Victoria Leigh

Ah, but Terry, that was exactly my point! You are associating "American" and NYCB as one and the same thing, which negates the vast number of American dancers, LIKE Gelsey Kirland, who are not "waist down" oriented! I must say, about that, that although Gelsey was SAB trained, she was really not an NYCB dancer. I have seen a video of her in Concerto Barocco, with NYCB, and she is so very different in the upper body that she really stands out not only for her unique abilities and special quality, but for the fact that her arms and whole upper body DANCE differently than the rest of the company. (And, IMO, much better because of that. She looks to me like an American dancer, while the others are strictly Balanchine dancers.) [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited March 27, 2001).]

This comes from a post on another thread which seems to associate American dancer and "...regular prototypical Balanchine American dancer...". I have read this thought all too often, and I think it is particularly predominant in Europe, where everyone seems to think that all American dancers are Balanchine dancers. Since this is very far from true, I just can't ignore it any longer and must take issue with this way of thinking. While NYCB is certainly a Major American company, with many wonderful dancers, there are just as many, or more, wonderful American dancers who are not Balanchine dancers! Although NYCB, MCB, PNB, and SFB are mostly Balanchine dancers, ABT, Houston Ballet, Joffrey Ballet of Chicago, Boston Ballet, and many other companies are filled with American trained dancers who are not Balanchine dancers! And even those companies above who are Balanchine oriented have many fine dancers trained in schools which do not teach Balanchine style. Is there even such a thing as a "prototypical American dancer"? I don't think so, but I would love it if they were thought of as just wonderful American dancers, and not limited to one particular style of training. [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited March 27, 2001).]

I had the rare privilege of seeing Plisetskaya dance this role at the old Met in NY, on the first Bolshoi tour to this country (at least I think it was the first). It was an incredible and awesome experience, which was totally ruined by the fact that she ENCORED it! Even though I was very young and inexperienced at that time, I knew instantly that this kind of moment cannot be repeated, and should not be. Many years later I saw the Dying Swan performed by a beautiful Cuban ballerina named Lydia Diaz-Cruz. She was the closest I have ever seen to Pliesetskaya. This is, as you well know, Lukayev, a very special role. I have never seen it danced by someone of your age, and I really wonder if someone 14 should even be attempting roles such as this, or Odile (which you mentioned in another thread that you are doing), even just the variation. They are roles for a mature ballerina, and even those young dancers with as much intelligence and savy as you seem to have must be severely challenged by not only the technique, but the artistry and emotional maturity required for these two solos.

Well known American dancers might include Edward Villella, Jacques D'Amboise, Arthur Mitchell, and, more recently, Ethan Stiefel. There have been a number of other very fine dancers, but I'm not sure they have the name recognition with the general public that these dancers do, just because of TV and movies.

But CD, neither of those is "contemporary choreography", and certainly neither is anything anyone wants to see again - IMO, of course. Neither works are original, although some of the choreography in both are certainly "different". But they are based on traditional work. Unfortunately, again IMO, the changes were NOT for the best. So, while Martins and McKenzie are both contemporary, their works are not, therefore they don't quite fit into this category.

I believe that Houston Ballet does, CygneDanois.

Ah, but Katie, there are lots of videos available of Fonteyn! (I don't think you will ever meet her, however, at least in this lifetime. She died a few years ago. I did have the good fortune of meeting her, however, as she was a guest artist with ABT when I was there. I don't believe I have ever met a more beautiful or lovely woman, one I could only term as a true Lady, in the very best sense of the word. Perhaps Gentlewoman would be a better term.) As for Pavlova, I think all of us would love to have been able to see her! The few little tiny film clips that are available are not very good, and very hard to tell what she was really like. Some of her photos are quite wonderful, though. I would love to have seen the Romantic era ballerinas, Taglioni, Elssler, Cerrito, Grahn, and Grisi. They all led such fascinating lives, and were major "stars" in their day. [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited March 01, 2001).]

Mary, I have seen Janet Combs dance, and in my own choreography! As you probably know, I taught her when she was a student at OU, and she danced a major role in a Poulenc Concerto that I did for the company there. She was indeed talented, and very lovely! Of the Indian Ballerinas, I have seen Yvonne Chouteau, Maria Tallchief, and Rosella Hightower. Never saw Mocelyn Larkin or Marjorie Tallchief. I adored Yvonne Chouteau! What a lovely dancer and beautiful person. I also took classes with her at OU, as I was still dancing when I was teaching there. [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited February 27, 2001).]

Count me in on that one! It's at the top of the list of books that I posted in The Studio section of Ballet Alert!

