Paul Parish

Christian, that is a glorious insight. Thank you. I love her choices in this variation -- the things she does, and the things she does NOT do, are so consistent and so coherent/ Sje shows the impulses of a character of a rare girl, someone we have to love. All that technique and control is put to this service. Let me reinforce the point you make about the piques, by pointing to the flurry of small steps she takes as she runs into position to launch the piques -- there is an incredible lightness and rapidity of those steps, and there are so MANY of them, all squeezed into a couple of counts of a throwaway preparatory move, and one where she runs to the left and then must reverse herself for the manege to the right....

It's awesomely great. I saw it when the Kirov brought it to SF in 1990 or so, with Ayupova and Liepa and a cast of thousands. I thought I knew it from the Ulanova film but was astonished by the magnificence of the stage-craft, and the presence in it of the great old Shakespearean way of staging huge crowd movements. I'd read about it in my Shakespeare studies -- and what else could have made plays like King John and Henry 6th so popular as they were except huge, thrilling battle scenes and turbulent mob scenes, which also would have been needed in Julius Caesar. I'd seen something like it in the movies of Cecil B de Mille and DW Griffiths -- but I'd never seen the complexity of it in live theater. The tops of people's heads become in effect a tree-line --and into the empty space overhead Lavrovsky was constantly elevating Juliet -- it was like a close-up in a movie, all those lifts -- and of couse, it was like the Catholic Mass, where the elevation of the host is the most holy moment in hte whole ritual -- it actually happens several times in the mass, but it's always showing you THE thing that matters -- and it's just the same in Lavrovsky's ROmeo and juliet. His love for her is something worth smashing the state to protect.

Here's what I wrote about Merce for the gay weekly in san Francisco, the Bay Area Reporter: http://www.ebar.com/arts/art_article.php?s...amp;article=143 Wonder what you'll think.

A clip of Gelsey Kirkland in her most famous role, Giselle, appeared on youtube yesterday for the first time. I'd rather hear what you all think about it than lay out my own views, though I must say, this clip stirs a lot of wonderful feelings in me. Check it out for yourselves. and let's see what people think.

and the HANDS -- the line of that arabesque has not only that tilt of the head but a very particular position for the fingers, curling slightly up, like wing tips of a bird landing

Here's what he looked like in motion pd4 from Septet, to music by Satie http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP0FTwKRa50 This is perhaps the piece that Denby said had a "shoreless beauty." It may also be one of the pieces that Ashton found poetic. (I suspect that "Monotones" owes something to this.) THough it looks a little like Apollo with three muses, I'm told by one who might know that Merce himself said he was Krishna with the gopis....

Danish National Treasure Thomas Lund and Gudrun Bojesun in FF at the inauguration of the new theater in Copenhagen... They're so proud of these dancers, it brings tears to my eyes.

Tallchief was a fabulous dancer of a very different type from that which Flower Festial calls for. She can DO FF, but the action is too emphatic, and her arabesque is too Nijinska-esque. The eagerness is right, andthe connection with Nureyev is lovely.... You should see Tallchief in Balanchine -- Orfeo, or Firebird, to see how that intensity brings thremendous things into focus. An ideal dancer for Flower Festival would be Rose Gad or Lis Jeppesen or Mette-Ida Kirk. Cojocaru is in fact not right -- her arabesques go too high, the rebound from the jumps is not cushy enough, andhte mystery of the lacy steps done SO close to the ground is not fascinating enough.

Jerry, you might want to invest in owning a copy of Agrippina vaganova's very readable book, Basic Principles of Classical Ballet, in which she classifies all the steps in a brilliantly logical way and makes all the terms clear, together with drawings that break the moves down into stages so you see the preparation, the take-off, the action in the air, and the landing -- she clarifies things a lot. It's almost impossible even with the most meticulous technicians, to show the movement in slow motion video as clearly as her drawings show it -- but all the dancers you admire use her system - -Nureyev, Soloviev, Sizova, Kobborg all trained in Vaganova's method

a sissonne is a spring from two feet, while a jete is a jump from two feet that begins by brushing the floor with the working leg -- they both travel forward, in both cases the front leg is like a javelin, but in the sissonne the feet spring into place, the legs rise simultaneously, while in the jete the front leg brushes the floor in its rise and initiates the jump, leaving the floor before the other one pushes off....

