leonid17

For me, Erik Bruhn descended from the heights of Olympus and Soloviev appeared out of the clouds at the peak of this mountain with a deeply spiritual quality, which moves me as I write and think about him. Many of the dancers mentioned so far were/are more than admirable.

Great! Join my crusade.

Surely the answer could equally be, that you only train and employ dancers for Romantic and Petipa ballets with the correct emploi. Since when does the fact that people are taller today become either an artistic or aesthetic consideration. We do not transpose up or down operatic scores for singers because of limited or peculiar abilities. Today we find authenticity an accepted approach in the restoration and performance of opera and music. Counter tenors up until 40 years ago were almost de trop. Today they are di rigueur in many vocal works. Either academic Romantic/Classical ballet is a high art or its an entertainment wherein we can choose to change rules willy nilly. Where are we all coming from? Either its ok to bastardize an art form or its not and as you can plainly see, I think not. I have absolute no problem with tall dancers in modern classical or neo- classical ballets as long as the line, shape and tempo are not interfered with. Let us truly respect, Bournonville, Perrot, Saint-Leon, Petipa, Ivanov et al and lets hear it for shorter dancers. PS I have had fun writing the above but I am also serious in my contention. We live in what appears to be a vulgar age. Lets try to go back, not to the inequalities of those early ballet eras, but to truly respecting the choreographers most of us admire.

For Romantic and Petipa ballet female dancers in leading roles should be not much more than 5'. I say this because Anna Pavlova at 5'2" was considered quite tall. To be any taller the choreographic line and shapes get distorted and tempi also may be affected. Premier Danseurs should probably be no taller than 5'6. I would think that Serge Legat for instance was shorter than that. In post Petipa ballets I suppose what ever the choreographer has stated is appropriate.

I am not sure how either France where Nureyev defected, or Canada where Baryshnikov defected were involved in political “one up-man ship,” It was an irritation for governments when such occurrences took place, interfering with the day to day business with Russia which all western countries were engaged in. Newspapers puff stories, always without substantive versions from either defectors or government sources readily appeared. Sabre rattling takes place in the press where a big boy’s game is carried out on behalf of some government department that does not really care but it is good for the peasants of both societies and eventually it all calms down. We have a saying in England, today’s newspaper, wraps tomorrow’s fish and chips. The most significant and long established ballet critics brought Nureyev into ballet history through critical reviews and articles, not political or gossip columnists. Headlines and photographs are hardly meat for a serious balletomane. Vladimir Malakhov and Rudolf Nureyev, who have been mentioned in the current posts, have little in common. They effectively were born in different countries more than a thousand miles apart with extreme opposites in family and cultural backgrounds and balletic training. They also of course belonged to two distinct ballet eras being born 30 years apart. Nureyev was and remains a phenomenon because of his great theatrical abilities and flair that was coupled with at times an uneven ballet technique which improved under the influence of Vera Volkova and Erik Bruhn. He could on very many occasions dance with a controlled fluency that was remarkable, .but, it was his in almost dare devil passionate and abandoned performances, as in Marguerite and Armand, that made Nureyev the star. Unlike some modern dancers who have publicists working with them, Nureyev after his first two performances in London had created a sensation to which the Covent Garden audience responded in a way unheard of. In London, Baryshnikov for all of his most beautifully trained technique never appeared so often or had as strong an admiration or following as Nureyev did with the audience or with the British Press. Nureyev was never famous for being famous like many 'celebrities' today. He was workaholic, riding a semi-tamed horse across the tundra, disturbing complacency of an old order, creating his own world to extravagantly inhabit. His journeys took him to audiences who admired his performances night after night as his fame spread across the worlds stages, where he danced and staged ballets would only end with the culmination of his phenomenal influence with the Paris Opera Ballet. Early in his career with the RB he staged the shades scene from, "La Bayadere". If you weren't there to experience Fonteyn and Nureyev in this work you cannot imagine the ballet audience reception on that first and for many successive performances. The staging was a high achievement for this remarkable man and the performance seemed a minor miracle had taken place for himself, Margot Fonteyn and the RB Company as a whole. It was another significant act in cementing his claim to fame and he had broken the somewhat cool reserve of what was still a somewhat "posh" audience. Drew writes, “When Nureyev collapsed to his knees facing the dawn at the end of Giselle, one felt that Albrecht had been through an extraordinarily intense, transformative, even redemptive experience. And such was the power of Nureyev's interpretation that as an audience member, one felt as if one had been through the same." Amen and again Amen. Stardom was always difficult to achieve on the London Ballet stage. A succession of distinguished ballet critics had established the bench marks for the audience which was knowledgeable and discerning and it did not accept status just because a management had bestowed upon particular dancers. Antoinette Sibley and Anthony Dowell were generally admired in London, but it was their successes in New York that established them as international stars. Darcey Bussell became famous through publicity but today is never talked about as a famous interpreter. Jonathon Cope an outstanding dancer and artist superior in many ways to Anthony Dowell, is hardly known at all beyond the regular ballet audience. Nanarina says, "When you compare dancers nowadays one could even say they are better than Nureyev. Worldwide there are some fantastic artiste's out there, but they need to be judged in their own right. You just have to look around to note their qualities, Roberto Bolle, Manuel Legris, Herve Moreau, Jeremie Belingard, Ethan Stiefal, Jose Mar. Carr, Angel Correlli, Jonathon Cope, Frederico Bonelli, Johan Kobborg,Ivan Vasiev, Ruzimatov, the Zaklinsky's, in the past, Zolton Solymosi, Anthony Dowell, David Wall, past present and future the list is endless. There are new promising dancers appearing all the time whose talents could now surpass Ruddi." For me “...better than..." has no meaning because we are not comparing like with like and we are not even discussing the fact that not all the dancers mentioned, belong to the same order of classification of type. No one can, “…surpass Rudi.” Because he is unique in a way that other dancers never can or will be. Some may follow who have a unique quality, but it seems to me that attraction and preference is what seems to be talked about here, which should not be considered to be a universal measure “Worldwide there are some fantastic artiste's out there” says Nanarina. I would prefer the descriptive, “significant” or perhaps “important”. Whilst admired by some for various reasons, in my opinion, the dancers in her list are hardly legendary or known outside ballet audiences. I do not think Nanaria is comparing like with like. If you want to mention other male dancers with real status who had international fame think of Edward Villela, Erik Bruhn and a few Bejart dancers come to mind as do some other Russians and what about Bujones? For me there was (is) only one Nureyev, one Barishnikov, one Soloviev, and one Vasiliev all of whom were both famous and great and not one of them like Nijinsky before them, was a true danseur noble. Volcanohunter revived this thread, with an interview which I was grateful to be able to read, began, “Vladimir Malakhov is one of the world’s finest and best-known ballet dancers. Critics have put the exceptional artist in a class with historic ballet luminaries such as Nijinsky and Nureyev.” What critics? Vladimir Malakhov very rarely appeared in the UK I saw him with the Moscow Classical Ballet in London and at a gala and have seen a number of films. Malakhov is however probably most well known in England for his many appearances on the televised Vienna New Year Concerts. As to his international fame, mention his surname to most people in the street in London and they might enquire if it is a new brand of Vodka. This is not a comment on status of this important dancer, but a comment on ballet as not being important to most ordinary people’s lives which is often only touched by the likes of a Pavlova, Ulanova, Fonteyn or a Nureyev. Do serious balletomanes often inhabit a parallel world to rest of society?

