Paul Parish

Frankly, Christian, I don't see much of an issue either. I think hte picture composes better cropped; it's just more interesting in hte version posted here. But the Times version is perhaps a better document. Re QUiggin and Jack, i think in the absence of major choreographic imagination like Balanchine's, his fascinating dynamics, his power to make something significant take place over time, today's choreographers make dances that showcase dancers' virtuosity --so what we get is one glamour-filled moment after another rather than points in an argument. SO everytihing is trying now to look more like hte exquisite European contemporary dance, where the dancers are so sexy and hte presence is so bruised and the posing is so studied......

Quiggin, I just got around to looking at hte links you posted - -wonderful photos, they're so telling. of course, you are right about the issue, too. Jack, I think I prefer the image cropped, though I think the whole thing is a fine record of hte occasion and gives valuable info aboutthe configuration of all the dancers at that moment. The image was not meant to be seen from that angle -- though it is probably the way Balanchine saw it, from his usual place in (though this is taken from stage left, and I THINK he usually stood in the front wing stage right). WHy do you ask? I think the corps girls look fine -- eager and energized. I;ve never seen D 15 in those costumes -- SFB dances it in borrowed costumes that look very 50s -- charming, fresh, very construced things with little rosebuds in their embroidery,, that look like they're made of linen, not silk.

With respect, I don't think the picture looks awkward. It does NOT look "posed" -- Actin shots of New york City Ballet from the 70 and 80s often revealed moments like this -- Martha Swope -- IF MEMORY SERVES, it was Swope -- took lots of pictures of ballerinas in the midst of high-speed combinations, like in the fondu before the next fouette, where the dancer is actively spotting and the face has the look of athletic presence, the will and decision are honestly present and not hidden behind some screen of "delicacy...." And that was one of the reasons many people thought Balanchine's women were sovereign. It's become fashionable to criticize Balanchine for subjugating women, but back in the day, what we often noticed was that they were indpendent, they didn't need their cavaliers for support.... I think this picture shows something like that -- she looks delighted to me, her back is straight and beautiful, her head beautifully supported, her face alive and fresh with a genuine smile. Kyra Nichols once told me in an interview that "our lines suck. Balanchine wasn't interested in perfect spacing -- he was interested in energy!

I'm with Jack. Here are my reasons, for I actively LIKE this photo The dancer looks so active and alive and delightful. It's not the most flattering angle, but it IS an interesting one, the sort Degas might have used. From hte FRONT she would have looked thoroughly turned out, but in fact she is wisely using less than full turn-out to allow for such depth of fondu. It's clearly an image taken on the run, that shows a dancer ready to make the next move while showing a position in its deepest amplitude. The relationship between the momentary pause and the about-to-be recovery is delicious: it shows that kind of delight in making the "in-betweens" interesting that Balanchine considered the heart of dancing.

Helene said, and I think this is astute: Also, what dancers enjoy performing isn't always the greatest work and/or what the audience wants to see them in. Dancers at PNB often cite Nacho Duato's "Jardi Tancat" as one of their favorite things to dance, and audiences here lap it up every time it's presented.

I met Marie-Jeanne once, Amy, around 1990; she took off her sandals and showed me her feet. (I asked.) They were long, very articulate, almost like hands, and beautiful. Let me explain. She was retired of course, and had come out to California to visit her good friend, Gisella [Caccialanza] Christensen. I'd been sent on an embassy to visit them by Francis Mason, my editor at "Ballet Review" -- who'd found a volume of "Letters to a young dancer' by Enrico Cecchetti -- the young dancer in question had been Gisella, his last protegee, and Francis had given me the honor of presenting the book to her. [What a fabulous man HE was.] So Gisella invited me to lunch on a Sunday and baked a chicken and it was very relaxed, one of the loveliest days of my life. Nothing fancy -- the two ladies were down-to-earth, very easy to be around, nothing fancy, -- and they were clearly enjoying hanging out together on a sunny warm California day and included me in that atmosphere. M-J was wearing pedal-pushers -- she still had beautiful legs -- and wedgies with woven soles (if I remember right -- I was pretty star-struck). beautiful feet. She was famous as a dancer for being able to move very fast. She was not tall, but her long feet made her when she was on pointe LOOK tall.

