Hans

I assume you are referring to the coda of Nikiya's slow dance in the betrothal scene--Asylmuratova is another long-limbed (although not tall) ballerina, so I don't think it's a problem with body type.

Rosa, thank you so much!

Interesting take on the Russians and Danes (of course it is hard to lump all Russian dancers into one group since there are many styles of ballet within Russia). I would not say that either emphasizes a particular part of the body but rather that they use them in a different way than perhaps some of us are used to seeing.

Since the 19th century, or perhaps even before, it has not been unusual to alter virtuoso steps to suit the dancer (Maya Plisetskaya and other ballerinas have chosen to skip Odile's fouettés, for example). However, omitting entire variations is not normal, although I have seen it done in the past at galas.

Yes, it's called Fall River Legend, choreographed by Agnes de Mille. It is still in active repertoire, though (as far as I know).

This might seem like a stupid question, but are you referring to tours en l'air or pirouettes? I didn't see the performance, but I'll take quality over quantity any day.

Ballet certainly doesn't stunt your growth.

I wonder if Terpsichore's Captives is the film that I saw a bit of while I was in Switzerland--it centered around a ballet student who wanted to play the violin, but her mother had made her stay in ballet school. Her teacher appeared to be, frankly, abusive.

I must admit that I am curious as to whether anyone alive today has actually seen the original choreography for "The Devil on Two Sticks."

atm711, I had no idea Asylmuratova danced T&V--please tell me more!

I have been an advocate of less pointework in ballet for some time now, and here's why, in no particular order: 1. Having to dance en pointe limits possibilities for female dancers who may be very talented in every other way but simply don't have feet and ankles that are flexible enough to allow them to stand sur les pointes. 2. Pointe shoes ruin a dancer's jump, making it not just lower but also more noisy, no matter how well the feet are used during the takeoff and landing. 3. Pointework encourages/allows choreographers to rely on (neo)classical partnering, with the man standing behind the woman either supporting or manipulating her, rather than allowing the woman to dance for herself and freeing up the man to do the same. 4. Because modern pointe shoes are basically designed with only the idea of being sur les pointes in mind (thereby allowing the dancer to perform Petipa and Balanchine ballets) it is more difficult to perform Romantic and Bournonville ballets. Not only do these ballets use more jumps (see above) but also the necessary thickness and narrowness of the shank make it harder to perform an unsupported adagio, of which Romantic ballets make more use. The dancer may be very strong and stable, but when she is standing on what is essentially a tiny balance beam in her shoe, wobbles are inevitable. 5. Too often, pointe is used as a foot-strengthening/posture tool. While it is true that pointework makes your feet stronger and that if you are not standing properly you cannot stay en pointe, both of these qualities must already be in place before starting pointe--otherwise there is a greater risk of injury. Learning to perform various steps on demi-pointe has the same strengthening effect with a much lower injury risk. I am not saying that pointework should be eliminated from ballet or that dancers should go back to wearing glorified technique shoes that do not properly support their feet. (Well, maybe a slightly softer shoe could be made for Romantic ballets that require more jumps and less pointe.) But as ballet moves forward, I think it is time to stop relying on what is essentially a "trick" and start focusing on developing movement that allows women to have the same freedom of movement as men. I feel similarly about lifts--when used well they are beautiful and effective, but too often they are merely a substitute for dancing, not to mention that they are often used as an excuse to keep women thin. The fact that it is not actually necessary for a woman to be particularly thin to be lifted has not silenced this reasoning.

I watched Martine Van Hamel coach Ashley Tuttle in this scene, and she mentioned the strings that carbro wrote about. Not sure about the different wings/bodice, although that sounds plausible, as Van Hamel said every now and then a string would break and a wing would come off too early!

Yes, I only started watching NYCB in 1998, so I can only comment on what's been done since then.

Jack, I saw NYCB dance Symphony in C several years ago at NYST and more recently here at the Kennedy Center with Abi Stafford, Wendy Whelan, Sterling Hyltin, and Ashley Bouder. I think it is interesting to read about dancers not being supposed to act in Balanchine because it appears to me that NYCB does it all the time. During NYCB's latest visit to DC, I actually had to stifle laughter throughout a good bit of the performance as the acting was so overdone, especially in Serenade (which is pretty melodramatic even without added acting). This particular video is not clear enough for me to compare, but generally I find the Maryinsky to be pretty restrained as far as that sort of thing goes.

Not that I'm aware of. Makhalina makes a very beautiful Odette and a striking Odile--she has a strong, beautiful technique and an appropriate sense of what she ought to convey. She just doesn't always quite get to the point of actually conveying it. I have this video, and I really enjoy it, so I am not at all trying to disparage Makhalina, it is just that as far as acting goes, I prefer other dancers (such as Makarova).

IMO, best performance of Symphony in C I've ever seen. And yes, I've seen NYCB live, and yes, it was a good cast. This is fantastic. My only wish is that Balanchine had the resources to use a larger male corps, as the Maryinsky could deploy theirs to excellent effect.

Can't say I'm a fan of Osipova's tacky approach, although given her age at the time, I suppose I must blame her coaches. Not so big on Letestu either, but I enjoy Tamara Rojo's interpretation. The dramatic flair is there but not to the point of excess, and she uses her technique in service of the variation, not the other way 'round. What really interests me, though, is the idea of taking a variation out of context and turning it into something else entirely--is that really a good idea, and what does it do to the variation? The music of this Esmeralda variation implies something dramatic and mysterious. Does "abstract, pure, and innocent" work with that? I recall that in character dance classes, my teacher would tell us that when we did a gypsy-style dance, we had to do it with pure emotion, as if no one was watching and that even if someone was, we didn't care what we looked like. Thus, although one must always be beautiful in ballet, I feel that during this variation, as classical as it is, one must dance with a bit of abandon, not kicking oneself in the head because it pleases the audience but rather with an energy that reaches to the highest balcony and beyond. Salenko's dancing is very beautiful, and I would love to see more of her, but this particular video leaves something to be desired, in my opinion. I will say that as it seems to be a rehearsal rather than a performance, I cannot entirely fault her for not being very dramatic.

Well in that case I wish she would dance it more like Esmeralda and less like Aurora. Still, her technique is quite beautiful and very impressive. Also, this does not appear to be a performance to me--it looks more like a stage rehearsal given that she is wearing little warm-up shorts.

Beautifully done, very tasteful. If she were a professional dancer I would wish for a lot more "gypsy" flavor--it was rather careful for my taste, but appropriate for a student.

Actually, Lezhnina is in the Act I pas de trois on the Swan Lake video. I like both of these, but while I find Makhalina to be lovely in the role, she is not moving.

I never had the chance to see Zyupova live, and now I never will. She remains one of my favorite dancers to watch on video.

I had the privilege of taking one of Michael's open classes at ADI in addition to conversing with him on BT. It was a great pleasure to have met him.

Honestly, I mostly watch the tape of Makarova's "Bayadère" for Asylmuratova's performance. For everything else, it's the Maryinsky, although I really enjoy Platel's dancing as Gamzatti, too.

I am quite curious to hear what more people on BT think of Tudor--we have a large Balanchine-friendly population, and Tudor seems to often be seen as Balanchine's opposite, perhaps along the lines of Martha Graham but with ballet. I have unfortunately not had the opportunity to see much Tudor, and so I wish that his works would at least be revived for film if ballet companies are not going to perform them anymore. Of course film is not a substitute for continuous performance, but it is better than nothing.

Béjart. Royal or Royal Danish?