Mel Johnson

However, it is worthwhile to consider that the use of male dancers (emploi) comes in waves. That is, long, tall dancers will be "fashionable" for a period, then the pendulum swings. Does the change in casting for Corñejo to include the "princes" combined with the near-simultaneous hiring of Simkin at ABT signal a change in casting for smaller dancers system-wide? Perhaps. And when that sort of thing happens, the rising tide lifts all boats. More work for everybody.

Must have been something in the zeitgeist in those years. Similar stories exist about Lillian Russell, Weber and Fields, David Belasco; Gilbert, Sullivan and the long-suffering Richard d'Oyly Carte. Edwin Booth complained of the vulgarity of acting in his time, and still the complaints go on, from an elder generation of show people, claiming that the younger generation "hasn't got it here!" (hand over heart) To which the younger generation says, "No, but we're close!" (hand over stomach)

It's poignant to remember that Balanchine was exploiting traditional "Americana", while at the same time, his work itself became Americana.

The advantage that the Petipa version has is compactness; it's a tighter show than the Bourmeister. The latter is problematical as it follows the 1877 score pretty much, and ends up with an hour of Act I, and an Act IV that seems like an afterthought. As a symphonist, Tchaikovsky did a great job, working pretty much in the dark about how to construct a ballet. As a ballet, the 1877 show is highly uneven.

Right. Chagall was in a bad way. He couldn't go home to Belarus, he couldn't go to Paris, he couldn't go to Spain, because as a Jew, he would have been handed over to the Nazis by collaborationists and fellow travelers. Massine was also on the lam from having associated with Socialists and Jews in the Ballets Russes. He used as a framework for the ballet the story of the same name by Alexander Pushkin. The good thing was that they both made it to the United States, where they could work together.

I don't think it's around anywhere today. It was a sort of visualization of Chagall's "village" paintings set to the Tchaikovsky Trio in a Minor. My teacher performed in it. He said it was very melodramatic and Chagall personally painted many of the costumes himself, making them very fragile.

Oh, I don't know. Ballets in that era had stories as framework for dances, and the mime was integrated far more with the variations. "Le Diable Boiteux" still has bits and pieces of the music surviving in sheet music form which sometimes turn up in class music. They seem no different from other ballet music of the period. Just as a musical exercise, it could be fun to have someone try a "revival".

My nominee for Don't Revive is "Square Deal", which William Forsythe set on the Joffrey. It became famous as "the ballet you love to hate". I cheered it when it opened, but more as a proponent of Free Speech against all the booing.

That depends on the negotiation of a company's specific General Contract. Usually, it's as I've described in the "plain vanilla" state, but both sides may add stuff as long as the other side agrees that it's a good idea. Often there's a "THE COMPANY may employ no fewer than X dancers, nor more than X+Y." clause. Specific rank structure is left to negotiation. A director may want to leave himself a "bail-out" option. Or the union could insist on it. It depends on what's at issue in a given company over a given time.

That's partially a function of union requirements for contract renewal time in the US. I believe that "boilerplate" is that dancers must be informed by March 25 if their contracts for the upcoming performing year are not to be renewed. Then contracts can be written to commence June 1 for all the rest. Dancers coming from outside the US may have other forces working on their initial contracts.

Barnes doesn't like "Fall River Legend". He wrote, "It's a great vehicle, but so is a subway car!"

Ah, that's right, thanks. I remember now that the MacMillan version came out about the same time that Mr. Joffrey died. Maybe that's why it sticks in my memory and the Skeaping doesn't.

It might be well to recall that the first full-length ABT Beauty was a MacMillan staging, he having got the beta version out of the way in 1973. If I recall correctly, it had the Messel designs.