I agree, Cranko's version is direct, imaginative, musical, and not too full-of-itself -- one of the very best. It's also one of he first, and that gives it hte natural advantage of NOT having to 'avoid looking too much like Cranko's.' He nailed it, and it's been a hard act to follow. I saw the Stuttgart Ballet dance it here a few years ago in Berkeley and it seemed so fresh and natural, every step -- before that, I'd seen it with the Joffrey -- Tina leBlanc was a fabulous Juliet, and I THINK Ashley Wheater was Paris -- he had the most elegant legs, matinee-idol handsome, but he didn't love her; and Romeo DID love her. I think it was Philip Jerry as Romeo, very sincere dancer, wonderful cast. My absolute favotrite is Lavrovsky's version, which is a choreodrama, virtually a silent movie, very old-fashioned, but brilliant beyond anything. He uses crowd movement in fascinating ways, he uses the overhead space -- it's almost like the tree-line on a mountain, the crowds occupy the stage up to a certain height and then htere's "open air" -- to create a realm where whatever happens is visionary -- including every lift for Juliet, which is actually a great percentage of the choreography. And there's the dancing at the ball for everybody, but otherwise it's kinda only the lovers who DANCE. SO poetic. Cranko's is one of hte first where it's all dancing most of the time; he keeps it moving. Macmillan's marketplace scenes can seem to grind on and on, and I've actually felt myself thinking, 'God no, not back to the marketplace again.' I must say, Michael Smuin's version was very very good; like Cranko, he could keep it moving, andhte poetry of hte lovers was ardent.

I'm kinda out of my mind. THis is SO BEAUTIFUL. And so intelligible! Thank you thank you for hooking me up. I've only watched the first scene and THAT only intermittently -- but I love the relationship between pageantry, mime, "social" dancing, and he revelatory variations Vaganova says in her intro that allegro is the real dance because adago is insufficiently revealing -- only in allegro variations do we REALLY see into the heart of hte dance. ANd Novikova's variations just made me feel the force of what she said. Even the "slow" ones, like the one withthe scarf, are disguised alegro -- the way she throwsthat scarf when she piques to attitude! or her entrance, when she bends down toe get the flower and springs up into attitude! Yep, that's how you bring on a ballerina! You REVEAL her! What a great ballet!

Sandi, please, SAY MORE!!!! How did hte movie affectyou overall? I've seen it on hte small screen, too -- but the big screen, with those monumental stage sets andthe huge crowds -- it must be overwhelming. but don't let me lead you on. Please, say more!!! how do the stars make their effect against all hte anonymous people?

We're talking denim, folks. That kind of "duck" is much more familiar as the material of blue jeans -- or at least, the blue jeans of old. Levi Strauss began to make his fortune using cloth that HAD been used as sails in big ships, which he had cut up and sewn into work-clothes Those floor cloths are notoriously slippery. I've heard about them many times. The Oakland Ballet revived a lot of Ballets Russes pieces, complete with floorcloths (which were often painted, beautifully, and a part of the decor, but it must have made them even slipperier). Sally Streets, who danced Zobeide and once told me she loved the part, said the floor-cloth for Sheherezade was really treacherous.

I kept hoping the fountain was going to start to dance, a la Las Vegas. it would have been wonderful! As it was, it felt like a compendium of homages to classicism, and neoclassicism, in the costumes from Symphony in C, yet, and to minimalist clacissism (Laura Dean came to mind)... So the heaviness of hte music overwhelmed it all and it felt ultimately VERY Soviet -- the emphasis on harmony, unison, , accuracy, service to an ideal felt grindingly earnest, like a machine that grinds up everything you really feel.... It may not have felt that way at ALL in the theater. Video seriously misrepresents everything. there was much individual delicacy and accuracy in the performances.

re Bart's question. I've watched it again, and now I think they do the Shades entrance BOTH WAYS. Obviously there whave been edits in the tapes used, and a splice of tapes was made somewhere after the first couple of minutes; the passage that we're looking at around 4 minutes in is coming from hte back of hte studio rather than from the mirror, AND they're doing the other version, with dancers alternating which foot they step out onto. ALso, it's curious, when they break from the opening phrase and run into place, there's a dancer who has to run past several others to find her right place in the front line. THey'll probably fix THAT before opening night.....

I've watched it twice, fascinated. Lovely kids, VERY interesting process.... 2 things about the taping -- 1) can't hear what the teachers are saying 2) the camera-person isn't interested in seeing how the girls negotiate turning the corner-- the first one did it well, , I couldn't see how she did it -- but the cameraman [busby Berkeley, Jr.? ]started panning down the line looking for a more interesting girl I know I can't have everything I want, but that pivot is a tricky moment, and I wanted to see how they did it... that's me. Interesting to see at the end that they're learning the upper body before adding the feet. When Massine was here setting one of his ballets on Oakland Ballet, Michael Lowe told me Massine wouldn't even show the feet till the plastique of the upper body looked good.... I love the idea of watching the process of 'bringing it up' Thanks for posting this. I'll be following it, and recommending it to friends who don't normally follow BA. Oh, and BArt -- i THINK I noticed that towards the end of the line there were some girls who were on the other leg -- at least one. Maybe she had an injury and was learning the dance but they didn't want her to blow out her knee in practice, so she learned hte rhythm and breatheing on the other leg.... or I may have hallucinated it -- this ballet induces a hypnotic state. edited -- nope, I was right -- check out 4;25- 4:50 THE GIRLS ARE ON OPPOSITE LEGS

Thank you for posting this, Brioche. It only makes me want more!!! Especially Barocco.... The footage of everybody is wonderful.