Fanny Cerrito, Whitney There is a wonderful book called The Ballerinas. Probably not in print anymore, but I found it not too long ago in a second hand book store. The library should also have it. Also check out other books on ballet of the Romantic era, particularly those of Ivor Guest. [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited February 24, 2001).]

BalletDanzer, your first post on this topic was deleted because it was not written in English. If you wish to post on this board please write so that we can understand you, including the use of upper case "I", "was" not "wuz", etc., and no computerese or slang that cannot be understood by our dancers from other countries. Punctuation is also very useful in trying to figure out the meaning of a post. Your post just above this one is better, however I strongly suggest that you look up the spelling for at least the famous dancers names and things like Swan Lake, not swanlake. [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited February 24, 2001).]

BalletNut, I don't think you are overreacting at all! Those are both dreadful ads, from the sound of it, and I don't feel that is what is needed in order to attract the interest of the younger generation. Of course my exposure to young people is primarily with ballet students, but their level of knowledge and sophistication is generally far better than ours was at their age, and talking down to them is not the way to go.

I'm stealing a topic from the General Discussion board here, with one major change: What dancers do you wish you could have seen who were not dancing in your lifetime and are NOT seen on video, and why are you choosing them?

Erik Bruhn.

Liebling, you have hit the nail on the head about this, IMO. Balanchine was a choreographer. He taught dancers who were already trained, and he taught them his style. He did not teach children, nor develop a syllabus, and I don't believe he ever set out to establish a "technique". I have enormous respect for his genius as a choreographer, especially his musicality, and I loved dancing his ballets. I don't always enjoy watching them, but often that is because I don't care for the style of the dancers, not because I don't like the ballet itself. I tend to prefer his work danced by other companies more than by NYCB in many cases. But that is a personal preference, and I know puts me in a great minority on this board. As a teacher, I feel that training students in "Balanchine" (I will not say technique here, but perhaps what has come to be considered Balanchine technique) is not the safest way to train them. There are injuries in every method, of course, but more than the injuries, I don't care for the idea of students learning only one way to do something and becoming extremely stylized while in the training process. A particular style of movement can be learned after there is a clean, pure basic technique established, hopefully without mannerisms.

When I was dancing with Nat'l. Ballet of Canada, Lynn Seymour danced Giselle with the company one season. I was fascinated by her, and loved being on stage every night to watch her, as it was never exactly the same. While she may have been somewhat hardier, or less delicate, she was still extremely vulnerable, and totally believable in the role. I thought she was a very special Giselle, definitely one of my favorites.

Micael1, needing to be "more forward" could refer to having the weight of the body more forward over the metarsals, or it could mean having the upper back more forward and the ribs relaxed. (When the upper body pulls back, the ribs go forward, and of course this usually also causes the weight to be too far back in the heels.) CygneDanois - and Gail Grant! - really stated it very well. Placement involves finding ones center of gravity, their "control zone", which means aligning the bones and placing the weight of the body in the right place for that dancer in that particular movement.

Thanks, Yvonne, that was a rushed post and I did mean to say anorexia. Just corrected it.

Yvonne, that was a dancer from Boston Ballet, Heidi Gunther. It was never determined that she died from anorexia. It was a heart problem of some kind. However, I think most people believe the heart problem was probably caused by annorexia. The medical people would not specify that, though. [This message has been edited by Victoria Leigh (edited January 09, 2001).]

Rachel, this movie has been out here in this country for some time now. Check your newspaper listing!

Oh! Well then, I have no idea why Tudor did not seem to use his dry wit and evil sarcasm on the Swedes and the Danes

Several things in that article by Brown that were most unnecessary. In my experience working with Tudor, the things that Dowell said about him in the other article were right on. He taught me to think, and totally changed many things about my approach to ballet. I really think that the lessons learned from working with Tudor were extremely important and influential in whatever maturity I finally managed, both as a dancer and later as a teacher. I did see the mean side of him sometimes, although it was not directed at me. I lucked out on that one! He could not abide stupidity, or dancers who could not think or were afraid to speak up. If he asked a question, he wanted an answer, not necessarily the "right" answer, but at least something that showed one was thinking. If dancers were afraid of him, he took advantage of that. I wonder if perhaps he was not able to be so "mean" in Sweden and Denmark was the fact that communication might have been somewhat more difficult?

Katie, it's had mixed reviews, but many of them were very good, some almost raving about it. We can leave this topic here for a bit, but do also check out the BB, as it has come alive again

Alexandra, I did not realize that about the links and the clicks being counted! Thanks for telling us that, as maybe if we all do it we might be able to make a little tiny bit of difference in the willingness of the editors to provide space for dance!

And the hard cover version is often available at second hand book stores. I have seen it in the one here in Bethesda several times.