Alexandra

Thanks for posting that, Ed. "Nothing remotely perceptive" struck a chord with me Mozart can survive one such production, or even a dozen such productions, but when ALL the "Cosi fan tuttes" are like this, or worse, AND when critics rave about how they're moving the art form forward, delving deep into the soul of man AND opera goers consider them the norm....then Mozart will not survive.

It does sound distasteful, but it's not a new concept. Fokine found that he did work for hire when Diaghilev fired him and he had no rights to his own ballets -- and, worse, Massine was the ballet master and so had the right to stage them!!!!! (The idea that "gosh, it just doesn't look the same this season, wonder why?" is not new ) Writers work for hire. If someone writes short stories for magazines, s/he has to get permission to publish them in a collection. The magazine could get huffy and say either "No," or "Sure, but it'll cost you."

I hope Kevin Ng sees this, as he lives in Hong Kong and I'm sure knows a lot about the company. (Others from Hong Kong, of course, please feel free to chime in!)

As recently as 1978, an ABT dancer (then corps, later principal) said that she thought the reason she was getting more roles than others of her same age and experience was because she had dark hair and blondes looked more washed out on stage. Beyond hair color and on to beauty, I think beauty does matter in ballet -- and beauty in the traditional sense. (The stark beauty of a gnarled oak struck by lightning is more modern dance ) I would expect most balletgoers to have personal preferences about looks in the same way we do about movie stars, and I think that one's reaction to physical appearance has emotional content that's hard to separate. If one sees blondes as cold and brunettes as warm, for example, then saying "I don't like him because he's blond" is more than a comment on beauty.

Just a word on bleeping -- this board bleeps out two basic four-letter words, too. If you type them, the board will replace the word with ***** I did this after one person (drunk, one hopes) came on one night and put up posts that were nothing but four letter words, addressed to several dancers who, one presumes, had injured him at some point in his career. Since we have so many teen posters (and lots of pre-teens who read the board but aren't allowed to post yet) I decided to use the software's editing capabilities. Having a board with teenagers has made me rethink a lot of my notions about bleeping and related issues. It's not just protecting children from words they hear on the bus, on TV, at school, and probably around the dinner table -- if they have a dinner table. It's setting an example, showing that it's possible to discuss a topic, even in anger, without resorting to a base vocabulary. And it's also providing an alternative, so that everything they read and see isn't vulgar. I think we forget that. Older people know there are other options. Young people aren't being given that chance. If we don't bleep, it becomes the norm. I think if I worked for something as mass media as television, I'd bleep. (I'd also encourage programming that was not bathed in blood, too )

The casting has been sent out to subscribers. I'm sure it will be on the web site eventually. (The PDF file that palliser graciously sent me is to large to be posted. I've deleted the postings about this.)

I'd never thought the prohibition against clapping between movements was recent -- I was taught it as a child, by people considerably older than me, who'd been taught it in THEIR childhood. And remembering Fokine, who hated people clapping at the ballet after each "number" -- because he wanted his ballets to be treated as wholes, and not parts -- I think it's been part of concertgoing for a long time. I think it's an issue with musicians. I lived in a small city when I was growing up, and Leonard Bernstein was guest conductor at our symphony when I was about 15. I remember reading an interview with him in the local newspaper, and the reporter asked him how he felt about playing in smaller cities. He loved the enthusiastic audiences, but never could get used to the fact that they clapped between movements, he said.

Very momentous I had a similar experience when I was in my mid-twenties. A friend and I subscribed to the Kennedy Center's theater season, and at the end of the summer, decided to go for broke and go the symphony (Rostropovich was cello soloist and conductor) and Nureyev and Friends. Branching out can change your life It's also fun to follow where ballet leads. We only played classical music in my house, but my family's collection started with Beethoven and ended with Sibelius. I discovered at least half of the composers whose music I now love through ballet. Thanks for these reports, Lolly. If you didn't write about the classes and concerts you were seeing, most of us wouldn't know they were happening. More, please

Skip, I doubt that the article is on line. BW was writing about the current issue of a mainstream magazine sold on newsstands and by subscription. It's America's biggest dance magazine, so it may well be available, even overseas, at a library, especially a university or ballet school library.

