Terry

Well POB has 150...so it must be much harder for them...

A very nicely and interestingly written review of Giselle: La Scala Ballet in New York Thought some of you might be interesting in getting more opinions about this controversial piece.

Since La Scala is performing in NY...here is a link to an interview with Massimo Murru (in English!!) for those who are interested: http://www.balletto.net/english/rubriche/a.../articolo2.html *I think he makes some very intelligent comments. Also I was very impressed with his Albrecht in Giselle last night.

lara Interesting how you said that Murru doesn't believe that the audience likes him much more than he thinks. I completely agree on that one. There's this humbleness to him on stage that comes off as extremely elegant, IMO. I think he deserves to be much more well-known in the US (since he's very well-known in Europe and Japan) and I think this was a marvelous opportunity for him.

Hmm...a little bit of mixed feelings....Overall, however, I enjoyed the performance and I would like to say that I buy her talent, her effort, and her determination as a great artist. In other words, I understood her philosophy towards this new Giselle. I was a bit perplexed in the scene changes at the beginning of the First Act (sort of reminded me of the LES MIS style...), but as the story progressed, I gradually began see that the rural, modern setting worked. You could see that she was really trying to create a theatrical piece, as she said in her program commentray. There was even live music ON stage during the pdd solos and Giselle's solo. So if some people were disappointed in her rechoreography and her modern setting, well then, in her words, it really isn't what she wanted the audience to look for in her nouveau Giselle. It WAS meant to be completely different. I've always thought Murru had a lot of potential since his many guest appearances in Japan, and tonight, I realized that he has developed into a even stronger artist than before. He's not the masculine, powerful, aggressive type , but he likes to present himself in a simple manner, that is, he doesn't like to over-do his acting. I personally liked his elegance, his youthfulness, and especially his *classiness* on stage. He works pretty well with Guillem, even though they've yet to establish the kind of partnership that she has with Cope, but he's gettin' there...(I've read that he'll be dancing with her again in Ashton's A Month in the Country at RB next month). He's an artist that I would like to see more often in the future, particularly in pieces that require strong acting skills because I think he posesses great potential for improvement. I won't keep this too long, but choreographically speaking, I thought Guillem's fine musical instincts were strongly presented in her reconstruction of the First Act, particularly in the peasant waltzes and the peasant pdds. I especially liked the more youthful, playful qualities that she added to the peasant pdd. Her solo was set to the one peasant pdd solo that Ashton had choreographed, and I'm still not sure why she didn't keep the traditional variation, but I think part of it had to do with the fact that she wanted to display her original technical qualities. If I was working closely with Guillem for this production's costumes, I probably would've made some suggestions. I've read that you could barely see any dancing with the brown socks and the long skirts -- this wasn't too problematic for me in the First Act, as I knew that she wanted more focus on the acting and the drama of the First Act, but I really wish that the wilis could have had more of a spiritual representation. Guillem sort of reinterpreted the characterization of the wilis by giving each one of them an identity (they all wore different wedding dresses) -- she gave them the femininity, womanhood -- the qualities that she felt vital to the portrayal of each of the wilis. (On the side note, this is where I realized how much Guillem had grown as not only an artist, but also as a "woman." We say that the development of one's artistry comes from one's internal development of as a "person," and in this re-presentation of the wilis, I could see Guillem had matured into a woman from that teen-age "etoile" that we had known her for so long. ) Anyway, my point about the wilis is that, again, I would've liked to see a more spiritual side to them as well, and this, I think could've been done (perhaps) with lighter skirts (closer to the costumes that's always been used for the original) . That's about it for the moment, but I'll post some more if I have any more comments to add. Lastly, the audience went WILD at the end. There was a HUGE standing ovation, and Murru and Guillem both seemed completely thrilled. (Even Murru had some tears in his eyes... )I was happy for them that they received such a warm welcome.

The elegant and beautiful Pierre Francois Vilanoba, former POB soloist and now a SFB principal has a very detailed website: http://www.vilanoba.com

Here are the winners: The Winners GRAND PRIX Dom Perignon 2001 Gustavo Ramirez Sansano - "Weight on my back" Encouragement Prize Yukichi Hattori - "Piece" Public's Choice Yaroslav Ivanenko - "Morning Prayers" *Very glad to hear that Hattori won; he is only 21 and is a rising dancer/choreographer from Japan. Hope the American audience will get to see his works someday.