The Internet Broadway Database has the casts for the Petit 's Ballets de Paris performances during two runs (Oct. 1949 - Jan.1950 and Oct. 1950 - Dec. 1950). One of Perrault's roles was the Toreador in Carmen. ...I also noticed that, in the caption of rg's photo, 4th billing goes to "Ann Bancraft." That was Ann Bancroft, playing Emma Hurok. Is that Sol's wife? Roland Petit’s, Les Balet de Paris played at the Winter Garden with a programme of Carmen, L'Oeuf á la Coque, Pas d'Action, Le Combat from10/6/1949 - 1/14/1950 a total of 116 performances. Later in the year they returned and appeared at the National Theatre and Broadhurst Theatre from 8/10/1950 to 02/12/1950 performing Carmen, L'Oeuf á la Coque Les Forains. In 1954 the company appeared at the Broadway Theatre giving 48 performances. Serge Perrault starred in all three visits. When Jean-Louis Barrault the great French actor/Director brought his company to the Ziegfield Theatre with three programmes in 1952, they ran between November 12 and December 30 with Serge Perrault appearing in two of the productions. Yes Emma Hurok was Sol Hurok’s wife and was as you say was played by Anne Bancroft in the film. The production of Le Combat was indeed by William dollar with scenic and costume design by Marie Laure. Ps I have made two small corrections to my original post.

The photograph shows Toumanova and Perrault in a scene from “Autumn Leaves”, (not that Pavlova would have recognised it) which was shot, but cut from the 1953 film except that you see a glimpse of this work under the credits at the beginning of the film. I have heard that this ballet sequence was replaced by Zanuck some years later but it was not in the version which I last saw in 1974. David Lichine is credited for the choreography of the film. Perrault trained at the Paris Opera(, entered the corps 1943-47) and left to join Roland Petit’s company which had terrific success in New York with a programme that ran for 116 performances. He also appeared in Jean-Louis Barrault productions on Broadway. Perrault taught at the Paris Opera from the 1970's to the late 1980's and he is the brother of a most distinguished French ballerina Lycette Darsonval and their nephew Francois Perron works somewhere in New York.

