sandik

Just wanted to add a plug for ArtsJournal (I don't work with them, but they are based in my home town) -- I think Doug McLennan does an excellent job for the arts with this digest/links site.

and forgot to say that all of second week casting is up on the website now.

Well, we expect to hear all about what you had.

The Joffrey Ballet, which used to tour annually to Seattle until the early 1980's, performed almost nothing but triple bills -- in fact it was a program-length work (Cranko's Shrew, if memory serves) that did badly enough here that it put its presenter out of business.

The Weekly is published on Wednesdays, but the logistics of printing means that most stories are due the previous week. When I review PNB, which opens on Thursdays, I try to see at least two casts -- I turn in my copy first thing Monday morning. My colleague Roger Downey is reviewing the company this season, and I think he may be trying to get his copy in on Fridays or Saturdays -- I know that some editing goes on over the weekend. Very few daily papers run anything like overnight reviews now -- for the Seattle dailies, if a show opens on Thursday the earliest a review will run will usually be Saturday. If it opens on Friday, it probably won't run till Monday (the arts section of the Sunday paper is printed much earlier in the week. several years ago they would run some arts coverage in the news section, which went to press on Saturday, but no longer)

From Moira Macdonald's essay on Louise Nadeau coaching Sleeping Beauty (rather than dancing Aurora again) A viewpoint on the shifting casting we were discussing above. "It was a difficult choice to make," she says. "But I thought, you know, I've done it, I enjoyed it when I did it. I didn't really feel that I had to prove anything to anyone. And I thought, do I really want to take up the space, and not allow someone else the opportunity?" (can see whole article through links for Tuesday 4/11)

Oh lordy, I'm sure your experience has been replicated many, many times!

I'm not familiar with Il Divo, but I thought the comments on musical styles in the 1950's were very interesting. The carefully callibrated work of people like Pat Boone would eventually be swept away by the onslaught of rock and roll -- I wonder if there's a "bad boy branch" of opera singers that could do the same thing here?

I'm very sad about Vaness and Cole -- as I understand it, they're both scheduled to sing with the opera company in the future, and I don't think that relationship will change until the current artistic director steps down (he's been particularly important in Vaness' career) but I imagine the more intimate events, like recitals, won't continue.

These are indeed an interesting pair of articles, and bring up some juicy ideas. Perhaps it's just a feature of being in the "other" Washington, but most of the college dance students I've met here are planning on at least some career as performing artists. Indeed, a higher percentage of them now seem to feel that life is within their grasp than did when I first started teaching in colleges in the early 1980's. What may be the difference is that many of them right now don't look towards joining large/established companies, but instead are working with new choreographers in pick-up groups, or banding together with colleagues to present themselves. The master/apprentice relationship that was more of a standard when I was training isn't as common today. Part of this comes from current training styles -- the egalitarian feeling of a contact improvisation class gives all the practitioners a sense of autonomy. There may be a teacher, but they are less of a leader than a facilitator. Even in more traditional technique classes the gestalt is less formal. I'm not willing to say that modern dance is sinking like a stone, but it is changing. I think it's doing what it's always done -- mutating based on the concerns and interests of the artists involved. It's an art form that was born of difference -- the early moderns often thought they knew more about what they were not, than what they were. For many of them it was a process of discovery, often mysterious, and highly personal. It was about those individuals and those times -- modern dance today is about a new cohort and a new century. If the mandate has always been to "dance who you are" we have to expect that the landscape will change. I do think that right now we have fewer significant mid-career choreographers -- like everywhere else, AIDS has painfully thinned the dance population, and many artists will only ever have been promising newcomers. A couple of years ago in The Guardian, Ismene Brown was very concerned that the major modern dance companies visiting Britain that summer were run by people who were either dead or nearly there (and then she made a reference to the unfortunate Tom Cruise movie "Vanilla Sky," but we won't go into that here). But I think part of the difficulty comes from the very good work people do trying to maintain the connections to the classics while we still make room for the new. Many repertories are indeed in danger of being lost, or have been absorbed into other ensembles to avoid that catastrophe (with much of early Tharp going to Hubbard Street and big chunks of the Nikolais/Murray rep being taken up by Ririe-Woodbury). This conservatorship takes resources, and if this means that we are not "developing" master choreographers at the same rate as we used to, perhaps that's another part of the changing dynamics. Like most of the people on this board, I see a lot of work over the course of the year. And like most of the people on this board, a big chunk of what I see is not destined for greatness -- it serves a purpose (sometimes several purposes -- we're thrifty folk), acting as a kind of training wheels for artists and communities, and then fades. It helps the choreographers learn how to make a better dance, helps the dancers learn how to perform, helps the audience learn how to see -- it keeps all of us ready for when something special comes along.

