Alexandra

Just posting a supportive "I hope there will be some answers to Veronica's very good question!" Lots of views of this thread, but no opinions. I'd like to read them

Jane, it's my understanding that there's a mandatory retirement age of 65, and I think six years would put Mason passed that. I'd be surprised if any board kept an Acting in for more than a year. If they want her to direct the company, they would appoint her, I think. I think there's going to be a lot of speculation about who's going to get the job, and when, and some of it will be speculation and some of it hopes, and some of it disinformation There's an article in today's Guardian, by Judith Makrell, that sums up the artistic situation and puts things in perspective. Dance of Destruction

This classic from China's Cultural Revolution played a one night stand at George Mason University here in Northern Virginia Saturday night, and since it's just starting out on a 46-city tour (!!!!!) I thought it worth posting. I was very glad I saw this ballet. I thought it would be a curiosity -- and it is -- but the company is very appealing and the work got a standing ovation here. I reviewed it here: From China, an Engaging Party Line I'd love to see comments on the ballet as it wends its way around the country -- what was the audience reaction, what was your reaction, etc. Did anyone go here Saturday night?

There's an interesting thread about this performance on Ballet.co, including a summary (by Jane Simpson) of Peter Boal's remarks in a post-performance Q and A. http://www.danze.co.uk/dcforum/happening/3034.html

Thanks, ronny. You can quote anything anybody posts here, as long as you say who said it first -- just like in real life I thought of several others: In America, Peter Anastos, and in Europe, David Bintley and Heinz Spoerli. Not forgetting Roland Petit.

I think there's a link between larger than life behavior offstage and on, not only because, as mbjerk points out, it puts dance in the public eye, but because the big classical ballets, especially, need larger than life dancers to bring those roles to life. Doing crotch shots for Vogue, though, does seem to be a bit more "look at me! me! me!", superficial attention-geting behavior than the real thing. When Nureyev threw that plate of spaghetti, it was from the heart

Not funny, Manhattnik. What was once condoned is not acceptable today -- and never should be, from a female perspective. (I'd also argue that marrying one's muses is not treating the corps like a harem.)

I like the hero/Protas analogy One wouldn't want to say that relatives or advocates should have no standing, because one would want great art to have an advocate. On the other hand, one doesn't want someone with a vested interest in one body of work to have undue influence. I agree, too, dirac, with what you wrote about how to handle the sexual allegations. I put up my comment in the post above because I'd quoted that bit from the newspaper article not to spark discussion of whether or not IT happened and who was involved or not involved, but because the sentence about ballet master behavior could be discussed in the abstract.

This is a question where definitions become a problem, I think. If you mean something like "Swan Lake" or "Sleeping Beauty," no. But there are a lot of contemporary story ballets -- "Merry Widow," at least Ben Stevenson's "Dracula" that are technically classical, I think. I haven't seen them, but descriptions of several of the "Madame Butterflies" make them sound like classical ballets. They've been successful in the sense that they're in repertory and have good houses; it's to early to tell how long they'll last. But I don't think they're very good. And by that, I mean they're simplistic in both theme and choreography, not very imaginative, etc. They're the kinds of ballets that, I imagine, a Petipa would insert some passages of more sophisticated choreography and add 100 years or so to their life span. There are also ballets by people like Peter Martins, Kent Stowell, Helgi Tomasson, which are sometimes referred to, unkindly, as "Son of Balanchine" ballets, by which people mean that they use Balanchine rules but are more derivative than original. There are a lot of classical and neoclassical ballets being made for schools -- read Dance Teacher Now and you'll be surprised how many. Both story ballets and abstract works. But they're looked on as training tools, it seems, and don't go into general repertory. Other nominations?

I thought you'd like this one But the idea that if one hires a "heterosexual male," the company automatically becomes his harem and the female dancers should realize this and behave accordingly is absolutely outrageous. I should add that I picked this sentence out for its content, divorced from the Royal Ballet case. There are whispers of impropriety that have been denied, and no one has spoken of them on the record, which makes them unconfirmed rumors. I'm not trying to discuss that aspect of the issue. Another point, regarding Ismene Brown's report that Lady MacMillan intervened. What do you think of that? On the one hand, perhaps a good thing, that someone is speaking up for a body of work. On the other, how much power does she/should she have?