Terrific. I so enjoyed watching this and the twinkly bits and the travelling moments were great fun. All of that and Dinah Shore as well. Thank you.

You are quite correct. My sincere apologies to Christian. I misread your post.

There is a Stravinsky database at Roehampton university in London which gives lists of works made to his music (at least up to 2002) but not to any other composer. http://www.roehampton.ac.uk/stravinsky/ Thankfully this has been available for some years and I simply found it by checking through a whole lot of google results for Lists of Stravinsky ballets and up popped "Stravinsky the Global Dancer: A Chronology of Choreography to the Music of Igor Stravinsky."

What other variations were dancers performing in Giselle when she left Russia? Perhaps this is the only one she knew? On youtube a contributer has said it was staged by Petipa for Cornalba in 1888. I have not checked this statement. The film is shot at an angle that distorts. There are problems with the speed of the film. Through my eyes, I definitely get a glimpse of her genius. Pavlova who is equally badly served by film, was to have said, "It doesn't even catch the flow of movement of my dress so how can it show my dancing?

It is sad to report such news regarding David Ashmole, a charming man with an engaging personality. He was a former principal with the Royal Ballet, and the Australian ballet. It is reported that he was diagnosed with cancer only three months ago. In recent times he had been active as a ballet teacher. At the London Studio Centre, he was Assistant to the Director, Head of Boys and taught Pas de Deux. I must have seen him dance more than a hundred times and he was successful in a number of leading parts and was always elegant with a very good technique that was smooth and well suited to prince type roles. Obituary: http://www.smh.com.au/national/obituaries/...90729-e1go.html

This is Pyotr(Peter/Pierre) aged as you indicate 19 years old. I have not seen this photograph before, which as a new discovery, is always a great pleasure. Thank you.

Deeply saddened to hear of the passing of this giant among modern choreographers. I well remember his outstanding success in London more than 40 years ago when the audience was as distracting as the performances on stage. Ashton who was in the audience said to Cunningham, "You are a poet, and I like poetic ballets." Poetic, fun and last year, "Crises" came up as fresh as if choreographed in 2008 and not decades before.

There is no doubt that he saved the Kirov/Maryiinsky. It also helped that he has a close personal relationship with Vladimir Putin. See http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/magazine/15gergiev-t.html

That is what I thought and I felt that there was something indicating respect (almost) deferential in Mme Alonso's body language.

I don't really have a question to ask about the foregoing, but I wanted to pluck this quote of Kathleen O'Connell's from the Balanchine thread so it doesn't get lost, because I think it speaks to something that is missing from some ballets today. (And I hope Kathleen will share with us whatever she works out. ) Thanks for giving us the opportunity to discuss what is important. Kathleen O'Connell says, “A thought that I haven't worked out yet. Balanchine relied on any number of formal elements to help us with the “story.” Hierarchy is one, for example: we usually get a central couple, soloists & corps to help us map out the internal organization of the onstage community. “Hierarchy” in this sense does not tell us who ranks higher so much as who and what we need to pay attention to sort out the story. Many of Balanchine’s heirs have abandoned hierarchy..." I know that it is not meant derogatory, but say that Balanchine, “...relied on any number of formal elements to help us with the “story” seems to me to simplify and denature his creative ability. Because there are, " ....any number of elements..." to help us with the experience, I really do not like "story" which perhaps wrongly suggests that we all watch a ballet performance objectively, which if that is the case we have witnessed nothing. During his lifetime, Balanchine created in numerous styles, some seen before some not. Why seek hierarchical explanations in a work of art that have nothing to do the artists creative process. I believe a high artist has an ability to go beyond what can be intended, unlike a lesser artist, who constantly thinks of what is to become in their finished work. The original vision of the flow of a creative artist gets themselves into trouble when they go out of the creative mode and start to think objectively about what might be successful. We see this all too often in many, many works that show a hint of what they might have been. I think great choreographers envisage no hierarchy consciously but work in the familiar various modes of their creative attributes and some they experience for the first time. On reflection upon having finished a work, they may themselves observe hierarchies, but for Katherine O’Connell to suggest it may be a deliberate, “relied on…”representation rather than an inspired creative outpouring seems wrong to me. The problem in analyzing hierarchical elements in a ballet is that persons from different artistic and cultural values will not come up with the same understanding. There can be no absolute analysis of any ballet performance only observations. In the same way you cannot measure genius, analyze its processes or relate its expression to any normal life experience. If you try to, you will only end up with an imagined view of the persons ability and creativity. The second viewings of bad ballets (Sandy McKean's) post, I have sometimes found that they seem less so than on first viewing and personally I take the view that familiarity sometimes breeds acceptance or I have to just surrendered to control my blood pressure.

