Morris Neighbor

Repertory in Review is, alas, out of print, though copies are available through many dealers in used books (including those affiliated with amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com). The price, however, is steep, ranging from $100 for a copy in "fair" condition to $250 for a copy in mint condition. For the less affluent balletomane, I suspect that most larger libraries have it available for free. In addition, the New York City Ballet website (nycballet.com) includes brief notes on the entire repertory. The notes are not as extensive as those in Reynolds' book, though they always include credits for music, choreography, date and place of premiere, and original cast. Almost all of them include notes on the music, including a brief biography of the composer and, in some cases, music clips payable with Real Audio. Many also include a brief description of the dance. (The people who think Peter Martins' ballets look better on paper than on stage will say "I told you so.") Annoyingly, there are no descriptions of any Robbins ballets -- obviously at the choreographer's request. As for a Reynolds update.... I'd love to see one, too, but it's difficult to argue that the post-Balanchine repertory merits the same lavishly detailed attention that the NYCB received in her 1977 volume. A dedicated historian, she included even such turkeys as "PAMTGG" in the book. They were obviously eclipsed by the masterpieces. In the last 25 years, the proportion of "forgettable" to "memorable" has inevitably changed, as the task of creating new works has passed to lesser -- or at least, less seasoned -- hands.

Robbins' "Goldberg," is almost 20 minutes longer than Glenn Gould's recorded version, which omits most repeats. Which raises the question of "artistic integrity." Myself, I like both Gould and Robbins, each of whom has a different goal. Choreographically, I admire Robbins' ability to introduce constant novelty to music created within narrow confines of style. I always feel a sense of melancholy when I hear the final Chaconne -- as I do at the last waltz of "Liebeslieder Walzer," another major audience commitment. I will concede, however, that people who need a martini every twenty minutes should avoid longer works by Robbins, Balanchine, Bournonville, Petipas, and others. In short, I don't think it's too long. I think it's precisely long enough to serve the composer's vision, which has always been the rule at City Ballet.

Nancy Reynolds' REPERTORY IN REVIEW also includes a detailed listing of all the pieces in THE CONCERT and in every other work performed at the City Ballet. With its historic reviews, cast lists, and photographs, the book is well worth buying by any fan of Robbins and Balanchine

A note to Kathleen O'Connell, from a long-time advertising professional: In covering the arts and lifestyle issues, the WSJ is seeking to make itself the "primary read" of its customers. In other words, by providing this sort of coverage, they are hoping to increase reliance on their paper and reduce the time their readers spend with other sources -- like, say, The New York Times, or the dominant daily in any other city. The Journal would dearly love to make those other papers "secondary reads" -- i.e. newspapers that get much less attention and therefore command less lucrative ad rates. For most of its history, the Journal itself was the "secondary read," of interest only to investors and executives. It's also true that, as the business world admits more and more women to its top ranks, "feminine" concerns like arts and recreation are becoming more important in corporate decisions. Stereotypical as this may sound, it was a woman who created "Weekend Journal," which has been a huge commercial success, and she has been the leader of the re-design team. Finally, you flunked the "frequently misspelled words" test. It's "minuscule."

A note to Kathleen O'Connell, from a long-time advertising professional: In covering the arts and lifestyle issues, the WSJ is seeking to make itself the "primary read" of its customers. In other words, by providing this sort of coverage, they are hoping to increase reliance on their paper and reduce the time their readers spend with other sources -- like, say, The New York Times, or the dominant daily in any other city. The Journal would dearly love to make those other papers "secondary reads" -- i.e. newspapers that get much less attention and therefore command less lucrative ad rates. For most of its history, the Journal itself was the "secondary read," of interest only to investors and executives. It's also true that, as the business world admits more and more women to its top ranks, "feminine" concerns like arts and recreation are becoming more important in corporate decisions. Stereotypical as this may sound, it was a woman who created "Weekend Journal," which has been a huge commercial success, and she has been the leader of the re-design team. Finally, you flunked the "frequently misspelled words" test. It's "minuscule."