I personally like his bluntness! And there's a lot I can agree with.

I would also like to second Drew's comments. I don't think every principal in major companies can pull it off as easily as some may think. I'm not trying to "pick" on any of the dancers, but Kent finished her 32 fouettes far too early in the last Black Swan pdd that I've seen her do, Tan Yuan Yuan nearly lost all control after around 20 fouettes in her Black Swan, In any case, I think that if Dancer A is a PRINCIPAL dancer in a company, then Dancer A shouldn't be really struggling with fouettes, which IMO are supposed to be (sometimes) the least problematic technical combination in a pdd/ballet. I tend to think that dancers with the most "gorgeous" and LOOONG legs with beautiful feet sometimes have problems technically when it comes to pirouettes. Of course, Herrera and Guillem are exceptions (I'm sure there are others I've forgotten as well.)

No one has seen Ms.Cullem?

I absolutely loved their "Dances at a Gathering," particularly with Ringer and Carmena. Alexandra Ansanelli was also very memorable. Wendy Whelan has always impressed me, but I think I prefer her in contemporary roles rather than the real classical ones.

Jeannie, I haven't been too impressed with Misty from the couple of performances that I've seen of her (classically speaking), but I'll have to see how she develops! Danny Tidwell was a sensation when he performed with Rasta's group in Japan last year; many commented that they liked him even more than Rasta! Best wishes to him at the Shanghai IBC.

What about Desmond Richardson?

I recently saw some video clips of her, and she looked gorgeous!!! Anyone seen her with the Bavarian National Ballet or with the English National Ballet? I understand that she is a frequent guest artist all over Europe.

I think that if you're born in a certain city or a cultural center in which the people around you have also grown up seeing a great Choreographer X, then I think this "centrism" is likely to happen. I think that many Londoners will always like Ashton/MacMillan, and many Stuttgartians (?) will like Cranko, and many Danish will like Bournonville, so forth. I do think though, that the problem always stems when the "centric" audiences see other companies performing the Choreographer X's works and start comparing. OF COURSE, it's going to be different. I'm not saying that the style should be lost, but there are going to be many things that are going to look tremendously different. I don't like to say that this is inevitable, but for eg, many RB dancers and audiences who have grown up seeing Macmillan, is often likely to not enjoy another company's performance of Macmillan as much as theirs. So what do we do then? Do we keep on giving these companies a chance, or do we keep on comparing them to the home company and just claim that they'll never be able to perform this in the REAL style? It's such a difficult question, but I'm always torn with this question... Ok, I guess I haven't answered the heart of the question...so back to the point. I think that if I had grown up my whole entire life in NY, and had grown up watching NYCB, then I would probably have strong feelings for Balanchine. IMO, I think many Balanchine ballet are great, and I enjoy seeing them. And this centrism I think will continue (if there really is) as long as NYCB continues to perform mostly Balanchine repertory (I'm not saying that it shouldn't.) Part of this I think has to do with the fact that no other company gets to give as many performances as NYCB here...and NYCB's major repertory is Balanchine. But I don't think that this centrism is occuring because NYCB fans are only seeing Balanchine. NYC always attracts many companies from all over the world every year, and they have opportunities to see other choreographers, even though I sometimes feel that the attendence rates are not very high for smaller, more developing foreign companies (BRB, for eg). So I don't think that the centrism is coming from the fact that these fans only see Balanchine, but that they've grown up seeing it and that they've always loved watching it.

Patricia, here is my email: ts362@columbia.edu

Hi Patricia, Sure I would love to communicate privately! I'm just not sure how to give you my email address. Alexandra, would it be all right if I just posted it here, in this forum, or is there another place I can do this? Thanks.

