Hans

I think it is fantastic that they want to expose more people to classical music and dance, and that they want to give young girls a positive self image. But must they mangle Swan Lake's story line and choreography to do it? There must be another way, preferably without involving Peter Martins' choreography:rolleyes: :eek:.

I know they were filmed dancing Giselle together with Alonso's husband as Hilarion and her daughter in the corps.

Currently, Plissetski is the main ballet teacher at Rudra. He also guest teaches about once/year at SAB.

There seem to be a great many people who think they can improve on Petipa. I think Balanchine said, as an excuse for changing around the classics, that old paintings have their cracks fixed (or something to that effect). It seems to me that people disagree with what the "cracks" in Petipa's ballets are just as much as they disagree on how to "fix" them. I don't think the test of a choreographer is his "range," whatever one means by it. One might choreograph good ballets in many styles but never once produce something as perfect as "Sleeping Beauty" whether they took two minutes or four acts. I agree that people all have different criteria for judging choreography--ie, that they will give more "points" to different aspects of a ballet. But what if we didn't "weight" each aspect and instead allotted each one the same number of points? We would probably have to exclude such qualities as decor because a choreographer cannot necessarily always control them, and they can be changed over time. The other aspects, though, like musicality, are too vague. Whether or not a choreographer is musical is a matter of opinion.

I would sit in the front row of the lowest balcony. From there, one can still see the patterns and "big picture" but also the facial expressions of the principals.

It might perhaps be helpful for NYCB to perform a good full-length Swan Lake every now and then, but that ballet is really the domain of other companies. I think NYCB should focus on performing its own repertoire well, though the occasional reminder of a really good, solid version of Sleeping Beauty and/or Swan Lake might help them remember where their style comes from. I voted "no" because I thought the question referred to Martins' Swan Lake. It puzzles me that his production is still being performed. However, I'd still vote "no" except to the Balanchine version, even though it isn't to my taste. As for your other questions, I can't say whether or not Martins' production is improving, but I don't think dancing it is good for either the dancers or the audience. Then there's the question of whether or not it would be enjoyable for the audience to watch NYCB perform a real Swan Lake. I imagine it would probably just look like an unfortunate rendering of a good production done better by other companies. I guess you could say the same thing about Balanchine being done by companies not trained in his style, but there would be some historical interest in watching the Maryinsky perform "Diamonds" and "Ballet Imperial" and Paris Opéra dancing "Palais de Cristal," whereas seeing NYCB dance Petipa is sort of like watching Svetlana Zakharova dance the reconstructed "Sleeping Beauty."

Now if only we could make the Jester die.

His last paragraph is offensive. Is Balanchine the only good choreographer in the world? Or perhaps he thinks there's something wrong with people who don't believe Balanchine was the greatest choreographer ever. The idea that Balanchine would "fix" what is "wrong" with French ballet is small-minded and short-sighted.

Thank you, Estelle; I will look for that tape, though I don't think I'll be very likely to find it anywhere very nearby--my town's public library system is not the greatest.

I'm not sure that picture is an oversplit--it looks to me as if her front leg is very hyperextended and her back leg is in attitude. My problem with that photo is her arms, which are badly placed and tense. Now here's an oversplit.

Well, if male dancers are included as well, Nureyev comes to mind. Also, Viktor Baranov has particularly beautiful lines and a wonderfully light, soaring jump.

Thank you for the links, Dale and Manhattnik--I've actually been wanting to see the Soloviev and Komleva pas de deux for quite some time, as I didn't know it was commercially available. And I'm always happy to watch Platel . Alexandra, if it were a more choreographically important pas de deux like Sleeping Beauty or Giselle, I would worry about that more, but since I'm only dancing the variation and it's such a "gala" piece, I'm not as worried about invoking the wrath of the Ballet Gods.

I decided not to add this onto the already unwieldy "Variations" thread, though it could easily go there. I am going to be dancing the variation from "Grand Pas Classique" in June and wanted to ask about different versions of it. I've seen the version with Sylvie Guillem and Manuel Legris (the tape of them at the Hans Christian Anderson awards) and wondered if there were any other versions out there--perhaps a more Russian one...? I don't know how much the choreography changes from one dancer to another, but I imagine that in a gala piece like GPC, it probably gets changed around quite a bit.

Carbro, I looked at my tape of the Royal Ballet's "La Bayadere" and they perform the movement you describe, so it doesn't seem to be an addition. Couldn't find my Kirov tape to check it against, though.

As much as I don't like her dancing in other ways, Darcey Bussell has a wonderful grand jeté--a very strong grand battement with the front leg so that the resulting jump is huge. I have heard Lupe Serrano was also quite a jumper. However, the grand prize for me definitely goes to Sizova, who flew through the air like a spirit, and with perfect port de bras.