My absolutely favorite quote so far is this one, published in The Australian: The article is quite interesting, with detals of the final meeting, contract issues, and several quotes from choreographers on the obligations and problems of running a company with a history. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/commo...5E16953,00.html

Geraldine Chaplin, Leslie Caron. Audrey Hepburn, Sean Connery. (The latter, I read, took lessons when he first came to London to improve his posture.)

Ismene Brown gets to the bottom of things in the Telegraph: Double whammy that toppled ballet boss

Thanks, Nan. My Cunningham videos are old, and taped off TV. I didn't realize there was commercially available material.

Thanks for that information about Monica Mason, Brendan. I'd be surprised if the new director were not given a hand in choosing repertory. He/she can be brought in as a consultant the season before for things like this, and I think that's the way it's generally done. It's nice to think that we can count on the powers that be at Covent Garden to make a slow, reasoned choice

Thank you very much for posting this, Brendan. Very interesting reading. I'm struck by Brown's comments about the problems with the repertory. I think she says it quite succinctly. Those interested in this issue will want to check today's Links threads, which have a lot of articles from the NYTimes, British, and Australian papers. I'd also lilke to add a word about "press bashing." I think this is partly a misunderstanding about the way the press operates, and I think it's unfair. First off, there's no "the press." There's no gang of people who have a meeting and say, "Right. Let's get that Aussie outsider and tell him who's boss." That's nonsense. "The press" is a collection of individuals who often make a point of never talking to each other so that there is no influence. The worst thing that can happen to a writer is that you have what you think is a brilliant, original thought, and hear someone else say the same thing at intermission. If you print it, he'll think you stole it from him, and vice versa. Second, most people, even the most avid balletgoers, don't have access to the same kind of background information that writers do, and/or often aren't interested in it -- why should they care about the repertory record that X had two companies ago in the 1980s? It doesn't matter unless or until there's a crisis in one's home company. But think of it in the political context. Mr. Fish, the man nominated to be head of the Environmental Protection Agency, say, is on record as saying there are already too many trees, and that laws protecting the environment are death to big business. He's a lumber company executive. You are an environmentalist -- or you're completely neutral on the issue, but you do have a vague idea that the purpose of the Environmental Protection Agency is to protect the environment. You read his statements, look at his background, and you say, "Hey! Wait a minute here! This is a bad appointment!!!" And he takes office and begins doing exactly what he said he would do -- cut down lots of trees, and propose the repeal of the Clean Water Act. When that falls through, he simply stops enforcing water safety regulations. You report on all of this, action by action. Are you Fish bashing? Are you not giving him a fair chance? Did you make up your mind beforehand and are just writing things so that you look smart? No. You've done your homework and are reporting on what is happening. If environmentalism doesn't work for you, try this one. You're a liberal and the head of Health and Human Services says, "The poor are poor through their own fault. Get a job." Or you're a conservative who is concerned about the country's defenses and is alarmed by the new Secretary of Defense who says he's going to bring the army into the future and then begins to cancel contract after contract for new weapons and closes bases. Point being, there's a difference between researching something, understanding the whole picture (or trying to) and seeing where each piece of the puzzle fits into that picture and then writing about it, and feeling cross one morning and deciding to go out and "bash" somebody. The purpose of the press, if it has one, is to sound the alarm while there are still trees. I admire the British critics for speaking their minds -- something everyone who has yet responded on the thread "What should a hometown critic do?" has advocated, by the way [And these are overstated analogies, of course. I don't mean to suggest that Mr. Stretton's situation was as stark as my analogies.]

Oh, GWTW, you've hit on the Great Dance Dilemma!! It's sometimes heartbreaking to read about performances one can't see! I'm sorry the company canceled performances there. And with Cunningham, there's little on video as consolation.