Jerry, he begins with a small assemble over, then springs forward in a sissonne change in attitude croise, and landing does a small ballone, and steps into a quick preparation for grand jete in attitude, from which he does a petite jete battu onto the other foot, and two more petite jetes battus, changing feet, and then a small assemble over and the sequence recommences and is repeated exactly except that it closes with assemble simple closing back. The new phrase begins with a sissonne into a double rond de jambe, from which he steps close to himself and does a big jete passe that runs quickly into several quick petite jetes battus, thence he glissades to the side upstage on the diagonal, does entrechat-cinq, and another glissade, whence he springs up into entrechat trois and changes his facing, thence glissades backwards on the new diagonal, where he does entrechat-cinq and a couple of jetes battus, a little emboite into coupe-front, and thence throws his leg up a la seconde for a preparation for a pirouette en dehors, and finishes in fifth position with a big flourishing gesture towards his partner. It's a brilliant performance, with the characteristic Danish modesty and sweetly engaging head positions that somehow soften and tone down all hte sharpness in the legs -- his footwork is very clean and fast, and indeed some of the small steps are so quick I had to look hard to see which foot was in front. Entrechats with odd numbers end on one foot, and all of them in this dance do land on one foot. The main characteristic of this dance is the clever alternation between steps which begin with a spring (sissonnes, entrechats) and those which begin with a brush (jete, glissade, assemble) -- this produces the fascinating laciness of the very quick steps -- and of course, the careful placing of BIG steps like the big plants in a garden, few and far between. the very big steps come at the beginning and end of the dance, with the only other big steps at the beginning of the second phrase. A long pirouette counts as a big step even though it does not leave the ground. This was fun, kind of like diagramming a sentence. Thanks for asking. It's also remarkable as well that the dancer can cover almost as much ground with small steps, like glissade, as he can with the grand jete -- it pumps air into the variation -- and that the jete passe at the beginning of the new phrase, though it is big and high, does NOT travel at all. And in fact, some of his glissades are WELL traveled, they are almost jetes fermes.

Duffster, we're on the same page -- Antoinette Sibley was the first to break my heart in the theater, and I felt before I started to write that I was going to have to mention Dowell, her partner. It was like they were twins, and knew each other from the womb. Their connection was so cool, so imperturbable, and so complete, its as if there was really nobody else in the world but them, and they were expressive and legible to a degree it had never occurred to me was possible to SHOW -- you could hear it from Artur Rubenstein, but until I saw them dance I didn't realize it was possible to make music visible. It was in Swan Lake, in I guess 1970, I first came under Sibley's spell, and it affected my own dancing -- in those days, i was just a rock and roll dancer, but at parties people would step back and watch me, sometimes, and I remember dancing to Black Magic Woman and having an out-of-body experience channeling her Odile -- it wasn't just me, my friends said so too, "WHAT was that?" Her dancing was amazingly spontaneous -- correct, and techincally brilliant, but so spontaneous, it's like she didn't know what she was going to do till she did it. It's famous now, but I saw it, when she did the fouettes she had no plan and threw in doubles ad lib, at a whim. I remember seeing Dowell's jaw drop when she did them. That was a glorious era -- In the US then, Farrell danced very much in the moment, it's become legendary I've now seen the films, especially the amazing dances from Don Quixote where she moves like smoke..... but I didn't see the films for another twenty years. The first Balanchine ballerina I loved was McBride -- in Tarantella. Then came Allegra Kent, In Midsummer Night's Dream. I didn't come to care about Farrell until Mozartiana, when I noticed in the video that in the finale, where there a number of steps in which she had to turn her back on the audience briefly, she'd come around the corner smiling and instantly wipe the smile off her face. This hidden inner life, and the wit in it -- not to mention the witty way she'd "sit" in fondu on the bass notes that punctuated her first variation, which I thought was a hilarious and delicate homage to Mozart's farting jokes which anyone who's read his letters will know he was addicted to -- made me rethink Farrell altogether, and suddenly she no longer seemed conceited.... Thanks for posting this question, iczerman.