That is a matter of opinion, citibob. I was taught that the point of a jump is to...well...jump. While one does move through a certain position in a jump, the point is not to reach a split; the point is to fly. Certain dancers who do not have large jumps can create the illusion of jumping higher than they really are by extending their legs farther apart if necessary. The differences between grand jeté and grand jeté pas de chat are differences in the quality of movement. The step Cojocaru is performing in that photograph is probably grand jeté pas de chat, as Makarova's staging does not include a grand jeté for Nikiya while she is wearing that costume. As for oversplits in the classics, I say don't do them. Even 180 degrees is going rather too far for me, especially as the dancer usually loses the height and quality of the jump when trying to split his/her legs as far as possible.

Great question! For me, it depends on the ballet and whether or not I know how the dancers are trained. If I'm watching a Balanchine ballet at NYCB, I watch feet and legs. If I'm watching Petipa with any company, I tend to look more at the entire body, and at the composition of everyone onstage. During Chopiniana, I watch upper bodies. I think perhaps I watch what the choreographer focuses on most, although with some current choreographers, I don't know where to look (away, perhaps?;)).

Actually, dirac, I had a thought very similar to that one just after I posted. Yes, it can be interesting to play around with details like time and place--it can even show us new things about the work or help it seem more relevant to newcomers. It's when they twist the work itself around that causes problems (as I'm sure you already know ). I like some unusual productions--I saw a Rigoletto set in the thirties once that worked pretty well, and I've wanted to see DTH's "Creole Giselle" for a long time now. It helps to have a director who knows how far is too far to stretch the classics.

Because Spain is where Don Giovanni lives, isn't it? Ed, it sounds like opera has the same problem with "updated" productions that ballet does. Seems to go across all the live art forms.

You are correct on both points, dirac:).

I know exactly what you mean, Old Fashioned. Once when I went on a long bus trip with a professional ballet school I attended, the choices were a bootleg copy of whatever new Star Trek movie had just come out or Batman. It's not that I think we had to watch nothing but ballet (some of us did on our own, in our rooms), but the choice of a good movie (ie something culturally enriching, or at least interesting) would have been nice, rather than pop drivel.

I agree, balletowoman. It does not sound like a concept that would help anyone be productive. I think Switzerland has something similar...but I'm pretty sure they haven't given it a name (probably because it would have to be translated into four languages). I wonder if this has anything to do with the relatively high suicide rates in Denmark, Switzerland, Japan.... In the US, we're raised to think everyone (theoretically) has an equal chance at doing everything. It's not really true, of course, but I think the idea is that everyone can make full use of his/her own talents. Unfortunately, stage parents sometimes don't see it this way, and they think their little child can be a ballerina just by going to the neighborhood school. What about England and France? I haven't been to either country, but my French friends tell me there is more of a focus on the individual in France, while I've heard that Italy is more family-centric. How does this affect art? It's said that in pop or rock music, solo artists are more popular than groups. True?

Another question, just as important: Does anyone have the time to do all that work!? ;)

Some dancers do get degrees by taking one class at a time, which is usually all they have time for. I don't know what they usually get degrees in, though. I know many dancers who are not interested in any other arts, possibly because they don't know anything about them. From my experience, though, the dancers who will pick up a book or listen to an aria are few. I believe some of this has to do with their education--the schools I went to didn't really have much in the way of serious music classes or anything except basic academics and ballet (and sometimes Pilates). However, when I finally went to a school in which we were expected to excel in classes comprising many arts, we students went to the opera, museums, &c because that was what we were learning about in our classes, so we were interested. It was very different from the usual ballet school setting of dance, dance, dance.

I agree with all that has been written here. I'd also like to point out that many people state that ballet is becoming more "technical," which in my opinion is not true. A high extension is not a display of technique; it is a display of natural (sometimes unnatural) flexibility. Dancers now seem to focus less on good technique (ie moving properly) and more on extreme physical features, such as very arched or pronated feet or high extensions or hyperextended knees. The sooner people realize that dancing on their knuckles and kicking themselves in the head is not technique of any sort--except "bad"--the better. It is very interesting to read through "Basic Principles of Classical Ballet" and note that when Vaganova was writing it, a low arch was considered far more suitable for pointe work than a high arch, as the low-arched foot tends to be stronger. The focus wasn't so much on the aesthetic properties of the foot as it was on the strength and suitability of the foot for dancing. Same with extensions. While 90-degree extensions were common, 135 degrees was considered high. "A la seconde" was a position; "battement developpé" was a movement.