Watermill

Yes, thanks, Ed: that is where I saw it. Ari, Maybe I can dig it up. I totally agree with the policy of not blabbing about prospective moves between companies, and have held my own bad tongue regarding several company changes until they were published. I'm guessing that we'll first glimpse the new company members at the open air rehearsals in the Park Blocks in August.

Yes, carbro, it was the first time I'd seen the basic ballet vocabulary used in conjunction with other non-ballet movements. It was a real eye-opener. Can't say I had the mystical experience you had, but it was very inspiring. Sometime around 1988 I saw Robbins walking toward me on Lexington Ave. The first thing that popped into my mind was to tell him how much I enjoyed Watermill. Then I noticed how sad he looked, and guessed that he was losing friends to the aids holocaust (as was I). so I didn't bother him, just walked by. I'll bet that piece resonated even more deeply in 1990.

Couldn't let this thread go by without mentioning Watermill. Controversial for its time: half the audience booed while half stood and cheered wildly (including me). Villella a study in stillness and coiled energy. Not a masterpiece, but provocative, experimental, modern and ancient at the same time. A rather sad autumnal mood pervades the piece, yet it made me glad to be alive.

Good point, Alexandra, but not to worry: it was announced in the Chronicle a while ago that Kester Cotton , a Portland native, and Kathleen Martuza were heading up I5 to OBT. Very exciting! Mark Morris & Company just received a standing ovation here in Portland. He is not my favorite ballet choreographer, but in the world of PR visibility, his working with OBT could be a nice boost. Ed, Portland itself is approx 240,000 with 1.2 million in the metropolitan area.

From a Laura Jacobs critique of Twyla Tharp in The New Criterion: "The late critic David Daniel, when he could be dragged to the theater to see something new (or was told over the phone about a recent dubious effort), loved to purr ominously, 'it’s the end of civilization as we know it.' Pushed for analysis, he fixed on the television screen as the great reductive force in American culture. There it was, shaped like a stage—a box—but without any depth or life, in fact, a vacuum. It was insanely quixotic, commercial breaks every five minutes. And most damaging, instead of being larger than life, scaled for wonder, it was very much smaller. To the teat of television, we can add the quick addictions of the computer—video games, the internet, virtual this and that. The 'extreme sports' that a tiny minority of Americans engage in (and the rest watch on TV) are the antidotal flip side to the extreme slouch of the couch potato and the computer junkie, sedentary sensibilities happy to gaze (or glaze) upon a depthless screen making synthetic sounds. As my best friend with two sons says, 'it’s a battle to keep your kids in three dimensions.' " Though taken out of context (apologies to Ms. Jacobs), I thought it pertained pretty well. Personally, my TV doubles as teat and telescope, depending on my needs. I almost never watch ABCNBCCBSWBFOXUPN networks.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when crass commercialism invades high art like this. Though I see some feel it's high art improving crass commercialism. This is naive: the lower motive always wins in the end. As the Chinese say: whether the melon hits the rock, or the rock hits the melon, it's going to be bad for the melon. In this case, Barbie's rock hard epidermis meets Martin's melon-headed thinking. This reminds me of Waiting for Guffman's Corky St Clair displaying his My Dinner with Andre action figures. I know it's apples and oranges, (god what a fruity post!) but it feels like Martins is tying to outdo McKenzie for the Questionable Tie-in Award. (see Issues: ABT for sale) Actually, if you take a good look at Barbie's proportions (minus the Teflon Twin Peaks) the small head, long neck, short torso, very long limbs remind one of what group of dancers? Scene: 1962: In the Nutcracker girl's dressing room, Mr. Balanchine, bestowing a gentle merde on the Candy Canes, spies a new doll lying on a dressing table. Inspired by its form, he cries: "At last! The perfect Dancer!" From that moment on the City Ballet female begins her evolution toward the impossible proportions of the doll. Talk about plastic surgery! So let's not be too hard on Martins...he's just following things to their most unatural conclusion. Can't wait for the Urban Contemporary Barbie in "Sleeping Booty"! With a Wink, Watermill

Thanks for that update, Ed. To this day Seattle's Eaglen/Heppner production remains as the most thrilling evening of my opera-going life. ( I'd peg the standing O at about 15 for that one) Would love to hear Voight top it! Who was Tristan?