Kate! You're going to the ballet!!! That's great -- I look forward to all of you reporting on this one

Here's a link to the discussion on ballet.co, including a transcript of a radio interview with Sir Colin Southgate, who gives the official position, shall we say, and Ismene Brown, who has a few things to say about that THANK YOU, BRENDAN McCARTHY! The transcript is many posts down, but the whole thread will be of interest to those reading this thread. http://www.danze.co.uk/dcforum/happening/3035.html

Thanks to ballet.co.uk for this link, from an Australian paper that says that Stretton was fired: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/commo...55E2702,00.html

I think this is such an important point. There is a dilemma here -- I'd go for year-end summaries rather than season preview pieces, personally. I think it's more fair to take the "The season just past raises grave concerns" approach than starting out the season saying, "Well, what have we here. Boring, boring, boring," or whatever. If one takes the latter approach, and then writes "The season opener of Company X was lackluster, with one dull piece after another," you'll be accused of having made up your mind in advance. (Which is true, in a way, but if you know the works, it won't be a surprise that they're boring!) I can imagine, though, that there are situations that present difficulties. What would a critic in Miami do if s/he did not think that having a repertory dominated by Balanchine ballets was the way to develop a company? What would you do if you were in Houston and couldn't stand Ben Stevenson's ballets, etc. mbjerk, thank you for this: "Finally, a critic must support the art and its success, but remain true to the art form and its standards." Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. (Personally, btw, I'm of the "be honest" persuasion. If you think every new work is a misguided choice, that the casting is off, that the ballets are not shown to their best advantage, and/or that talented dancers are languishing, then you must say so, even if you have to say it four or five times a year.)

There may well be age and/or gender bias -- I say "may"; I don't know. But often assistant directors don't make good directors. (I have no opinion on Ms. Mason; I'm not trying to say she would not be a good director. I don't know anything about her except as a dancer.)

I don't know all the likely candidates, so I can't answer with a name, but if I were on the search committee I would want someone who: 1. ...was trained by and grew up in the Royal Ballet, who recognizes and respects the national character of the company and plans to build on the past. 2. ... will follow Ninette De Valois's precepts, that the repertory should consist of: the classics, contemporary classics, national works, and novelties (by which she meant new works that may not become classics, but which are needed to stimulate the dancers and provide a diversion for the audience). Even distribution of these. 3. ....will actively encourage new classical choreography. Who wants to bring ballet into the future -- but to do it from within ballet, not from without. London already has several excellent contemporary dance companies. It needs a ballet company. 4. ....can develop dancers, not just pick a few stars and put them in everything, but make the company look like a company again, with everyone involved, every dancer having a chance at roles. 5. .....if not a choreographer him or herself, can coach and stage ballets. 6. ...... can work with the theater's bureaucracy and can manage -- although the day to day running of the company can be delegated and supervised. What's needed is artistic vision and the ability to carry out that vision, not marketing skills.

The reissue of "Holding on to the Air" is out! Here's the press release from the publisher: My name is Steve Krutzler and I am the online marketing coordinator for the University Press of Florida, the non-profit publishing wing of the Florida university system. We have recently published a new edition of "Holding On to the Air," by Suzanne Farrell. This memoir, first published in 1990 and reissued with a new preface by the author, recounts Farrell's transformation from a young girl in Ohio dreaming of greatness to the realization of that dream on stages all over the world. Farrell recalls professional and personal attachments and their attendant controversies with a down-to-earth frankness and common sense that complements the glories and mysteries of her artistic achievement. We believe that this book may be of interest to your site's visitors and invite them to check out several full samples of the text, available in our reading room. Readers can read about several trip sites in these HTML and PDF samples that offer a substantive preview of the book that we think dance enthusiasts will enjoy. The Reading Room can be accessed at http://www.upf.com/Mkt/ and contains more information about the book, including a jacket cover image.

Reading old reviews -- I haven't studied them, but just judging from the ones I've read over the years -- I've read some of seem to be historical periods. Some of the great critics -- Gautier, Shaw -- are defnitely opinion writers, commentators. In the 1940s and '50s in this country, though, many of the reviews I've read are very strictly news articles. So and so danced the pas de trois, a debut. This is the choreographer's background. An adjective or two about the ballerina. This may be a reflection of the newspaper's attitude towards dance -- and in some cases, though not all, the writer's knowledge about it. But I think there was a sense that this was a news item, covering an event that happened, in the way one would cover a robbery or a baseball game. More recently, I think newspapers have taken the approach that criticism is opinion. There was a rebellion against this within the ranks of dance critics in the 1970s, during the minimalist period of modern dance. Just describe. Who am I to make a judgment? Criticism must be objective. So I think there are different schools. (I'm of the criticism is opinion school, btw. )