Brilliant. I had hoped for some more reports as I understand they do not have exhibition catalogues that one could purchase. A sign of the times. Bravo for staging the exhibitions and thank you PHENBY for your post.

Mr Cronkite was much more a representative of thinking America to alert Brits than almost all the American Presidents we heard on Radio and television. His distinctive voice, the content and the sense of gravitas he projected cushioned many of the irritations we thought were representative of American culture. There are not many that have followed in his footsteps. PS You may be surprised to know I am one of probably tens of thousands of Brits who daily read the Times on line. We have always been interest in the welfare of our American cousins and I can remember when I was a teenager being startled at a newspaper vendor in Piccadilly Circus some 50 years ago was selling the Trib and the Times .

To answer the first part of you question, I think possibly there is not much in translation to form an opinion about the cultural life of the first half of the 19th century. Copenhagen was at the centre of an important trading nation at the time of Auguste Bournonville and Norway was part of its Kingdom as were/had been parts of Germany, East Africa and the West Indies. It is difficult for very many people to appreciate the amount of Handel operas and music that has been played of late as they find it difficult to engage with the style. If you can't engage with Bournonvilles ballets it is not that they are weak or unsophisticated, I would suggest it is the inability to make the journey to meet the genre. Auguste Bournonville’s ballets are exceptionally sophisticated (not as described elsewhere) as was the choreographers background and as indeed was the great man was himself. The father of Auguste was the French born Antoine who had been born into a theatrical family who had studied with one of the greatest names of ballet history Jean Georges Noverre who had performed at Fontainebleau and has been called the creator of ballet d’action and world famous for his” Les Lettres sur La Danse et sur Les Ballets”. It was from this kind of background Antoine (described as beautiful as Apollo) was confirmed when he was appointed to premier danseur at the Royal Swedish Opera a post he would depart from following the assassination of Gustav III. From Sweden Auguste gained employment with the Royal Danish Ballet in Copenhagen. Here he was to dance in seminal works by Vincenzo Galeotti, (a pupil of Gasparo Angiolini) who had collaborated with Gluck at the Vienna Court theatre and spent some time as balletmaster at the St,Petersburg Imperial Theatres. Auguste was not just a scion of ballet history royal blood he was a scion of imperial ballet ballet history blood. Auguste Bournonville path to glory was not too dissimilar to Balanchine. Both, for dancer choreographers, had a privileged social backgrounds compared to most dancers. Both had a privileged artistic and historical background, Balanchine’s musical training by descent via Tchaikovsky, goes back to the Johannes Ockeghem in the 15th century. Bournonville’s ballets capture commonplace characters with a vivid reality in narrative works that achieve an economy of expression which is highly sophisticated. That is to say his characters are as real as those that appearing in Shakespeare plays. It takes the admiration of a genre, to be able to rise above critical reception of Bournonville’s sophistication which has not been tainted by familiarity and study of 20th century aesthetics. There has recently been a Bournonville revival in Copenhagen which although it is a new work look at, we are still far short of knowing a quarter of this mans ouevre to fully judge him. We measure Petipa’s unseen works because studies in English have been available for more than fifty years. This is not entirely the case of Bournonville. Galeotti was the starting point for Bournonville, as Petipa (who was musically trained) was for Balanchine. Ashton came from a distinctly upper middle class background and although not having the advantage of the Imperial School had distinguished Russian teachers and studied choreography with Massine and Nijinska. The answer Bart, is that the toffs have it. (TFIC) Was Bournonville a victim of the dramatic social, industrial and technical changes of the late 19th century and early 20th century as happened to Petipa? Has anyone counted recently the number of works by Balanchine that have not been revived? Were they just plain bad or unsophisticated? PS I have avoided dates as I am not at home to confirm them and have late made a correction thanks to Alexandra spotting an error in confusing names of Antoine and August. (ADDED) Truly I do know the difference.

Miss Hayden and Mr Flindt guested with the RB Touring Company at Covent Garden in the full length productions of "Ashton's " Sylvia" and "La Fill mal Gardee" .

Melissa Hayden appeared in London in Le Combat The Duel with both the NYCB and Ballet Theatre. I have been talking this morning to a friend who saw both performances said she was extraordinary with both companies. Sadly I only saw her in Sylvia and La Fille mal Gardee with Fleming Flindt. Ashton loved her I think because of her background in Russian training which showed.

Thanks Jane. I love the whole manner and expression of Acosta in supporting Madame Alonso in the last picture.

Thanks very much for posting this link.

I am sorry that you had that experience and I believe what you say is true. Miss Kirkland was a dancer that divided opinion and in my time, to keep with the era of this thread, there have been a number of leading female dancers some of whom had famous careers in America and elsewhere, that were definitely NIFM for many seriously knowledgeable and fair minded balletomanes.