Thank you...points well taken, and may I say, not very well understood amongst many prospective SAB students and their parents. Sorry to side-track this thread...keep those reviews coming! Watermill

Comrades in Port de Bras, I cannot tell you how much I treasure your immediate first hand reviews of multiple performances of major companies. As a self exiled NYC expatriate, patiently awaiting the reign of Stowell the Younger at OBT, I read each one with anticipation...close my eyes...and am transported. Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to share moments both brilliant and botched. I especially enjoy completely different takes on the same performance: "That's what makes the world go 'round'". I would like to harken back to the quote by Michael, highlighted by carbro. I would suggest (based on my limited sampling) that perhaps SAB is not entirely to be taken off the hook in assigning blame for a loss of classical fundamentals (placement & alignment, ETC {there's a lot contained in that ETC, but don't have the time to list it all}) Of the half dozen student ballerinas I know that have studied at SAB (4 in SI; 2 year round) five have returned with strangely broken wrists, heels that can't find the floor, odd head and neck affectations, and a host of unclassical habits. The exception to this was the remarkable Angela Snow, currently in ABT Corps, whose classical technique was unshakable. But I must say that I know not a few knowing parents who hold their breath as their son or daughter packs for Lincoln Center, wondering what will have to be "unlearned". It is, of course, ridiculous for me to make general comments based on such a small sampling, but Michael's critique of the corps is so in line with the out of line nature of the training ...that I am beginning to wonder: though SAB has the reputation as the finest ballet school, how long before someone shouts: "The Emperor has no clothes!" ? Apologies to fine teachers and dancers who work and train at SAB. I adore the legacy of Mr. Balanchine. I raise this issue to encourage discussion of SAB as a training ground for classical dancers. I think it's a serious issue. Watermill

If memory serves, there's a thrilling male solo in Ken Russell's Women in Love (which is about men in love). Barefoot and clad only in a dance belt the dancer serves as the thematic introduction of homoerotic stirrings between Rupert & Gerald. I don't think there's many minutes after these soaring jettes before we find the two gentlemen wrestling by the fire... I still consider this film to be the eccentric Russell's finest acheivment.

In the interest of being fair, especially after ripping into them fairly frequently during this thread, I must admit the latest ABT TV commercial is well done and inoffensive to my obviously overly refined artistic sensibilities (not to mention my hair trigger art vs business hot button!). http://www.uemedia.com/artman/uploads/0509ballet2.mov It's beautiful & bland & black & white. Which is probably just right for a mass media TV commercial selling ballet as a dramatic classy night out. I am thankful that it did not include the debatable attitudes mentioned above in Tobi Tobias' mini-rant. I suppose the only criticism I might have is that it could have been shot with dancers from any company. But obviously this was a conscious choice to not showcase any personalities. They do enough of that anyway, don't they? For fun: anyone know who the dancers were? A Wondering Watermill

I also should admit I'm a bit hyper-sensitive to this sort of thing having endured seven years of James Canfield's raunch & roll here at OBT. I shouldn't be suprised: marketing for big numbers always goes for the crotch. Personally, I think people are growing tired of this sex-laden content which constantly bombards us every minute of the day from all directions auditory and visual. I have always held ballet above the high school horniness that seems to be fashionable. Though ballet is often erotic ( L'Apres Midi, Agon, R&J are among my favorites, because of their sensuality) my point is that I think ABT and other marketing bottom-feeders are perhaps not realizing that their audience (even their young audience) might be seeking refuge from 24/7 T&A. And that they stand to capture more audience swimming against the tide by providing a momentary shelter from Brittney's Belly-button or J-Lo's latest gownless evening strap. Apologies for straying off the topic...BTW: notice in links that the AP critic couldn't help mentioning CK. I do hope ABT got a lot of money for this, because CK is going to sell a lot of jeans. Watermill

Well, you know I couldn't let this pass without dragging it over to this thread. Though not the same issue, I think it strongly bespeaks of the commercial as opposed to artistic direction ABT is drifting toward. Throw in the controversy of the school and you've got, imho, an arrogant American Ballet Titanic making a beeline for the nearest iceberg. (From Links) ............................................................................. Footnotes by Tobi Tobias Ballexploitation May 7 - 13, 2003 American Ballet Theatre, frantic to sell tickets to its season at the Metropolitan Opera House (through June 28), has embarked on an ad campaign that goes beyond the foolish to the offensive. One of its photos features a ballerina seemingly nude but for her pointe shoes. Her head is bowed so that she's faceless. Her arms are wrapped across her torso, her torso bent over her thighs, as if she's shielding her breasts and genitals. The image suggests sexual violation and shame —simultaneously, like much fashion photography, glamorizing them. (The ostensible equal-opportunity shot given to a buff male chest and belly is just locker-room pretty.) A panoramic view of ABT's stars in costume—haplessly derived from an unforgettable Irving Penn photograph—extends the tawdriness of the campaign. It's captioned, "They tear apart families, turn women into animals and poison heaven." Onward and upward with the arts! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Tobi, for drawing the line. Watermill

Tristan und Isolde would have four out of five!

