Hans

I believe the tilt they are referring to occurs at 1:51 and 1:53 of the Bojesen/Blangstrup video. Perhaps my favourite moments of that video are from there through 1:58, when she opens her arms and beams out radiantly at the audience. Sizova and Soloviev are two of my favourite artists, but it seems to me that Mariinsky and Bolshoi dancers frequently have trouble with Bournonville's style, particularly how soft and understated it is. Taken on its own terms, though, I think the Sizova/Soloviev performance is beautiful, even with the choreographic alterations. Edited to add: there is a similar step in this video of Evdokimova at 1:10, 1:14, and 1:18.

Thank you, gentlemen. Any way to describe the particular position of the legs (I imagine several varieties are possible for each?): 3:49 - Fouetté sauté en dedans: how to say his working leg is fully extended and pretty high from the hip? 4:05 - Pirouette en dedans: how to describe this particular flexion in his working knee, or alternately, the particular position of the working leg? 5:43 - Double tour en l'air: how to describe that the legs are straight, parallel and vertical (are all the tours executed this way? I doubt, but I don't know.)? Thanks. In each of these, he is essentially doing the standard form of the step, so I don't really see a need to specify, except perhaps to say that the fouetté sauté en dedans is croisé. He does the pirouette in retiré position, which is standard, and the tour en l'air in 5th position, also standard. One would generally only specify if there were a deviation from these--for example if the fouetté were at 45º instead of 90º, or if the pirouette were to be done in cou-de-pied instead of retiré position.

I just watched the Bojesen/Blangstrup performance that Helene linked to earlier in this thread (Bojesen is delightful--that soft port de bras combined with the speedy legs!) and noticed that Blangstrup does not do pirouette terminé en écarté devant in his 2nd variation but rather, from 4th, he does a quick little turn in plié and then a battement fondu at 90º in écarté devant.

3:43 - Yes, that is a sissonne 3:49 - Fouetté sauté en dedans 4:05 - Pirouette en dedans 5:43 - Double tour en l'air 6:11 - Pirouette terminé en écarté devant

I have just looked at the video on the ABT site, and there is a flaw in the execution! The dancer takes a small step out of 5th before doing the jeté, which is incorrect. If he started in pointe tendue devant, he would be justified in going through 4th. Very good eye, JerryS!

In jeté battu the working leg would be the one that does the initial dégagé. If you start in 5th position with the left leg in front, the right (working) leg does a dégagé to the side, then beats behind, and then in front of, the left (supporting) leg. Then when you land, the right leg becomes the supporting leg with the left leg in cou-de-pied derrière. It does get confusing when talking about a movement like jeté! Normally one speaks of working and supporting legs when one is more stationary. I agree with Paul that Vaganova's book is excellent, and you may also wish to look for Gail Grant's "Technical Manual and Dictionary of Ballet" which has just about every step there is! There is also Gretchen Ward Warren's "Classical Ballet Technique" which is more expensive but extensively illustrated.

It is a bit difficult to explain, and I don't have my ballet dictionaries with me at the moment, but basically the dancer raises his/her leg to 45º or 90º and moves the working foot in toward the supporting knee and back out again with the working toe tracing an oval shape in the air. It can be a bit difficult to see the "rond" from directly front sometimes. A very basic definition is that a sissonne is a jump that starts from two feet and lands on one, while a jeté is a jump that starts on one foot and lands on the other. So when he does sissonne, he starts in 5th position and finishes on his front leg with his back leg raised behind him (although in this case he has to bring it down quickly for the ballonné) and in the grand jeté, he brushes the front leg forward and jumps off the back leg onto the front leg (soaring beautifully through the air in between, of course!). I hope this helps.

0:41-44 - He does a grande sissonne en avant followed by a quick ballonné with the left leg and then steps into a grand jeté en avant 0:48 - Another grande sissonne en avant 0:52-54 - Double rond de jambe en l'air sauté 0:58 - Glissade, entrechat-cinq, glissade, jeté battu (if you want to get really specific, it is glissade derrière de coté sans changée, but that is quite a mouthful!) 1:07 - Pirouette en dehors

Altynai Asylmuratova. She is still one of my favourites.