I thought CyberDancer made a good point, too, and I think dirac has just pointed out another "where's the line?" problem. I'd say that, in theory, if the artist recognizes the audience's existence instead of ignoring it, or treating it as a target, I won't be upset if he miscommunicates (which is different than not communicating). And I'm not a fan of the "I want to see my own life up there on the stage" school of viewing. I want to see something ELSE up there, so going to the theater is not All About Me. But I don't want to be lectured, ignored, or spat at either. I think there is often a period of adjustment between audience and artist, too. The artist may make something that he thinks everyone will understand and love (and let's say, for the sake of argument, that he really is brilliant and the work really is great) and be shocked, hurt and disappointed when the audience, with the best will in the world, doesn't get it, or hates it. The artist may realize that s/he's not presented the idea clearly, or that the work looks so much like something else that the audience was confused and put off. And the audience will, in time, become accustomed to his/her style. In the best of all possible worlds, of course.

A housekeeping matter: Two posts made in this forum this morning which we judged to be inexcusably nasty, and which squarely crossed the line between disagreement and personal attack, were deleted. The poster was notified and has been blocked from posting, after several prior warnings. We have never banned, and will never ban, anyone from this forum for his or her opinions. All opinions are welcome here. We will block people from posting who violate the rules of this forum, and chief among them is that every poster be treated courteously and with respect. I extend my most sincere apologies to everyone who was offended by these posts.

Just that she's still working on it I was told by a colleague that the intention is to get the book out in time for the Balanchine Centennial. Welcome, Phaedra!

and I'll cheerily counter with, "The bad drives out the good." Providing a sanctioned negative alternative is like giving a kid a twinkie on the theory that when you give him a choice between the twinkie and broccoli the next night, he'll do the right thing

IMO, Forsythe's work is much like his statement: lots of words (steps) but no sense. And a scorn for communication. Really really cool, hip, intellectual avant garde artists don't have to communicate. It says so in a book somewhere. I like your formula, Watermill. I think the biggest harmful trend of the last twenty years is the replacement of artistic vision in ballet companies by nonartists, or minor artists, or, in some cases, pathetically meagre artists with huge egos and huge mouths. They were an outrage, talked about in whispers as unfortunate stopgaps until something better came along, and now they're here. Like weeds, we'll never get rid of them. (I don't put Forsythe in this category; he is a choreographer. But there are a lot who can't teach, can't stage, can't do much of anything except make deathless pronouncements about how "We are not a museum company!" or "Ballet must cope with the realities of modern life!"

Yes, Ballet Nut. I think we'd call a coryphee a demisoloist. (Although that may have literally meant "half a soloist," or one of a pair, the "side boys" in a supporting pas de trois.)

Thank you very much for that perspective, Diane. I think that one of the main reasons for the move to contemporary dance companies and away from classical ballet is expense: the expense of training and the cost of toe shoes for one thing, as well as the need for live music and a much larger company, to be able to do Swan Lake. And I can very much understand the point that every city doesn't need to have its own company doing Swan Lake (and the like) -- but I can also see the point that an audience needs variety. Could you tell us, from the German perspective, how this (the Forsythe issue) is being received there? By the general public as well as by dance fans? My understanding is that Forsythe is very respected in Europe (probably more than he is in Ameica). I don't know whether that means he's popular, but I know the Frankfurt Ballet tours a lot. There's the view that having a company that is so well-regarded is important to the city, and that the city has a responsibility to support it. Could you (or anyone, of course) comment on that?

There is a very interesting commentary by Robert Greskovic in today's Wall Street Journal (available online only to subscribers). The gist is that there's more to restoring the Graham legacy than a legal opinion. Here are two paragraphs excerpted: In some cases, Mr. Protas's authoritarian manner, based on no formal dance training (his own background was that of a photographer and devoted Graham fan), estranged numerous veteran dancers who could have helped to stage Graham's work reliably by instilling this generation's dancers with invaluable history. Such seasons as ensued in the late 1990s became more sporadic and shorter, while tight budgets led to the use of recorded music. Artistic decline compounded quantitative compromises. Mr. Protas's choice and preparation of dancers remained dubious at best, at times revealing performers of skin-deep skill. Similarly, the emphases he deemed appropriate for lluminating Graham's emotionally charged and physically sharp dance language often rang hollow, with desperate play-acting cheapening thrilling Graham theatrics. For some time now, Graham's canon has paled and grown patchy. Judge Cedarbaum has given a thorough assessment of the legality of artistic ownership in a 111-page decision. But artistic life will not necessarily spring forth and flower because an inept individual has now lost his legal hold. Artistic matters cannot be decided in the courts, or in board rooms. If Graham's dances are to command attention again, and win an eager audience, an artistic director sensitive to her art and to today's public is the only answer. With former Graham-dancer candidates aging to the point of infirmity, the pickings are smaller every day. An artistically adept and astute member of the younger generation is wanted, but all are untried. Comments? Personally, I feel I've never seen a first-rate performance of a Graham work, except on video. I first saw the company in 1976, when Graham was still alive, and the works seemed small and dusty to me -- yet when I read about them, I am absolutely convinced that Graham was a very, very great choreographer, and if I'd seen her work when new I'd have been a devoted acolyte. How can Graham works be revived? Is her aesthetic so out of kilter with today's anti-expressionism that revival in any meaningful way is not possible?