Oh to be sure, dirac, it can always get worse (see my examples above). You are partly right about Olivier: actually he contributed the proceeds to help get the National Theatre started. His motive,which was loftily altruistic, is not in question here. That he did it was. It signaled from the heights that the artist could use corporate sponsorship to further his art. His deal was the end of an era. Obviously I am having trouble with the new era. Re: Mr. Harrison's priorities, you're probably right. But I think he knew when to render unto Ceasar...as opposed to Mr McKenzie et al rendering unto Calvin. Watermill

Worthy points, Calliope. But Versace was involved as a designer, part of the artistic team. As I understand it (and please correct me if I'm wrong), the whole point of this product integration is the very fact that the dancers are wearing off the shelf stock. So that you and I will go buy the same jeans. (Pardon me while I chuckle at my self looking anywhere near as good as the dancers. But that's what advertising is about isn't it?). I would also suggest that the press release and program notes will make the audience "see" the CK. Listen to the chatter during intermission. See Ari's reply above regarding the difference in benign and malignant sponsorship. To it I would add the following question: If UAL were the official airline of the Metropolitan Opera and the airport scene in "Nixon in China" was dominated by a United Airlines 747, wouldn't that be over the line? (Ed, what do you think?) I'm probably over reacting a bit, but this feels almost as bad to me. Watermill

Love this lively discussion! Ed, I think I'm making a different point. It's not WHO should pay but WHERE to draw the line between commercialism and the artistic integrity of a performing arts organization. Heck, ABT could make millions tying into Disney, Brittney, or Fox Reality Show #27. But they don't because there is a theoretical line somewhere out there which when crossed will turn off subscribers. Obviously my old fashioned ouch point is much more sensitive than ABT management's. Though I know that in these times, the line will move toward commercialism as other funding sources are diminished (Look at PNB's woes). And I'm the first to admit that if it came down to a choice between no ballet at all or the McDonald's Variations (Doesn't Ferri have Golden Arches?) I'd still sit in the fourth ring with my free Happy Meal ("Look: a Jock Soto Action Figure!") I just don't think it's quite that bad...yet. I will also try to be fair to ABT and guess that they turn down a lot of money from inappropriate sponsors who whould just love the step up in class a tie-in to the ballet would provide. However, being true to my crusty old self, I remain adamant that the actual wearing of an advertised product during an artistic performance amounts to a commercial. If McKenzie wants to make a curtain call covered in CK, that's fine. But to integrate the product into the actual performance and send out press releases notifying the public (and mentioning it in the program?) is gross commercialism. So when is the Kirov mounting "Back in the USSR" ? Watermill

Yes, Ari, I know that promotion of the higher arts has been slowly sliding towrds the gutter since Lord Olivier posed for Polaroid and Thomas Hoving commercialized the Met. But I still prefer to howl in pain rather than go numb and become a pop-zombie. But what are some of the issues here? I well know the practical necessities can lead to a blurring of good taste in advertising. But who's going to stand up to the marketing weasels and show some leadership, draw the line? Obviously, I'm laying some blame at McKenzie's feet but there should be some upper management, some board members who disdain this creeping commercialism. Someone upstairs has to have standards, no? And what about the integrity of the costume designer who chose the right fabric, just the right cut and seams and closures for the dancers? To have their work and choices cast aside for brand name off the shelf stock is insulting. Not sure I'd want to design for ABT if my costumes could be set aside by a sizable check from K Mart Kasuals. And I think Harrison would be outraged at the use of his spiritual song as the basis for worldly gain. Then again, he 's probably somewhere laughing at the whole thing. Watermill

From Links: "When American Ballet Theater performs its George Harrison tribute, Within You Without You, at the Metropolitan Opera House this spring, the dancers will wear "a range of cK Calvin Klein jeans, four styles in juniors and women, and three for men." Oh, yes, Calvin Klein is underwriting the Met performances of this ballet." ...and when Alina Cojocaru guests at ABT next week...her name in the program will be changed to Coca-cola-ru...cuz Coke is setting up machines in the lobby... What price Kevin McKenzie's soul? Do I have any bidders? (Spin, George, spin!) Watermill