Doug and Paul are right about the mime. The curtain opens on the first act with the waltz dancers dancing around three women dressed in black, and knitting like mad while they do pas de bourrées fleurets. Cattalabutte comes on, begins to lecture the women about the spinning ban (but they're knitting, not spinning). Then the king and queen enter with the princes, and Cattalabutte does the best he can about hiding the women behind the tails of his coat. The King finds them and confiscates the yarn and needles. He then mimes "I" "you" "hate", "you" "die". The Princes try to intercede for the women, but the King refuses. But when the Queen asks for their lives, he relents. This exchange is a more benign version of the mime between the Fairies and Carabosse in the Prologue. It demonstrates the magnanimity of an Absolute Monarch vs. the nastiness of an old Earthmother Fairy who is all bent out of shape because she wasn't invited to the Christening.

Probably the best-known setting of it was by Kurt Jooss.

There's the knife-edge that productions have to walk. It has to be lavish, it has to be magic, it has to be a fairy tale, in fact, it has to be so many things, I can understand why Ismene Brown feels that it's almost like a religious experience. I don't necessarily agree 100%, but I certainly can understand it! And now on to another kind of experience. I have to go make my supper. We can pick this up another time, and perhaps let others in on the discussion, while we're at it!

Not only was it a tribute to Louis, but also to any Tsar who happened to be by at the time! Check out the article. I went to some pains to make sure I had included the relevant details of the original production, but never got to go further than that. Perhaps if I retire.

As long as it hews close to the line that the ballet is not only a fairy tale, but a hymn to autocracy (see Louis XIV, the Tsars). Sumptuous it must be.

Here's a little something you may find entertaining. It's a multi-part article I wrote a long time ago for our "mother" site, Ballet Alert! Some of the sections have aged out, but most of it's there. Enjoy.

http://www.balletalert.com/ballets/Petipa/...ty/sleeping.htm

I've seen all of the RB Beauty productions since 1963.

And as an intention, the Messel "remake" was not a bad idea. It seems to want in execution, though. It lacks the vividness of the original, although I will admit that some of my memories may be gilded with the stuff of recalled youth!

I think that we're ALL affected by the first Beauty that we see. My first Aurora was Merle Park. Everybody had to compete with my image of her, and few could quite come up to her. Fonteyn and Sibley, Beriosova and Nerina, on good days. I think that old production is permanently etched on the inside of my skull.

Well, the Dowell production has left me with a seemingly permanent hangover from the sets, and the two very worst headgears I recall seeing sketches or photos thereof, as well as performance shots include a very large flopped hat for the European (read British) Prince in Act I, which must have interfered horribly with his partnering in the Rose Adagio (besides making him look like Captain Hook), and the thing worn by Florestan in the pas de trois in the wedding scene. It looked like he had a chicken sitting on his head!

Now, isn't this a pleasant dialogue? Just the sort of thing this board was created to induce!

In retrospect, far worse things have happened to the poor show since, and we should have been grateful to the '68 production for sparing us even greater enormities. Things probably could have been worked out. After all, they had been for the Messel. Some of the more ghastly hats and headpieces were scrapped by the time I first saw it at the "Old" Metropolitan Opera House!

I was thinking of the London Central Public Library in Dundas Street, but I'll bet that a better bet would be at the British Library! They seem to have EVERYTHING there!

And yes, I did see the production live at the "New" Metropolitan Opera House in Lincoln Center.

No, I believe that version was aired while I was on active duty in the Air Force, and the dayroom television was not mine to command. By the time I got out, the ballet had gone to another production.

The next time you're up to London, I would inquire at the main library. University libraries may also be of some help here.

Anything by Ashton is so strong, that anyone undertaking a similar dance would have his or her work cut out for them. One of the reasons I like Wheeldon is that he's "Ashtonian", but up against actual Ashton, that's not enough. He needs to learn more, and the only way he can do that is to make more dances.

Even if videos of productions don't make it to commercial release, they can often be found in larger libraries' performing arts collections. Usually not for circulation, though.

Yes, exactly that place. I love it, too. A lot of the "Ashton" versions were actually under the general supervision of Ninette de Valois, and "Madam" would take credit for it. It was part of the ongoing feud between those two. One thing is certain, though, the Waltz in Act I is pretty much Ashton's, the way it's done to this day. The original was notated, but it had something like 72 dancers in it, with students and additional props, like step units! Bring back vaudeville!