NYCB has, as far as I know, more than one studio, so they could (in theory) hold several classes with different teachers--maybe a general warm-up class, men's and women's technique classes focusing on personal corrections and technical maintenance and development, and then a challenging classe de perfection at the same time, before rehearsals begin, and the dancers could choose what they need that day regardless of rank. Of course, this does not factor in things like paying more teachers and more pianists, or any other issues I may not be aware of.

There is a thread regarding the issue here: http://ballettalk.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=29912

Some NYCB dancers also take the advanced classes at SAB. They don't really get corrections there as the teachers are focused on the students, but it isn't as crowded. It's also an opportunity for the men and women to have classes appropriate for their technical needs.

I've heard of the company, but I've never seen a performance. A former teaching colleague danced one of the Shade solos in their 'La Bayadère'.

I believe several of our members watched Kirkland quite frequently in New York, and I hope they will post their thoughts as well.

Notice on WB's website: http://www.washingtonballet.org/about/arti.../johnGoding.htm I worked with Mr. Goding for several years in WB's performances of Mary Day's "Nutcracker". He was delightful on the stage and teaching company class. A very sad loss for Washington Ballet.

Anyone else watching? Dessay in particular sounds wonderful, IMO.

That's another one I'll be skipping. I haven't seen Nutcracker in years, and I couldn't be happier!

That would be great, Hans, but remember the conservative presenters. I'm afraid that we were spoiled with the recent Royal Ballet 3ple bill of imaginative offerings. Will we ever see anything like that again? Instead, it will most likely be Nutcracker Suite, Don Q highlights and a predictable Tharp (if we're lucky). A lot has changed in one year. I know, but if we don't ask for good ballet, we won't get it. I guess The Dream would be a little odd to do in January, but Les Patineurs would be perfect. I don't think they've brought that for a while.

I'd be happy to see Lilac Garden, On the Dnieper, The Dream...not all three on the same triple bill, though.

I got very excited when I saw the Sylvia photo, and seeing that they were bringing R&J was such a letdown. I won't be going to see them on this visit.

Didn't Wendy Whelan dance the Sugarplum Fairy variation on Letterman a while ago?

Didn't she mention that her contract said attending company class was optional? In that case, as long as she kept up her technique, I don't see why that should be counted against her, unless it was known that would be a problem. I've had contracts with ballet companies that stated company class was mandatory, so I don't think it's that difficult to stipulate if an AD wants the dancers to attend.

I am hopeful that I will get up to New York some time! I've been wanting to go for a while now. On another note, imagine if ABT did start programming more Ashton and Tudor. Combined with all the Balanchine and Robbins NYCB could perform, NY would truly have an embarrassment of choreographic riches!

I ended up not being able to go, so I am very thankful for all of these reviews! I have the Sylvia DVD with Bussell, but there is nothing like a live performance.

I understand, but that was another era, and even so, I still think it's unproductive. It makes more sense to me to say, "I wasn't really happy with how you were dancing this past season. You need to work on X, Y, and Z, and you have X amount of time to improve them or your contract will not be renewed/you won't be promoted/I won't recommend you for a raise/&c" (depending on how serious the issues are). There is no need to be brutal, just state the facts and be specific. That's how it has been in every day job I've had, and I was always under the impression that it would be illegal to fire me without a documented history of unsatisfactory performance and a chance to improve. I understand that in the ballet world one can be let go at any time, for any reason (unless one is a soloist or principal, apparently, which surprises me) but I still think it would help both dancer and AD to be clear about any problems and to give a reasonable amount of time to fix them. That way everyone knows what is going on. The dancer doesn't have to try to read the AD's mind to understand what s/he needs to work on, and the AD doesn't have to pray that the dancer just leaves before s/he has to fire him or her. And yes, I realise that taking a reasonable approach is not something that is likely to occur to many people in the ballet world, but I can dream!