Phew! When I read the title of this thread, Mel, I was afraid you'd closed ranks with Clement Crisp and were proffering an even darker (or shall we say crisper?) solution to the "child performer" problem. I was therefore relieved to find you merely grousing about the latest Swan Take. In the theatre we have had to endure a generation of Boinkin' with the Bard...In the spirit of Misery Loves Company, I offer up the following memorable Shakespearean Follies: A Midsummer's Night Dream done as a Star Trek episode, with Puck "transporting" the lovers to their assignations. Oberon as Kirk; the rude mechanicals as aliens. Gave "no sign of intelligent life" a whole new meaning. A Julius Ceasar where Ceasar appeared festooned in balloons, each one to be pricked by a pin-pushing senator. Lend me your ears...and earplugs, please. A schitzoid Macbeth in which the same actor played both Mr AND Mrs Macbeth. Director's notes implied Old Will had written the first inner war between the sexes. Most amusing. I'll stop there. To dredge up any more of this drecht puts a sour edge on my morning... Hopefully you will have taken some solace in the new found awareness that not only do you suffer for your art, but your art is suffering for you. With a wink, Watermill

Though it's certainly far afield from a Fairy Tale, The Rake's Progress (with a charming assembled score by Gavin Gordon) was set by Ninette de Valois on Sadler's Wells in 1935. I have the video tape from the 1985 production. Wonderful! Has any British company kept it in rep?

Damara Bennett, Director of City Ballet School in San Francisco has accepted Christopher Stowell's invitation to become Director of OBT's School of Ballet. This has brought another collective sigh of relief, as the last two years the school has been drifting without vision, failing to uphold the high standards set by former school director Haydee Gutierrez. It appears that Mr Stowell is really getting his act together. It's going to be quite a honeymoon! Champagne anyone?

Gosh, I hope people more knowledgeable than I respond, Leigh...but here's my rusty two cents: James Canfield's balancing act was almost impossible to sustain. His very contemporary (from hard-rocking to hip hop to lasVegas to modern to neo-Billboards) programs required a company so diverse in its abilities that the classical pieces suffered. In my opinion, this has resulted in an unstable audience base, fickle in the extreme, never knowing what to expect. (aside from an excellent Nutcracker). I totally applaud Stowell's approach: without meaning to diss Canfield, who, on a good day produced some brilliant dance, the new direction is a step up to a clearly classical vision. The balletomanes I know are nearly weeping with joy. I just hope the general audience will respond. Actually, the first year will be a honeymoon...it's the second year I worry about. I would not have touched the Nutcracker if at all possible, but he may have been forced to. By the way, I find Canfield's Nutcracker approx 50% derivative of Balanchine's. AND...OK, hang on to your hats...some of it is BETTER. I've seen a lot of Nutcrackers, and little OBT's is the best. An absolute jewel. I will miss it dearly. I happen to know that most of the company has been auditioning all over the place to cover their options. I expect more than half will leave or be replaced. The screaming need is for men. The skeletal crew that remains can in no way execute the season Stowell has planned. I will certainly miss some of the ballerinas, but am looking forward with excitment to new faces. Having lived for 20 years in NYC (76-96), I was once part of a different kind of audience: one with a tradition of going to the ballet: exposed to the highest quality in dance and dancer. It is a very different situation here in the Rose City. The audience base is smaller, with an even smaller percentage of knowing ballet fans. To the extent that James Canfield's work mirrored the popular need for a heavy rock downbeat, he was led by general audience taste for sex, drugs and rocknroll. Christopher Stowell has decided to lead this dance. Let's hope they don't step on each other's toes. Watermill

OK, Leigh. I think this might be a case of misunderstanding this particular brand of humor. It just seems to cross the line for me. But you're right: we all get to draw the line wherever we want. And I certainly do appreciate the chance to draw my own personal line in the civil environs of this forum. Although, I must say, the enabling of this type of misopedic (There's a five dollar word for you, Mel!) humor gives me that creepy feeling I get when I stumble upon male locker room jokes directed towards women & gays. Oops, there's that line again! Watermill

Yes, I had the same problems...glad to know it wasn't just me. Here's a question: Why do so few Americans compete? Do they concentrate on Jackson?