I agree. I've only seen Abbagnato once, but if she does get promoted, I will definitely come to the conclusion that many "other" forces had to play. I've liked Pujol. She's in some ways a conventional dancer, but she has strong technique, and I am sure that in a few years, her dramatic and artistic abilities will develop. I've never seen Osta, but from what I've been reading and hearing, she seems like a dependable dancer (unlike, Nicholas, who gets injured way too often, which is really too bad!!). Sometimes, the most "dependable" dancers do well in the end (best eg of that would be Eleonore D'Antuono I think!!). And then Gillot. My goodness POB has some of the TALLEST dancers in the world! I think I even read in an interview of Claude Bessy once that the female dancers are getting taller than male dancers, and it's becoming a problem!! But she has some strong qualities in her, and I think those strong, unique qualities of her can eventually develop into an "etoile" quality. Can't she partner Bart and Martinez and LeRiche? Or are they too short for her? I haven't seen POB in almost a year, but I am very very excited to see some of the new upcoming young dancers. Just to name a few: Marie Ould Braham, Emilie Cozette (although I think she isn't considered so "new" but I think she has very good potential), Aurore Cordellier, Dorothee Gilbert, and more! By the way Estelle, any hopes of Melanie Hurel or Delphine Baey becoming a premiere danseur or possible an etoile? I've always liked Hurel's classical quality and Baey persona on stage; and I definitely think they're in the same league as Osta, Pujol, Gillot, Abbagnato. They definitely deserve to be more than a sujet, IMO.

In fact, if you ever attend major international ballet competitions, you will see that dancers who only show interest in highlighting their technical gifts will not do very well. It has to be both the artistry and the technical strengths combined. I would say that the ballet competition that really serves as the ultimate "artistic" competition would be the Paris International Ballet Competition. Here, a contestant A once did quadruple sets of pirouettes for her variation in finals, but the person who won the gold was contestant B who did a double pirouette with classical elegance and purity. And, Contestant A did not receive anything.

Since Marc added a link of Nioradze, I thought I'd provide the link to Galina Mezentseva's website that I found. Some people have probably seen it already, but for those of you who haven't, it's a very detailed website. http://www.csa.ru/Mezentseva/

Alexandra, one question: You mention about 2 great RDB principals during the 1970s. Was one of them Eva Evdokimova? I understand that she had been RDB school trained, and IMO was a wonderful Bournonville dancer. Thanks.

My point /question is, what is wrong with ballet companies doing contemporary pieces, when they can balance both repertories, and when they can still have a strong classical foundation and do it well? Of course, as many of you noted, POB would be the best example of this. If a company can't do both of them well, then they shouldn't be in the repertory; but POB, does both contemporary and classic pieces extremely well and that is why they have it in their repertory. Plus, they maintain the best standard of classical dance, IMO in the world today. Of course, contemporary dance has different dance vocabularies, no one I don't think would disagree with that, but, really, my question is why do classical ballet companies today increasingly dance both contemporary and classical pieces, when it is not the case other way around (and I think I would rather see a classical company do contemporary than a contemporary company do classics )? [ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: Terry ]

Well then, why do these major ballet companies including POB, RB, ABT, SFB, Hamburg, etc, etc, etc, stick to this idea of contemporary and the classics if it isn't such a good idea as some of you seem to be implying (at least, that's the way it sounds to me, but if I'm wrong, then please let me know).

Well, my question is: shouldn't dancers even if they are classically trained, be able to dance any forms (but probably more towards contemporary), because ballet is really the foundation of all dance styles? Of course they should be able to dance the classics, but isn't part of the reason why contemporary dance is being offered greatly in SFB, for eg, is because these dancers are able to adjust to different forms and styles of dancing when demanded? It must be so difficult for the dancers because they have to be able to perform classical, neoclassical, and contemporary works. Anyway, IMO, I think that dancers in major ballet companies today should be able to dance both contemporary and classical pieces. If they are professional dancers, then I think they should be able to dance both just as equally well. (But this doesn't always happen, of course.)

I'd also like to to point out that even though contemporary pieces are far more danced in what some people may call the so-called "regions," it is an inevitable phenomenon as new choreographers and new dancers are continuously coming out. The training, the schooling, their environment, their location, etc, etc, etc, plays a role but moreover, what most CERTAINLY plays a role is the era. Why do with have such articles like SF Chronicle's Allan Ulrich writing about the neglect of the Ashton repertory in the newspaper? Because young dancers and young choreographers not living the "cultural centers" are getting less exposed to the "great choreographers" but also because dance is becoming more and more globalized. How could a professional dancer who has gotten most of his training in China and becomes a principal with RB, for eg, ever possess that authentic style of "Ashton" or "Macmillan" that audiences demand? It's an age of globalization. We have to maintain the heritages of the past, but at the same time, ballet and dance will keep moving and adjusting to the demands and styles of dancers who come from all over the world, as like any other field of art, technology, politics, etc, etc, etc. And sometimes, for a number of these kinds of dancers, contemorary ballet might be more suitable than classical ballet and vice versa. I think the question of "contemporary dance" also has to do with what kinds of dancers are in the company.