (choreography by Kent Stowell and designs by Maurice Sendak) had a panorama and a wave effect in a toy theater frame during the "traveling to the Land of the Sweets," and it got big applause every time I saw it.

I noticed that she didn't deal with either company.  In the case of Ailey, possibly because it was never a one-choreographer shop -- he always included works by other dance makers in his programming.  And the Limon company danced some of Doris Humphrey's work early on, though they did become a very traditional single choreographer ensemble pretty quickly.

On 6/29/2019 at 5:52 AM, kbarber said:

The OUP Dictionary is now the Oxford Dictionary of Dance (Craine and Mackrell, 2010).

I've got the newer edition, but still use the older one for some things.  They had to edit out some older material to make way for additional information...

Looks like Pantastico and Postelwaite are scheduled to dance the duet from Cerrudo's Silent Ghost

Thanks for the heads-up -- it's good to have a date.

When I was teaching dance history, I often used Susan Au's "Ballet and Modern Dance" as a core assignment, supplemented by excerpts from multiple sources.  She is less America-centric than most of the other general history texts.

You might want to take a look at Deborah Jowitt's "Time and the Dancing Image."  She takes several key works and/or traditions and examines them in their historical context.  The whole book is excellent, but I think her chapter on Romantic ballet is particularly fine, and might serve your purposes.

Lynn Garafola's seminal book on Diaghilev and the Ballet Russe is large, but don't be intimidated -- it's very readable and packed with great scholarship.  Many people have written about the BR, and all its descendants -- Garafola is a great place to start examining that legacy.

Horst Koegler was an excellent observer of the German ballet scene, Erik Aschengren and Alexandra Tomalonis (founder of this website!) have written thoughtfully about the Danish Ballet, and there have been many excellent writers covering ballet in the UK. 

And rummage around here

https://balletalert.invisionzone.com/forum/25-writings-on-ballet/

for more specific suggestions (and lots of opinions!

I think that might be enough for now, but the gods know I can go on and on about this topic...  Let us know what you're reading, and what you think about it.

Tharp's new work is to Brahms, and Lang is using Tony Bennett. -- is she stepping into the popular music section of Tharp's world?

Glad to see the Dorrance work coming back.

Hadn't listened to this in years -- thanks for the reminder!

Looks like big fun!

Not that I'm aware of.  But that certainly would have been something!

Many thanks for the Artforum links -- I'd read Jowitt's review, but hadn't seen the others.

Lots to think about, still considering the changes in style and how the work is revealed by folks who aren't at home in the tradition.  But also wondering how far away you can go from the source material and still say it's a Cunningham work.  I have a feeling, as we get further and further from the 20th c greats, we will have plenty of opportunities to think about that process...

On 6/14/2019 at 4:33 PM, Buddy said:

We fought hard over nothin' 

 

I think almost everyone has had this experience.

I agree, lots of Glen Campbell in here, both the delivery and the orchestration. 

Ok, I will seek this out.

On 5/12/2019 at 11:02 PM, sandik said:

On 5/12/2019 at 1:23 PM, Drew said:

Just confirmed (what may have been known to others for a while) that the Royal Ballet Triple Bill with Medusa, that is, the new Cherkaoui, Flight Pattern, and Within the Golden Hour will make it to the Atlanta area-- not live but about a month later. Thrilled because I'm very curious about all three works on that program!  In fact, I have known for a while that RB broadcasts make it to Atlanta in recorded showings a month and longer after the live broadcast goes out--that's not really news--but the midweek nighttime scheduling has made them unrealistic options for me. And honestly I had long since forgotten that this triple bill would be one of the broadcasts.

Anyway,  June allows a little more freedom in a my schedule and I will try my hardest not to miss this showing.

It's coming to Seattle in June as well -- I'm really looking forward to this one.

June is a busy dance month here, but I managed to get to the theater this week to see this program.  I'll have more thoughts later, but just on the top, I was so glad to get a look at the Pite.  She seems to use her commissions from ballet companies to work on big cast projects, and that's the case here as well -- 30+ dancers on stage, mostly in large group forms.  She's trained in ballet, but the style she creates in has some significant differences from that tradition, and the dancers really seemed to give her what she wanted -- it was a stunning performance. 

According to my totally non-scientific poll (chatting it up with the people around me during the intervals) almost everyone was there to see the Pite.  And there were more people in the house for this than there have been for any of the other Royal Ballet in Cinema programs I've seen for the last several years.

Did anyone else here get a look at this program?

Interesting indeed.  It's not as popular a training style now as it has been in the past, but you can certainly see parts of it in choreography all over the place.  I'm always curious to see how dancers who are products of one school grapple with work that comes from another tradition.