Hans

I don't know, I just watched the Alonso clips to refresh my memory, and I have to say I prefer Beriosova. The way Alonso slowed down the music to accommodate her pirouettes in her variation (the changes in the choreography could have been due to a lack of space) as well as her long preparation time for them signifies what was apparently more important to her. Maybe one really needed to see her live for her magnetism to come across.

How very sad. I remember him as an extremely kind man.

If a teacher tells you to pirouette with the working leg in retiré position without saying/demonstrating a position for the arms, it is usually safe to assume s/he expects 1st position. For pirouettes with the working leg in an open position (aka grands pirouettes) the arms would usually be held in Vaganova 3rd position if the leg is extended to the front or back and in 2nd or 3rd if the leg is held to the side. For a pirouette en dedans with the working leg in attitude derrière, often the arm that corresponds to the working leg is raised to 3rd position while the other is in 2nd. There are, of course, no hard and fast rules, but these arm positions are very commonly used for these types of pirouettes.

Hasn't "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" already been done in a version by Petipa called "Esmeralda"?

Children today still learn the Greek myths in school, and one might even be able to do an ancient Greek play as a ballet. I've noticed that opera seems to be a little more adventurous as far as plots go--we recently had "Margaret Garner" at NYCO, and there is one about Harvey Milk. There is (or soon will be) an opera about Erzsebet Bathory, written by one of her descendants, no less. Admittedly, opera uses words, so it's easier to get certain specific things across to the audience without using a story everyone already knows. I'm not saying the above operas are the artistic or box office equivalent of "Swan Lake," but they are at least new operas that people go to see/hear.

We could use a choreographer. I think the Greek myths would be an excellent place to start for a plot. They worked well for Graham, after all.

I wonder what the point of making statements such as "classical ballet is dead and shouldn't be performed" &c is. Obviously it isn't irrelevant or unpopular, as the classics sell quite well, and companies don't dance Petipa and Bournonville to the exclusion of other choreographers (just look at all the mini-NYCB's around the country). The old and new both seem to be doing just fine (even if many productions of the classics leave something to be desired, at least they are still performed) so I really don't understand the reasoning behind saying one or the other ought to go, or that they are mutually exclusive. It is all right to say something inflammatory in the name of "discussion" or "debate," but this particular debate has been going on since Isadora Duncan, and probably long before, and we still have both old and new ballet, so apparently we'd better learn to just live with them.

My uneducated opinion is that because modern dance is less demanding than ballet, it doesn't "filter" mediocrity as well as ballet. 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.

There are certain types of modern dance that are more about the movement and use of the body than the body itself. Graham technique (I never met the lady herself) is actually quite friendly to this concept (and the ballet world could stand to warm up to it a little itself, in some respects). I would think that modern dance would have an easier time changing in response to its audience, for one thing because there is no one modern technique the way there is one ballet technique (essentially) with many styles. A modern choreographer could theoretically do whatever s/he wants with movement, add multimedia, &c. So why haven't they done something to attract an audience? I think that perhaps the time has come for us to go back to narrative dance, at least for a while. With every popular book being turned into a movie, tv show, and/or musical, it seems as if stories are what people want. Once we've brought in an audience with a story as a pretext, they might find themselves enjoying the dance for itself, even without the plot.

Actually, the dancer's rhythm should change along with the music. The choices dancers have regarding choreography often depends on the company. At, for example, the Maryinsky, even principal dancers are usually told what to do. Western companies are less strict.

I think it works very well. As for dancers being lazy and unimaginative; most of the time ballet dancers are not allowed to choose which steps they will do.

You can't have a tattoo or unusual piercing (at least one that can't be covered) if you're going to be a ballet dancer, at least in one of the major companies. Other types of dance or smaller, less formal companies may be an exception, but my view is that if a choreographer wants a tattoo, that is what temporaries are for. I always thought that was a mole or birthmark. Regarding body hair, that is not something one chooses to have; it is there naturally, so I do not have a problem with it, although a close trim is usually a good idea, as that will usually keep the hair from being distracting onstage.

As a dancer, I don't think I would care much how the director acted in the audience (unless it was truly embarrassing) as long as s/he was good to work with in the studio.

I would bet that 2 is La Valse and 4 is perhaps Firebird? 3 sounds as if it could be Scotch Symphony.

Or better yet (because of her superior fioritura abilities and similar diva behavior) Angela Georghiu.

I am surprised to hear that there is no biography of Delibes!

I thought everyone on here ate smoked salmon on blinis.

Speaking of Rambert, is there a bio of her?

I take it the Sibley stove has nothing to do with the lovely Antoinette.

Yes, I think so, she does a developpé devant croisé, glissade, cabriole derrière in 1st arabesque.

I didn't vote because my favorite is not on here: the one danced by Terekhova on the video of the Kirov's Don Quixote. I remember hearing that it is the original variation; it is in 3/4 time, and it is much more fun to watch (and probably to perform) IMO than the harp variation.

Pierina Legnani and Maria (Marie) Taglioni, as well as the other famous Romantic ballerinas. And how about August Bournonville?

Marius Petipa!

That is interesting, rg. I wonder how much the choreography for that variation has changed over the years.

As with so much in ballet, yes.