Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Steve Keeley

Member
  • Posts

    78
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Steve Keeley

  1. Alexandra, if you'd ever heard me speak you would not have made a call as wrong as "Not a New Yorker"! I'm Manhattan born and raised. I'm also such a Balanchine fanatic that some people are surprised to learn I actually like anything else. I did not mean to imply that Farrell or any other Balanchine ballerinas were inferior to "classical" ballerinas; only that I don't use the same yardstick on them. To me, comparing Makarova to Farrell is almost meaningless. It's like asking if a coffee mug is better than a wine glass. Better for what purpose? I don't agree with your suggestion that we can compare dancers across time the way we can compare other artists. The score of Beethoven's 5th was not burned after it was first played; it is still around, and its structure and nuances can be compared to Mozart's 41st. Rembrandt did not reuse his canvases after one showing; they can still be seen, their brushstrokes examined. But Makarova and Dowell's performance in Swan Lake in October of 78 is gone for good. It exists only in my memory. I've watched them dance it for the Royal Ballet on video, as well as Makarova and Nagy at ABT, and as much as I enjoy those videos they do not give me the thrill that I got that night. Alas, I do agree that Bussell and Durante will never reach the heights of Sibley or Fonteyn because the creative talent isn't there to give them the proper settings. I think the quality of dancers is at an all-time high, but the craft of choreography is in the doldrums. (At least in ballet. The situation in Modern Dance may be different, but since all Modern looks dreary to me, I'm in no position to judge.)
  2. I've been mulling this one over since it appeared, trying to come up with an answer. But I can't answer the question as phrased. There are no current ballerinas I could rank with Makarova or Fonteyn or Farrell (although I wouldn't put Farrell in the same category as the other two; a dancer who is primarily a Balanchine ballerina is judged by different criteria in my book). One problem is that I am not comparing these dancers side-by-side. Today's dancers are being evaluated by what I see before my eyes; yesterday's dancers are being seen through the haze of memory. I was a different person when I saw them, and levels of appreciation have been added to my viewing since then. I can't watch a contemporary dancer with the same set of eyes that I wore when I saw Makarova. Another problem is that there is a sad lack of new, quality works being staged for the current generation. We can only see them in works where they are competing with the memory of the dancers we first saw in those works. The last major "new" work of any consequence, IMO, was Makarova's staging of "La Bayadere." It's difficult for a young dancer to shine in the lacklustre new works being created, which go in one eye and out the other. It also should be kept in mind that when we remember Fonteyn or Makarova, we are recalling an artist who had reached their maturity. Makarova was almost 40 when I saw her, and had the time to nail down her technique and hone her artistry and expressiveness to its peak. She was a finished product; today's young dancers are still learning. (It's a sad fact of ballet that by the time you've got it all right, it's time for you to get off the stage.) That being said, there are quite a few ballerinas today that are a joy to watch on their own terms. Darcey Bussell and Viviana Durante, two dancers with very different qualities, are at the top of my list. (Several people mentioned Assylmuratova. I've admired her since I first saw her on video in "Backstage at the Kirov," but can't forget how easily Bussell out-shone her in the "La Bayadere" video.) Susan Jaffe and Julie Kent also rank up there, as well as Nina Ananiashvili. On the Balanchine front, there are Helene Alexopolous, Wendy Whelan, Kyra Nichols, and Darci Kistler. For the future, I also have my eye on Riolama Lorenzo, who I've only seen in the corps at NYCB. She stood out there and shows promise (it helps that she's tall and beautiful and not so scrawny).
  3. People always talk about Tudor's "Lilac Garden," but that one left me cold. The Tudor ballet that I liked best (although I haven't seen many) was "Leaves are Fading." Watching this ballet was a special, magical experience; it took me completely out of the time and place I was in, and into it's own plane of existence where time has a different meaning.
×
×
  • Create New...