I've been meaning to chime in on this, but haven't had enough time till now, so at the risk of posting on the wrong site, here are a few more thoughts. There are many schools with long-established artist-in-residence programs in visual and performing arts -- while some of those artists carry regular teaching loads (and I know of a few who are part of university administrations as well!), generally they perform more coaching or masterclass functions, organized around their art-making schedules. They are a connection to the real world for the students (and other faculty) as well as an inspiration. Their presence can help lend credibility to a school, with the assumption that school x must be a good place to study since artist y is affiliated with it. Since one of the difficulties with arts programs in college or university settings can be questions of rigor -- how "professsional" is the training -- these kind of residencies help answer those concerns. (When I was first teaching at the University of Washington in the early 1980's Jacob Lawrence was on the art faculty -- he taught some of the drawing classes and would regularly bring his students to the dance department to sketch during class, not just working with live models, but live, moving models. It was an honor to have him there.) In some schools, they also have a significant role as artists themselves, so that they contribute to the culture of the school and/or the community. This is particularly true of visual artists, but also of many musicians -- Helene mentioned chamber music ensembles, but singers often find a home in a school as part of their career (here in Seattle we're sorry to be losing Carol Vaness and Vinson Cole, who have both been on the University of Washington music faculty while they've been singing around the world, and are leaving for other schools. They've performed with the Seattle Opera, but have also sung in recital at the UW -- a real treat for local audiences.) As is generally the case, dance comes out at the bottom end of the list right now -- there are significantly fewer college programs in dance than in the other arts, and they usually don't have the resources to fund resident artists (traditionally those funds have come from endowments, and endowments frequently come from alumni -- many college dance programs aren't old enough to have a large cohort of wealthy alums) There are artist-in-resident programs in some schools, but mostly they fund individuals rather than ensembles, and often look more towards choreographers than performers. What can happen is that a choreographer might be in residence in a school, and some of their ensemble might also have some kind of affiliation, with the rest of them there unofficially, taking class or using studio space to rehearse, but not actually a part of the school structure. I believe that early in its life Ballet West was a part of the University of Utah's dance department, though I think that relationship is more tenuous now. (Indeed that school has nurtured several difference groups -- Ririe-Woodbury and Repertory Dance Theater both started at the UU, and Virginia Tanner's Children's Dance Theater operated out the school with teaching artists coming out the school as well). The performing ensembles at several schools are of a professional caliber, even if their members are not being paid, but the internal dynamics of those groups are very different than in an independent company. As more schools create graduate programs geared to dancers who have already had a professional career (not to brag on my home town, but the University of Washington was one of the first institutions to take that step) the dancers that are "coming back to school" bring a kind of professional vibe with them, and often function much as artists-in-residence do. At the UW, their performing group (Chamber Dance Company) regularly presents some of the most interesting work in the course of the season, and gives the dance program there a higher level of visibility than it had before that program began. (they specialize in historic modern dance, which seems very appropriate to a company resident in a university) What it seem to boil down to (no surprise to anyone in the dance world) is money -- ballet companies are expensive propositions, and most universities don't have the resources to devote to them.

Martha Graham used to call her works ballets. And then there are companies with "ballet" in the title -- Les Ballets Africains was just in town (Seattle) last weekend. And the gods know that the old court ballets were more like the circus than anything else!