Teri McCollum has posted this on her website Odette's Ordeal: BIG (Bolshoi!) Ballet News: Most of us will be able to see David Hallberg's debut with the Bolshoi on Sunday 11/20 simulcast LIVE and in HD! As the 1st U.S. dancer to join the Bolshoi as a Principal dancer, David's debut in 'The Sleeping Beauty' will be aired in select cinemas nationwide as part of Emerging Pictures' 'Ballet in Cinema' series! 100's of screens have been added to the nearly 300 screens that are already part of the Emerging Pictures Network. Mark your calendars! Here's the Press Release: http://www.dcinematoday.com/dc/PR.aspx?newsID=2551 ttp://www.facebook.com/insights/?sk=po_158238107542677&ref=pdem#!/pages/Odettes-Ordeal/158238107542677) www.odettesordeal.com Odette's Ordeal-A Site for Sore Swans & Serious Ballet Fans in San Francisco

'Atys' I certainly agree with you there: Ravishingly beautiful. I love that there's a venue to discuss this kind of thing. I remember as a kid falling for ballet in the late 80s, I would try to find everything I could about the original productions of many of these ballets, and come up with scattered articles, booklets, and photographs--with descriptions that nearly always contradicted each other. And I have many friends and family members who love ballet, but frankly, questions of authenticity have no importance to them as long as they enjoyed the dancing and performance (which is probably true of most balletgoers, understandably). I've always had a fascination with theatre design, and it does seem to sometimes get forgotten when discussing ballet productions (unless it's particularly awful or ill suited, and distracts from the performance). Good point! For a long time, the general impression was that this never existed until Diaghilev, I'm sure many people still think this. It's true that he probably took it to a higher level--hiring famous artists, etc--but it's obvious that a lot of thought from the start went into the design. I know that for the ballets Vsevolozhsky actually designed the costumes for (which include Beauty, Raymonda, and I think Nutcracker and the '95 Swan Lake, but am not sure), he did so as early as when the ballet would be comissioned and a libretto worked out. And speaking of Diaghilev, it was Benois who wrote rapturously about how Sleeping Beauty re-awakened his love for ballet, partly because he saw every element, includig the designs, as a complete whole for the first time, a ballet "Gesamtkunstwerk". So there are several direct connections there. I admit, I also always thought that one reason these ballets would never have restored productions was that to a modern eye, judging from the photographs, it would look fussy, over-dressed and cluttered, as you say. Also, audiences would have to get used to longer tutus, even more wigs than the Soviets used (;)), those 'modesty shorts" for the men, etc. But when you actually see the results, for the most part the design simply *works*. That's a good point I hadn't thought of. It's true the pendulum of what people like tends to swing one way or the other, and currently I think many audiences going to the ballet appreciate, and maybe even expect, the spectacle--which for a while seemed to be the opposite where people felt it took away from the purity of dance. Probably another reason why story ballets, even brand new ones, seem to currently have by fair the most mainstream appeal. For non regular ballet goers, it's so expensive to go to a major production nowadays anyway, that, for good and bad, it might be a bit like the Megamusical trend--people want to see some of their money up on the stage. (I would have killed to be able to see that revival of Atys). I think you're right. These things go in trends, and to repeat myself, the pendulum will probably swing back again. But I suspect a few companies will keep them in their repertoire, if only to pull them out occasionally for special occasions. (This is why I hope the rumours of Raymonda being filmed are true--and I'm still greatly annoyed that we never got a commercial release of the three Vikharev/Mariinsky Petipa reconstructions, back when they were briefly being regularly performed). I hadn't been to the Mariinsky's website in about a year, and they DO still list The Awakening of Flora and Sleeping Beauty in their repertoire (along with the Sergeyev Beauty which they seem to be doing exclusively now), so that gives me a tiny glimmer of hope--Flora certainly would be a good vehicle to show off students. On the other hand, both versionfs of la Bayadere used to be listed, but the 1890's reconstruction has been now removed... No big surprise I suppose (I know the standard version uses many of the same set designs).

It's in his book, Leonid. I read it long ago, but I remember him using that expression frequently in describing variations. or maybe it's in Wiley, quoting him.

THANK YOU, Mme Hermine. This is wonderful -- and great-hearted. Very Soviet, but splendid in that style. They make it into a dance of joy, and that's right.