I think the term is still used in Paris -- I'm sure Estelle will know. When those hierarchies were established, a dancer's contract had very strict rules about what a dancer could be expected to do. At a certain rank, you would no longer dance in a group larger than eight, or four. In the 19th century ballets, the ballerina always has eight friends -- think of the Pas de Vendanges in Giselle, or Swanhilda's friends who accompany her into Coppelius's workshop. Those would be the coryphees, I think. (Ivor Guest's "Romantic Ballet in Paris" has a lot of interesting tidbits about contracts, and life backstage, as well as facts and figures.)

I certainly agree that there's a difference between "bad" and "unpopular" (or "good" and "unpopular", or whichever way one wants to switch them). I'd still like to have some perspectives on where to draw the line on the artist's rights/responsibility issue.

Thank you, atm -- I hope we do hear from her. The Ann Barzel collection is legendary -- I've never seen it, but I've heard about it as long as I've been interested in ballet. She apparently filmed everything. Absolutely everything. Well, everything that came to Chicago! Silent, grain, old films, but if it's there. I believe some of the films are in the Dance Collection -- but I write that on hearsay, without checking. (tsk tsk, yes, I know)

Deborah, I think the artist's responsibility to society is very much the issue here, and the line is between the artist's right to make his own work, popular or unpopular (flip the coin; does an artist have the right to be popular, or does that automatically exclude him from artistland?), and the artist's responsibility to his audience. Is it simply a question of letting the market decide? Where is the line for you, generally? Or where should it be in the Forsythe case? Take your pick.

Thank you for that, Ina (and for your post on Gayaneh the other day). Since most of us, I'm afraid, don't read Russian, I hope you'll stop by and keep us up to date with what's going on in Russia when you have the time. There is a lot of interest here, I can assure you!

I think there are a lot of interesting issues raised by the Forsythe Leaving Frankfurt Ballet issue, and one of them is this statement: "It is extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to objectively translate or reduce intrinsic, multiple values as are typically embedded in art, into interest-maximizing numbers that explicate it?s relevance in political models of cultural well-being." This sentence is being read, I think, as a choreographer wanting to make the work he wants without worrying about popularity (if that's a fair reading of "interest-maximizing numbers"). What do you think about this? We'd probably all defend the right of an artist to be true to his personal artistic vision, and we'd picket if a board said, "You know, Martha, all these flashbacks and triple personalities is confusing people. Couldn't you just do a nice Nutcracker, like George is doing?" Or if ABT did a research survey and found that 85% of subscribers ONLY wanted to see "Swan Lake," would we say, "Well, can't argue with that." Or would we say, "perhaps the company could put a few bucks into audience education." Where is the line in the sand? I cannot paint or draw. Absolutely not, by any standard or stretch of the imagination. But if I decide I'd like to be an artist, and go out and buy an easel, some paints, and a beret, do I have the right to produce (ghastly, wretched, incompetent) unpopular art? If the public rejects my paintings but I can convince some kindly old soul to support me, is that okay? How popular or unpopular can an artist be?

An email to NY Magazine sent to me for posting: As Tobi Tobias's onetime editor at New York Magazine, I mourn the absence of her voice in dance criticism and devoutly hope it will soon be heard, in another venue if not at New York. "Editing" Tobi was a delightful if unchallenging task. Aside from her meeting every deadline with a full, trenchant, witty, and gracefully written column, she was and continues to be a particularly gracious writer to work with. New York's "culture" section is sadly diminished by the loss of a dance column in general, and by Tobi Tobias's truthful, insightful criticism in particular. One can only hope NY has the vision to reinstate her column--or that the magazine's loss will promptly become another's gain. Claire Perrault

An email to NY Magazine sent to me for posting: As Tobi Tobias's onetime editor at New York Magazine, I mourn the absence of her voice in dance criticism and devoutly hope it will soon be heard, in another venue if not at New York. "Editing" Tobi was a delightful if unchallenging task. Aside from her meeting every deadline with a full, trenchant, witty, and gracefully written column, she was and continues to be a particularly gracious writer to work with. New York's "culture" section is sadly diminished by the loss of a dance column in general, and by Tobi Tobias's truthful, insightful criticism in particular. One can only hope NY has the vision to reinstate her column--or that the magazine's loss will promptly become another's gain. Claire Perrault