In the past it's gone both ways in terms of casting -- there have been programs where there have only been a couple of casts for main parts (the new Dominique Dumais in the last program had only one cast for all performances -- a logistical thing), and then we have programs like this, with 5 Auroras. When the company came back to a significantly remodeled (and renamed) McCaw Hall in the autumn of 2003 with a new production of Swan Lake, they had 5 Odettes, which didn't feel like a stunt, but more like a special event. I was very curious when I heard they were having so many Auroras here, but they have some women who have certainly "earned" the role, as well as others they are bringing up. It's been a balancing act for many years, and Stowell and Russell worked hard at it, especially moving younger dancers into new parts. Part of the audience does follow individual performers, and is pleased to see them move into new roles. And some people like to look in the corps for the next new thing. I don't know that too many people get frustrated because a favorite doesn't get multiple performances, though I wish sometimes that I could see that maturation process within one program. Often, though, if I have a chance to see a certain program multiple times, I'll try to see as many different people in it as I can, rather than the same cast over again, especially if I'm reviewing.

Apollo certainly, and Green Table (convenient that it matches the opening!)

Does the job come with a costume then, or even just a hat. Always happy for more glamor and intrigue.

What a good idea! Looking forward to seeing what people have to say.

Unfortunately, Peter Martins has become the contemporary blueprint for what a god must look like, which may make a bit more sense in the truncated version, where the awkward young god isn't shown. (Not that it's unfortunate that Peter Martins looks like Peter Martins, but that other mortals are expected to.) But neither Villella, Baryshnikov, nor d'Amboise fit the blond god mold, nor did Lifar, the originator of the role. (Kronstam fit the god-looking part, but not the blond.)But there is hope: Lew Christensen was the original blond god, and others who did not look like Christensen were able to make their mark on the role. on looking like a god: Following this from a distance, since I rarely see the company, but we got a nice look at Apollo here in Seattle (Pacific Northwest Ballet) a couple years ago and had two different views of the main role -- Jeff Stanton's was a more "godly," serious interpretation right from the top, while Stanko Milov had a slightly looser physicality (I thought he looked like Elvis when he first played his lyre). In the end, Stanton ruled through his gravitas, and Milov tamed the muses through his power. They were both extremely cogent interpretations, worked quite well, and I was happy to see them both. ps We have the full version with the birth and the stairway.

As dreary as this situation is, I'm glad to see the article -- the topic has gotten relatively little attention in the US press, despite the fact that it's been a big hassle for performing arts presenters since 2001. The requirement that each artist come in person to a US embassy is a real sticking point, especially for ensembles with many members who come together for performances and rehearsals, but otherwise live in several different places.

Oooh, Karsavina! Many thanks!!

The Magic of Dance is one of those early series that seems to be caught in limbo since its producers (Time Life video) were munched up and traded and spun off to the point that no one seems to know who owns the rights to any of their library. I would love to have a clean copy of that series, on tape or DVD. As well as the materials you list, it has some great examples of early dance, including some wonderful footage from the Drottingholm Royal Theater with authentic 19th century stage machinery -- trap doors, wave machine, "dimmers" for candle lights. There's also the finale of a production of Cupid out of his Humor (a Mary Skeaping reconstruction) that includes a real "Deus ex Machina" with Zeus descending to the stage in a "cloud" to put everything right. It's wonderful footage, and was extremely helpful when I was teaching dance history. Adding my voice to Koskoff -- if anyone knows where these might be available for purchase, please post the information here.

I'm always sorry to see a dance festival closed -- from the outside it always seems easier to maintain somethiing that already exists than to start from scratch. This seems to bring up the larger issue of the difference between presenting touring artists and developing a local company or community. Lately, with the growing emphasis on "cultural tourism," the focus seems to be on bringing the audience to the company rather than the opposite. For me, they both have their drawbacks -- I think a healthy dance community has resident groups and room for visitors, but I'm not sure how many arts agencies/funding policy makers share that point of view.

I am sure I am not the only one who is grateful that you are willing to deal with the details! Many, many thanks!!!

Absolutely. Although some of the most "youthful" and poignant Auroras I've seen have been dancers mature enough to know how to project that characterization, it doesn't really translate to Odette/Odile. Many of the young ones I've seen have been just that -- young, and not much else. You can, as you watch, project things onto them, but they don't necessarily bring that with them.

You know, they should give you a commission. Thanks for the Mac info! Scampering off to the website.

Ah, all is explained.