I stand with dirac and Farrell Fan (full disclosure: a personal friend, though we often disagree) in resisting the trend to panic. A bit of context might be useful here. Only three daily newspapers seek national readership: USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times. The Times stands third in circulation, and views (for obvious reasons) the Journal as its main rival. The Journal has unveiled this week a sweeping re-design, including more emphasis on service features -- "news you can use" in consultant-speak -- and stories about entertainment and recreation. ERGO, the Times seeks to respond with its own added emphasis on service features. The "Dining In/Dining Out" section, for instance, now covers restaurant news from across the country and offers less dish for New York foodies. Friday will bring a regular section on week-end travel. And on and on.... In such a context, it's not surprising to see editors pressing for more prominent coverage of popular culture in the Sunday paper which, after all, provides nearly all of the paper's profits. (Almost every American paper breaks even during the week and makes its profits on Sunday. The Wall Street Journal is the obvious exception, and the Times would love to press this advantage.) At the same time, I am sure that Howell Raines, like every other senior editor at the paper, cherishes its role as "the newspaper of record." In this context, I am sure that the paper's policy will continue to be to review every dance performance in any major venue, or even a minor venue with a good press agent and good timing. It does keep three full-time critics on its payroll, it does pay to send them to major events around the world, and it pays stringers to write up events that staff critics can't get to. Are there delays in publishing? Are reviews short? Are there a gazillion demands for space in the paper? Do editors have to make cuts to balance all those competing demands? Is a 300-word review better than no review at all? Given the quotes I have seen in programs and publicity, that 300-word review may serve an emerging dancer or choreographer quite well, thank you. Finally, let me note that, as our local public radio station slashes its classical music programming (half the surviving music airs after midnight), the Times' WQXR-FM continues to air classical music 24/7. Yes, the programming is conservative and the ads are annoying, but it's the only place you'll hear Bach in the morning. More to the point, if the Times wanted to "maximize shareholder returns," they would have gone to a news-talk format years ago. Their persistence with a commercially outdated format convinces me, at least, that the Times would rather be classy than crass, even if it means reduced profits. And even if it means sending Anna Kisslegoff on yet another trip to Paris and St. Petersburg.

I stand with dirac and Farrell Fan (full disclosure: a personal friend, though we often disagree) in resisting the trend to panic. A bit of context might be useful here. Only three daily newspapers seek national readership: USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times. The Times stands third in circulation, and views (for obvious reasons) the Journal as its main rival. The Journal has unveiled this week a sweeping re-design, including more emphasis on service features -- "news you can use" in consultant-speak -- and stories about entertainment and recreation. ERGO, the Times seeks to respond with its own added emphasis on service features. The "Dining In/Dining Out" section, for instance, now covers restaurant news from across the country and offers less dish for New York foodies. Friday will bring a regular section on week-end travel. And on and on.... In such a context, it's not surprising to see editors pressing for more prominent coverage of popular culture in the Sunday paper which, after all, provides nearly all of the paper's profits. (Almost every American paper breaks even during the week and makes its profits on Sunday. The Wall Street Journal is the obvious exception, and the Times would love to press this advantage.) At the same time, I am sure that Howell Raines, like every other senior editor at the paper, cherishes its role as "the newspaper of record." In this context, I am sure that the paper's policy will continue to be to review every dance performance in any major venue, or even a minor venue with a good press agent and good timing. It does keep three full-time critics on its payroll, it does pay to send them to major events around the world, and it pays stringers to write up events that staff critics can't get to. Are there delays in publishing? Are reviews short? Are there a gazillion demands for space in the paper? Do editors have to make cuts to balance all those competing demands? Is a 300-word review better than no review at all? Given the quotes I have seen in programs and publicity, that 300-word review may serve an emerging dancer or choreographer quite well, thank you. Finally, let me note that, as our local public radio station slashes its classical music programming (half the surviving music airs after midnight), the Times' WQXR-FM continues to air classical music 24/7. Yes, the programming is conservative and the ads are annoying, but it's the only place you'll hear Bach in the morning. More to the point, if the Times wanted to "maximize shareholder returns," they would have gone to a news-talk format years ago. Their persistence with a commercially outdated format convinces me, at least, that the Times would rather be classy than crass, even if it means reduced profits. And even if it means sending Anna Kisslegoff on yet another trip to Paris and St. Petersburg.