Wow, Christian -- That's beautiful! PS --There's NOTHNIG of Henning Kronstam on Youtube. Now what's up with that????

atm 711, thanks for putting this topic up, and for sharing your experiences. I sure wish I'd seen him then. One of Kevin McKenzie's great strong points is knowing how not to waste talent. I anything could make me forgive him for Swamp thing, it's his knowing that Franklin's presence in Romeo and Juliet will give real weight and stature to the performance. Friar Lawrence has a profound sympathy with youth -- 'Our Romeo has not been in bed tonight" or "Such a light step will ne-er wear out the everlasting flint" -- he loves these kids, and Franklin has exactly the temperament for the role. It's a great part, and often given to people who can't give it any weight. Franklin's got the capacity for awe and for study, without which you can't believe that Friar Lawrence would know how to brew these potions. I'd also love to see him as the Charlatan. Thanks, Dale, for posting those articles.

I hope Suzy Spaulding lands on her feet. I loved her dancing -- the impulses themselves were right. ANd I have to say, I'm going to miss Aubert van der Linden. A unique presence. He'll probably end up in burlesque, but has he got a gift. They all did.... sigh.

I LOVED Gale Storm. I thought she was hilarious. Can't remember much in detail, but the tone is still very strongly with me. She was funnier than Eve Arden, whom I also loved -- and back then for me, I was not crazy about Lucy.

I like Christian's "despective glance." I've been practicing, and i think I'm getting good at it. Next time this guy says something like this, let me know, I;'ll give it to him. You stick with me, don't worry about him.

I think of good feet as those that work well -- like Baryshnikov's, or Peter Martins's -- they're also well-shaped, but the thing is that they start to point when they should and work with alacrity. It's how they take shape. Monica Mason had great feet, they were so witty, they licked the floor. It's that ACTION that makes feet good.

Ambonnay, I love the freshness of your comments. Thank you for telling us what it was like for you to be there.

his dancing is pretty funny..... lots of bad dancing in that -- and I guess a parody of Ratmasky's new Prokofieff ballet? -- but none of it was funny except for his, which has a kind of weird glide to it that's actually charming.

I may have dreamt this, but I'd swear I've seen a clip of the two of them in a parody of Swan Lake that was very broad and very funny. And I think she was wearing clod-hopperish shoes.

Cngratulations from me, too leslie4310. BTW, what does PD stand for? It's obviously not "principal dancer"

Helene, this is a great poll. I like the fact that there are several sections which keep refining the question so that by the time I've finished I feel less misrepresented than usual, AND you've provided an opportunity to write a little essay to explain.... I write about dancing, and am lucky enough to pick mostly what I think is interesting and my editor will go along -- when there's space. But it's also the case that I write about dancing because in the car on the way home I'm still talking about the ballet when everybody else is changing the subject, and I'm constantly interrupting to say "Did you see how Sarah initiated her pirouettes with the back of her head?" or some such... I DO also take ballet class regularly, and come recital-time always go see friends/classmates perform. And furthermore Carbro's "definition of a bad ballet as something I wouldn't see with Gelsey in it" should be printed up on T-shirts and coffee mugs, it would sell big time. I'll buy one right now. Me, I believe in emploi in its largest sense. Ballets need the right dancers. I'd rather see Lorena Feijoo as Kitri than ANYBODY, except Osipova -- certainly not Zakharova, whom I DID see kick herself in the back of the head without arching her back, but what's Spanish about that? AActually, what drives me to ballet was best summed up by my teacher Sally Streets, who said "Ballet is one of htose things you do in ofrder to find out why you do it." If you don't do it, you go see it, but it's essentially the same. You go in order to find out why you care.

Dorati is an excellent conductor, with a feel for the dance rhythms underlying symphonic music -- I know his Haydn recordings best, and I love them. The book sounds absolutely enticing. I can't wait to read it....

Hans is assuming that the photograph was taken from the front -- but perhaps a) the picture was taken from the side and b) the front of the studio is 90 degrees round, in which case her leg would be pointing towards the back corner and her head would be in hte right place for ecarte derriere.