Ray

Homans claims, arguing against Kavanagh, that "Nureyev had no way to know that his sex life would be any freer in the West. " I think this is patently false. And to say "Defection set Nureyev free, but it destroyed his life and his dancing" is certainly an interesting indirect endorsement of the virtues of a totalitarian state! I guess she's right, in a cynical sense--I mean if Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn hadn't served in a labour camp, he would have never written The Gulag Archipelago.

I would caution against stating categorically that all modern dance is less demanding than ballet. Some of it is just as demanding, but in different ways--it depends on the technique. You are correct. I wasn't intending to claim that ballet is more difficult than all modern dance, but rather that the minimum standards are lower in modern dance; however, that probably wasn't clear in my post. And even this could be a reflection of the particular ballet companies that I've seen being more talented than the modern dance companies that I've seen rather than an overall truth (I've seen modern dance programs that I thought could have been done by a proficient amateur recruited out of a disco). I'm going to come at this from a different angle. I think that in general, the standards for choreography are higher in modern than in contemporary ballet. We may not like these standards, or think their aims are misplaced, but hear me out. Most modern dancers with decent training at some point in their lives have to endure fairly rigorous training in the basics of dance composition. In addition, grant-makers tend to scrutinize modern dance makers more strictly than they do ballet choreogs, because sometimes in ballet, pedigree/lineage/training is enough to qualify a former member of ballet co. X to choreograph a dance. This happens far more infrequently in modern dance (where, to be sure, opportunities to create dances arise more often). I think we've all carped about this to some degree ("who died and made HIM choreographer?"), and discussed the paucity of apprenticeship opportunities for ballet choreographers. BTW I don't think the ballet powers-that-be do an especially good job at filtering mediocrity, in terms of choreographic content. The ABT's recent Beauty and PA Ballet's Dracula are proof enough of that.

Well, from the modern dance I've seen in the past 10 or so years, narrative is back, big time--along with "feelings." In Philly alone, we have two excellent dance/theater or physical theater companies: Headlong and Pig Iron. If their dances aren't "narrative" in the traditional sense, they are often concerned with stories. In less able hands, however, "narrative dance" often comes in the form of dances to songs--pop or otherwise--that mimetically act out the lyrics. A friend accompanied a group of young modern dance choreographers to see Merce last year. They barely knew who he was, and could see no value in his abstractions ("it was so cold," etc.). I don't think this is better. Now I'm a lover of abstraction, so I might not be the best judge, but it seems that the work of Elizabeth Streb, Sara Rudner, Siobhan Daives (in the UK), Trisha Brown, and of course Mark Morris use abstraction in a way that's completely accessable. But that's just me.

I suppose the gap between intentions and execution can turn out to be bigger than some artists imagine. I confess to having some sympathy with the following comment of Dunning's: On the other hand, the NY Times -- whose income depends so much on celebrating luxury brands and consumer excess -- may not be the media outlet most open to the message Mr. Jasperse is trying to get across. While I don't disagree with the thrust of Dunning's review (I didn't see Jasperse's dance), she made a big boo-boo: she wrote, "Mr. Jasperse talks of paying his dancers $15 a rehearsal," when in reality, in the interview she's referring to he says he pays them $15 an hour. Still not a lot of money, but I fear the error is what Jasperse and fans will latch onto and miss hearing the bigger point. And she should've gotten it right--the interview was in her paper!

Thank you!

I'm not sure. Theaters run by non profit organizations are not threatened and the Joyce may be non profit. It will be interesting to watch. In 2003 (I believe) the broadway musicians went on strike and Equity and Local One honored the strike. The unions stuck together. Personally I believe that is a good thing. The Joyce, City Center, Lincoln Center are all nonprofits (thus the ".org" in their URLs).

I guess I'm old school: the author's thesis should come first, followed by the support. I want a roadmap of what I'm going to read, esp. if I have to slog through mounds of primary source evidence, even if it's juicy stuff. And I can still draw my own conclusions, I hope!

This seems quite extreme. Any truth in it? I'm sorry but I don't see this as particularly extreme, although I agree with Haglund's that the Times, like most newspapers, likes the provocative hook. Macaulay is careful to praise Wheeldon's talent and limit his negative criticism to a single work--indeed, a single PDD ("Here..."). It is also true, I acknowledge, that he says this only after he's already implied a larger pattern--"how dismayingly passive [Wheeldon's] presentation of women often is" (my italics). Yet I'm not sure why his writing is any lazier than any other dance critic tracking a choreographer's work over the years--in fact, I think he's doing a pretty good job in trying to raise what for him is clearly a painful thing to have to say. (And I can't say that I disagree with his reading of CW's handling of women.) I think this is a hard thing to accept sometimes: we can be critical of choreographers we like--and even love--and it's not tantamount to dismissing their talent. It's not a zero-sum game, it's art. If you guys want extreme, check out some theater reviews!

Do you think Kavanagh does a good job alerting us to this? In other words, is the collusion disconcerting in itself, or because JK can't "unpack" it? Do say more--yes, it certainly might be disconcerting on a local level (or for other reasons? say more if you can), but culturally it's a fascinating reflection of mid-century critical practices.