Thanks for the update, which I missed in the paper. I've been getting mailings about the performance, but it wasn't until I saw names like Christine Dakin, Teresa Capucilli, and Francis Mason and a list of Graham repertory on the same piece of paper that I realized the long legal battle had ended.

Thank you, Alexandra, for reminding me of Feld's protean past. Given his remarkable talents, he may well make another provocative turn at any time. Re-reading the string, I suddenly remembered why Feld was once compared to Robbins: "Intermezzo," a "piano ballet" (to Brahms) clearly inspired by "Dances at a Gathering" and "In the Night" (and, of course, "Liebeslieder Waelzer.") I've always liked the piece, which I saw several times over the years, for its effortlessly witty charm, a choreographic Viennese pastry. Then I encountered Peter Anastos' "Yes, Virginia, Another Piano Ballet," one of the funniest dance parodies ever. So now I see these pieces with a certain duality, a sensation that does not decrease my pleasure.

There's plenty of leg-room in the row of seats behind the wide cross-aisle in what used to be called the balcony; it now separates the "Grand Tier" from the "Mezzanine." I make a point of ordering tickets from the first mailing I receive and usually get seats in this row. Especially in the center section, the sight lines are good. You still have to contend with the occasional tall person seated in front of you, but there's also the bonus of being able to trip those rude people who dash out during the curtain calls ;)

To begin, I should note that the first work Feld ever staged was named "Harbinger." The man does not lack for nerve. I strongly suspect that the text quoted by Farrell Fan is Feld's own prose, pure and unedited. Feld's current "Ballet Tech" is composed entirely of teen-aged students at his school, which is indeed recognized and partly funded by the New York City Board of Education. His effort to attract and train kids from widely divergent social and ethnic backgrounds is admirable. Whether it produces a good dance company is another matter entirely. The Feld Ballet, which he disbanded, did not include "outsiders," only experienced and gifted professional dancers, whom he chose to dismiss. As I noted elsewhere, some of Feld's best work depends on his dancers' ability to draw on life experience -- which is unavailable to a youngster of 15. "At Midnight" is set to songs of Mahler full of late-Romantic weltschmerz, a sensation as remote from hip-hop as palm trees are from snowmen. At the same time, some dances, created for this technically gifted if emotionally shallow group, can be sensational. As for "Organon," if I want to see a hunk in a jock strap, I'll rent a porn tape. The "dance" is not worth the time or the money it took to produce.

As an enthusiast who came of age in the midst of the "Dance boom" of the late '60s and early '70s, I can see why many people are pessimistic about dance today. Funding has shrunk, companies have disappeared, and the giants are dead: Balanchine, Robbins, Graham. Merce Cunningham, Paul Taylor, and even Twyla Tharp are eligible for Social Security (though still capable of creating great art). Even Lucinda Childs, the iconoclastic minimalist of the Judson Group, was hailed in the Sunday New York Times as an elder statesman of dance. So what's good? First of all, as a recent visit to the School of American Ballet proved, there are scores of gifted young people who have chosen to devote their lives to this exceptionally demanding art, mastering skills once unknown on stage. A few years back, I attended a "seminar" conducted by the New York City Ballet Guild with the late Alexandra Danilova, prima ballerina and teacher without equal. I pointed out that, in her youth, ballet was dominated by stars like her, with dazzling stage personalities, while today's dancers were more technicians than performers. While she graciously agreed that "girls today, they do things I would never dream of trying," she summed up her views with an elaborate Russian shrug and the observation, "If we do not PROgress, we RETROgress." I think this is extremely important to remember when discussing such an inherently evanescent art as dance. Styles change. Tastes change. The physical ability of dancers change. Modern performances of Copellia, for instance, interpolate extra music for the male star, since there were no male stars in Paris when the work had its premier. At the same time, there are also several active choreographers worth watching. In addition to Mark Morris (whose commitment to my neighborhood may color my views!) and the aforementioned Taylor, Cunningham, and Tharp, I'd cite Christopher Wheeldon, Garth Fagan, and Susan Stroman, if she could be tempted away from Broadway for a moment. The many young contributors to NYCB's Diamond Project may also blossom into major talents with time and experience. Even Eliot Feld, for all his egotism and eccentricities, can create masterpieces: Skara Brae, with the right cast, is one of the most powerful dance pieces of the past decade, and the solos he made for Buffy Miller, so long as she performs them, are nothing short of brilliant. His current teen-aged company is both a welcome social experiment and a celebration of the city's diversity, but their lack of life experience undermines the impact of many works. But, hey, he's turning teen-agers on to dance!