THANK YOU, Mme Hermine. This is wonderful -- and great-hearted. Very Soviet, but splendid in that style. They make it into a dance of joy, and that's right.

Re the SLAPS It would be great if we could all read V Krassovskaya's study of the work and influence of Agrippina Vaganova in changing the style of Russian ballet. To summarize, Krassovskaya says that Vaganova created a heroic Soviet style, that was derived from her own slightly out-sized way of dancing (which had not found favor with the management in her dancing days; she was never advanced to the highest rank -- she did not recach the heights in the Tsarist era because her body, and her style were not pretty enough -- she was very clear, but too strong for the aristocratic era. She showedhte techique too nakedly. It DID work, however, for the Soviets, who wanted a way of dancing that was amazing, heroic, austere, where every aspect of the technique was made visible and therefore made the dancer larger than life. The recreations of 1890s ballet that we've seen (Sleeping Beauty, now Raymonda) have struggled to create an image of a more delicate way of dancing while not stifling hte much larger way of dancing that has developed in Russia since Vaganova's day. THe issue has been blurred by the recent aggravation of high extensions -- but in fact, Vaganova started long ago to make the technique more salient, at roughly the same time as Balanchine was doing the same thing (but each in their own ways). in 1890, Petipa's "Raymonda" was a princess, not "the people's princess" -- she did NOT do a double pirouette in the Hungarian variation. Pontois is amping it up. It's pretty clear that Petipa wanted his heroines to "display their coquetterie." it's a phrase he uses over and over. The style of Pontois is much coarser than that -- she is not gracious at all; she's commanding, impressive, sexy, challenging, borderline dominatrix -- very Nureyev. it puts me in mind of Rudi's thigh-high crocodile boots. It's wonderful in its way -- the technique is of course mighty fine. But.............

o THANK YOU, California. This is a red-letter day, Christmas and easter and Pentecost rolled into one., This is one of the great performances of all time. There is WAY too little Kirkland on video. I love the interview: How do you feel after dancing something like that? So relieved that it's over!. Honestly, she's being honest. There are SO MANY STEPS! It is SO HARD!!!!! Lorena Feijoo once told me that dancing Ballo della Regina, she could not say why she danced it. "Why not SHOOT myself?" It is SO hard to move like that and breathe. As she says, she now (in 1971) dances it "more naturally" -- for "even a princess is just a princess"

Wonderful insights into those costumes and how they move, how they're constructed, pick up the light, constrain and liberate the dancers.. Thank you for posting this.

Natalia, I agree with you in part, but would say that in "new" steps, the ENERGY that comes across has to be greater than or equal to the iconic combination's. With respect to codas -- which is where the fouettes always go -- they are mini-finales and as a general rule must be corruscating, so the substitution must be dazzling. But dazzle isn't always the quality that's wanted. In other cases, there could be another aspect of the ballet that the artists want to bring to he fore -- some aspect of the character, or a heightening of a mood that's NOT a brio-mood, or some aspect of hte dancer that is telling and appropriate. For example, Markova was astonishingly adept at stillness, and her version of Giselle's solo is remarkable for the piques in arabesque in which she perches suddenly, like a bird lighting on a branch, in a perfectly placed arabesque. She could stop and start -- Denby noticed this -- with more clarity than any other dancer of her generation. And clips still show this. Mme Alonso also had this gift of stillness to an astonishing degree (and she has said that when she was young, she modelled her performances on Markova's) -- it's a feature of Romantic style, most noticeable perhaps in Pas de QUatre. Osipova's lovely arabesques in hte clip posted by California have a lovely arrested quality to them, but she does not produce them as sharply as Markova, nor does she attack the attitude turn with the alacrity of Markova -- it's really stunning, Markova's attitude turns are launched and sailing before you can see the impetus.

Sorry, California, I need to "disambiguate" -- I was not referring to the diagonal of toe-hops, but to the VERY END of the variation, which in Ballets-Russes-style settings is a difficult diagonal of pique turns alternating with emboites on pointe; as seen here, 1:14-end, danced by ALicia Markova in 1951 it's THAT diagonal that hte Russians don't do, but instead do a circle of very fast pique turns holding the skirt -- as in the clip of Osipova you posted (which is lovely, by the way, THANK YOU, I've never seen that one before, it's simple, delicate).

Thank you, Leonid. Kolpakova is fabulous in this. You are quite right, she was brilliant. My only complaint is that her right foot does not point very well, and when she throws it out in a quick extension, the leg looks shortened by the almost flexed foot. It points by the time she gets there, but it started offwrong. In a dancer of her many perfections, it's kind of a drag.... They are stunning and, at least on Youtube, Novikova made them seem perfectly light and easy. Watch the 43 year old Irina Kolpakhova execute the same steps.