According to Janet Anderson of Philadelphia's City Paper, a free weekly (http://www.citypaper.net/articles/2007/09/27/pas-de-deux-grand): "[PAB's] dance roster will be different [....] Neenan, talented choreographer and corps member, resigned from the big company to focus completely on his experimental troupe BalletX. Two PAB dancers, Heidi Cruz-Austin and Tara Keating, have also joined Neenan full time in this endeavor." The implication here, while not explicitly stated, is that Cruz-Austin, like Neenan, left PAB. (Note, though, that Anderson--not always the sharpest writer--also implies in this article that BalletX is newly independent of PAB, when the truth is that BalletX has always been a separate entity.) I think Cruz-Austin not getting promoted to soloist at PA Ballet was inexplicable on the part of the company's "artistic" management--locals and website visitors will note, however, that they're still using her pic on promotional material! Related note: Neenan in the article cited above said that he had reviewed a video of his Carmina for its revival at City Center and "didn't love it." I'm sure the sound of Macauley sharpening his pencil might have had something to do with that reassesment... I hope he gets the support from the company that he will need.

Why do so many critics find it necessary to put down one form of dance when praising another? And it's just silly--it makes MM sound like the cutting edge of the avant garde, which he isn't. He has more affinities to ballet than most modern choreographers, both aesthetically and literally--I mean, he's actually choreographed a ballet! And I can easily imagine a ballet company dancing his works.

Eifman, sometimes; usually, though, he's just boring too.

True--and for all we know, you're Ashley Bouder! I beg your pardon. How do you know I'm not Ashley Bouder? Because everyone knows you're Jilanna. And I'm Una Kai.

Reviving this thread b/c I have been listening to Baiser a lot lately, both the full orchestral version and the wonderful piano-violin adaptation that Stravinski did for Dushkin of the Divertimento. I don't find it long at all; it's a model of economy in some ways in its "survey" of Tchaikovsky's Russian musical impulses. I think it's a score that's crying for good choreographic treatment. I wish, for instance, Mark Morris was choreographing Baiser rather than the much longer and oft-choreographed R&J. Is Baiser singular in being a ballet composed for dance (if you look in the score you'll see it even includes stage directions!) yet so unsuccessful as a full-length ballet? It seems as though some would classify Baiser with Prokofiev's Cinderella as a "problem" ballet. Anyone know why? (I've heard about the problems in representing the final scene, for instance). Somebody had mentioned that some reviews noted the ending music was undanceable, but I can't say I understand why. It's one of my favorite parts of the score (I know, I know, just because one likes it doesn't mean it's musique dansante...).

I saw his 7 for 8 (?) recently, and could not stay awake. What a waste of a major company's time.

This is getting to the heart of what I'm trying to understand. I can appreciate the erotic appeal of the "regular guy" but what is it that's appealing about seeing him in tights on stage? Perhaps it is the a kind of sexuality that we want to see onstage projected from men--it seems to me weirdly tied into notions of ballet "purity" that I'm trying to get my mind around. By contrast, we certainly wouldn't say anything comparable about a female dancer--she must be thoroughly transformed from any trace of the "regular."

True--and for all we know, you're Ashley Bouder!

I've always thought SAB was curiously inactive in terms of alumni development, cetainly compared to every other school I've ever attended, including NCSA. This is ironic, considering the numbers of wealthy students who have passed through its doors. I remember one student when I was there who was an heir to the Hearst fortune--she even had a picture of San Simeon on her wall! Perhaps this website is a step in the alum development direction.

But if they're bigger they can do more damage. And of course, I'm only carping about the ego of bad stropping male dancers. They're just painful to watch (and, if you should have the misfortune to have to work with or for them, painful to listen to).

Why? Just as eye candy, or another aesthetic reason? Big strappers sometimes come with big strapping egos, even if the talent is tiny.

Didn't Patrick Bissell partner Kirkland and, perhaps, d'Antuono? Maybe the heights are off...but I do think I remember Bissell with Kirkland in something. Or, Bissell is--sadly was--the youngster in the bunch (?), maybe didn't come onto the scene until the 80s?

RV is a good example of a ballet that seems more of a chore than a challenge for dancers these days (at NYCB and elsewhere). YET a heightened level of "technique" in many areas has never been more, as Leigh implies, expected of both male and female dancers. So can we account for this?

EAW, I've been fascinated by this topic for a long time--my sense that the NYCB dancers in the 50s-70s really understood what they were doing (subverting the "dance don't think" canard), and this intelligence came through in multiple ways, sometimes even as wryness. I always measured this sense, however, against my own age--i.e., did the dancers seem "smart" in the past because I was so young? Is it that today (when, to use EAW's words, "the execution rarely rises above adequacy") I'm just an older and more experienced viewer?

Wow, Leigh, what a rich and suggestive response! From the local and specific (details of the incredible performace styles of individual dancers like Mimi Paul [did anyone ever see her in that funky Italian-made film of Midsummer?], whom you could place in a stylistic lineage from Doubrovska to Jillana to Nanette Glushack and Stephanie Saland)--to big, general critical questions, like what's the relationship between culture and the forms & styles it produces (as exemplified in changes in NYCB style and practice)? I've always been fascinated by the advent of US culture in the postwar-to-Regan era, and this film seems to be a good "case study" of one of its many incarnations.

Thanks, I posted there--you can eliminate this one if you want to.