NYCB regulars have heard Mme. Malraux perform twice on the NY State Theatre stage, on the first night of the Stravinsky Festival (at Mr. B's request, she had sought out the manuscript of what came to called the "Lost Sonanta" at the Stravinsky Foundation in Paris and performed it as John Clifford and Gelsey Kirkland danced) and on the first night of the Ravel festival, where she played the "Sonatine." To emphasize the composer's nationality, the cyclorama was bathed in blue-white-and-red lighting, Jean-Pierre Bonnefoux danced in a blue costume, Violette Verdy wore white (yes, yes,I know, an odd couple if ever there was one, but both French)while Malraux wore a red gown. Charming, but not path-breaking.

NYCB regulars have heard Mme. Malraux perform twice on the NY State Theatre stage, on the first night of the Stravinsky Festival (at Mr. B's request, she had sought out the manuscript of what came to called the "Lost Sonanta" at the Stravinsky Foundation in Paris and performed it as John Clifford and Gelsey Kirkland danced) and on the first night of the Ravel festival, where she played the "Sonatine." To emphasize the composer's nationality, the cyclorama was bathed in blue-white-and-red lighting, Jean-Pierre Bonnefoux danced in a blue costume, Violette Verdy wore white (yes, yes,I know, an odd couple if ever there was one, but both French)while Malraux wore a red gown. Charming, but not path-breaking.

I took out my first subscription to the New York City Ballet the season after the Stravinsky Fesitval (of which I saw only the opening night: "Lost Sonata," "Violin Concerto," "Symphony in 3 Movements," "Firebird," plus free vodka). I figured that God was not going to send too many universal geniuses across my path, so I had better seize the moment! As a result, my late companion and I spent many a memorable Sunday evening in the center of the first row of the Third Ring. There was an extraordinary "Concerto Barocco" with Farrell, Watts, and Martins. And it was ideal for the farewell performances by Farrell and Patricia MacBride... But I digress. I later added a second subscription, on Friday evenings, but rising costs, and the company's decision to cancel Sunday evening performances, have left me with that alone. As others have noted, the company has a very liberal exchange policy, and subscribers get priority in ordering single tickets as well. Occasional visitors should know that unused subscriber tickets are sold on the day of the performance, not at the box office, but at a table in the lobby by volunteers from the Ballet Guild. The price is the same, but seat locations are usually better, and the revenues help support the company. For several years, I took advantage of a series discount that the Joyce Theatre offered for its many dance presentations: order four or more companies per season and get a substantial discount (40% in most cases) on all tickets. Unfortunately, while several companies I admire greatly appeared from time time, I saw no point in committing myself to other dubious choices. I do take advantage of series discounts offered by many dance companies -- ABT for its fall City Center series (story ballets in an airplane hangar do not inspire me), Paul Taylor, and Merce Cunningham among others. A modest contribution to a favorite company will get you top priority -- i.e., maximum legroom in the City Center balcony! I also take advantage of series prices at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, just down the street from my apartment. While these usually entail a combination of events (opera, concerts, performance art, etc.), the choice is always wide. And the arrival of the Mark Morris company across the street has brought special deals for his company's local seasons. In short, when I see discounts and prime seating for a company I like, I jump at the chance!