Thalictum

The comments from Raines are revolting, but thank you, Cargill, for bringing them to our attention because I think Raines's dicta, via Kantor, are very much dominating Arts and Leisure, which has shrunk its dance coverage. These are dismal, dismal times for American mainstream media.

At the Kirov, Lilac was once danced frequently by Alla Osipenko and Inna Zubkovskaya -- you cannot get starrier than that.

Also, a coach, no matter how celebrated his or her dancing may have been, who wants you to do it their way right or wrong does more harm than good, in my opinion. Better to come to the role fresh than with restrictive parameters, perhaps. Perhaps not; maybe those parameters at least supply a structure, a foundation.

Alexandra you are so right about ABT; it was savaged during Baryshnikov's reign for a number of reasons; now it's as if the critics have simply decided they must support the company at all costs. And that's how artistic standards atrophy.

The self-evident truth to me is that those star talents carry with them sizeable egos, as do most if not all people at the top of their professions, and could conceivably be a threat to Martins' leadership. Once X is in the door, Martins may not feel he will be able to dispense with him/her when he wants to. They may grow roots.

Michael you said it perfectly. And let's not forget that Heather Watts is a contributing editor at Vanity Fair.

Why would you assume that's only "a small part" of Gottlieb's agenda?

The idea that Martins' text is loyal to Petipa "as we know it," is just a preposterous statment. There is hardly one bar's worth of enchainement that he hasn't fiddled with.

I have to take issue with Gottlieb's statement about the greatest Auroras being Fonteyn and Kolpakova. They were both wonderful, and he is of course entitled to his opinion, but it's an awfully reductive one. When making these type of statements, it helps to tell us just exactly from what pool of interpreters such a selection is made. Whom has he seen? "Everyone" is the implication, but that won't cut it and of course no one has seen "everyone." Furthermore, it's just a flat out statement on his part, without the slightest qualification or acknowledgment that his pronunciamento is subjective. And his comments on the Kirov restoration of Beauty being overlong are ludicrous. Don't tell us how much you love Beauty when what you really mean is you love Beauty highlights, or Beauty edited.

Marc, I'm not going to name names, because all the dancers are talented. And I didn't say that they should put a corps de ballet dancer in a leading role, although there ARE going to be corps dancers performing leading roles, because they are favorites. But the cadre of favorites extends beyond the international stars like Vishneva or Lopatkina, and there is a lot of miscasting and overcasting going on at this Festival. Just as you said this has been the policy for a while -- in fact, perhaps throughout the company's history. In fact it's true at every company. But for me it has reached critical mass at the Kirov, and I'm surprised that after the recent near-shakeup in the administration nobody seems to have learned his or her lesson. Yes, as you say, Zakharova's departure demonstrated the dangers of this approach -- she had been dancing the opening night of every ballet on the company's tours last year. At last year's Festival, one dancer had FOUR lead roles and others equally good had nothing. They are deliberately skewing casting on the basis of issues having nothing to do with talent or achievement, and, as you've noted before, that leads to enormous stress on the favorites, and a meager plate for a lot of others, as well as a less than full palette for the audience's enjoyment.

I don't have any problem with Vishneva as Aurora, and I'm glad too that Ayupova and Zhelonkina are dancing, as well as Amosova, who was also out in the wilderness for a while. But after being told the full casting of the Festival I decided not to go. Aside from the guest stars, the Maryinsky is basically using the Festival to promote a small cadre of home team favorites in every possible role, ones to which they are not suited as well as ones they are right for. This is at the expense of equally or more talented dancers who are not company pets. Don't they realize the world is watching and the prestige of the company is involved? Shouldn't the point of a big festival like this be to show the DEPTH of talent in the company? This restricted casting instead makes the rooster look anemic. I adore the Kirov dancers, but not only the favorites, and I hate to see talent suppressed.

What didn't you like about Tewsley's solo?

I think the reason for the Scherzo cancellations may very well have been that they weren't feeling up to it that day; each was thirty plus by that point and Farrell had a bad knee and perhaps didn't want to jump.

Also on that Glory of the Kirov tape is Osipenko dancing Alexidze's "Syrinx" solo to Debussy.

Part, Meunier, and Leiceca danced like a dream as the three Shades during one Met Bayadere last year.

Part is recovering from an injury, by the way.

Very well said, Alexandra. I think that emploi should be respected except when it becomes needlessly restrictive. We must also remember that emploi is always evolving; in the 1940s, short, relatively squat ballerinas like Olga Jordan and Feya Balabina danced Odette/Odile at the Kirov.

Franz or Colas yes; Desire no in my opinion; he hardly has the elegant port de bras needed. In fact, all his gestures look slightly pasted on. That is one department in which the Kirov-trained men are unsurpassed.

I saw Kowrowski's NYCB Swan Lake last spring and it was much improved from a year earlier. Let's give credit where it's probably due: the coaching she received from Kurgapkina and Lopatkina when she danced Swan Lake with the Kirov last March.

But if the Kirov devoted the rehearsal time needed for Etudes, Les Noces and Le Sacre they would undoubtedly do them very well indeed. One reason for the cancellation might be that Fadeyev and Sarafanov are both indisposed at the moment. They have done almost every Etudes. Merkuriev did one performance, I think.

Yes, this is another bait and switch by Bush and Co. to enable him to re-capture the spurious "Compassionate Conservative" mantle.

What's wrong with amplitude? What we have to guard against is overuse.

I found Double Feature dismaying. I will write more about it later. Stroman is incapable of investigating any movement genre in depth -- I find her an indictment of our culture today. She takes no risks, and her homogenized product reaps her fame and fortune.

It's interesting that current Russian male dancers like Scherbakov at the Kirov or Gudanov at the Bolshoi are able to generate enormous elevation with slim calves, thighs, etc. And the classes Baryshnikov took here were different and less heavy than what he'd taken in Russia, although Pushkin's classes at the Kirov changed after the NYCB visit to Russia in 1962.

He was not still a student; he graduated in 1966 and that competition was in 1969.