Alexandra

There's an alternative -- a "classical pas de deux" (that's what was danced when the RDB took this into repertory; I don't know if it originated there. I've seen both). Sorry, I don't know the reason for it -- maybe it was considered exotic at the time? I'm sure someone will have a better answer

A, more women than men; larger sample! B, I think there were genres and sub-genres and sub-sub-genres that vanished long ago. Part of the smoothing out (in the same way there were once over 400 Types -- the Woman in the Ball Dress, the Woman in the Apron, etc. that are now just Ingenue, Juvenile Male Lead, Villain, Maid) that's been happening in ballet and, to a lesser extent (guessing here) theater. Back to Ansanelli -- I thought Leigh's comment about her dancing McBride's repertory was interesting. I don't believe that McBride was noted for her turnout, either. (I honestly don't remember, as the period when I saw McBride the most was my first few years of ballet going when I wouldn't have thought to check.)

Different interpretations of the same passages, I think I see the key to Vestris's sentence as the "forbidding him to take up picturesque attitudes." Perrot probably did not have a face appropriate for hero roles -- by Danish employ, a noble or classique dancer has a straight nose -- more a demicaractere one a "peasant face" with a turned up nose. But while today a gnome can dance anything, and often does, that wasn't the case then. I'd read gnome as a body reference, too, as gnomes are short, with short legs, and lumpy muscles. Bournonville choreographed several roles for them

Interesting article in today's NYTimes. While I'm not one who considers television a high art, even in its better moments, it takes the temperature of the nation quicker than any other art form. How retro will we go? How will this trend affect ballet and dance? Ballet seems to me at a real crossroads now: either New! Now! crossover works or very retro classicism and fauxclassicism. Neither, to me, are healthy for the art form and we discuss that often here. What analogs can you see in this article for ballet? For Fall, TV Looks Back, and Back

Thank you, Bobbi, for such a nice, long review!

Very interesting answers, all -- and a special thank you to atm for those lovely memories It is a double-edged sword. I did see Nureyev a lot in his waning decade -- not always by choice! -- and what was particularly frustrating is that four nights in a row he would be so awful that it hurt to watch (and if you're reviewing, you can't close your eyes! Or at least you're not supposed to ) And then the next night he would get a surge of Something and be wonderful. (Not the very last years, but the Early and Middle Decline years.) There's a very delicate passage in John Gruen's "Erik Bruhn, Danseur Noble" describing how Bruhn got to do (I think) "Theme and Variations" -- that Youskevitch aged, very suddenly. Reading between the lines, it sounded as though everyone realized this except Youskevitch. That would be difficult too -- the dancer thinks he's in a temporary slump caused by an injury, or whatever, and it's obvious to everyone else that, at 45, it's the end of the road. Bruhn stopped relatively early -- at 44 -- when he was still in good shape (Danes generally last long) because of illness and, when he returned to the stage, did so deliberately in nonclassical roles and roles that he hadn't danced before he stopped. A model way of handling things, I think. Kronstam stopped classical roles even earlier -- James at 36, everything else at 40 -- because of a prolapsed disk and torn Achilles -- but danced character roles until there was nothing left in the repertory that interested him. And Niels Kehlet was bounding about like a kid in his mid-40s. He's over 60 now, and I think he still has a jump! All that to say that, like stopping driving, there shouldn't be a mandatory age limit. A freelancer, like Nureyev, wil go solely on appetite for pain and box office. He was still selling out when he couldn't walk. If there's a strong company, the director can says, "No, it really is time" if the dancer doesn't know that him or herself.

Very interesting answers, all -- and a special thank you to atm for those lovely memories It is a double-edged sword. I did see Nureyev a lot in his waning decade -- not always by choice! -- and what was particularly frustrating is that four nights in a row he would be so awful that it hurt to watch (and if you're reviewing, you can't close your eyes! Or at least you're not supposed to ) And then the next night he would get a surge of Something and be wonderful. (Not the very last years, but the Early and Middle Decline years.) There's a very delicate passage in John Gruen's "Erik Bruhn, Danseur Noble" describing how Bruhn got to do (I think) "Theme and Variations" -- that Youskevitch aged, very suddenly. Reading between the lines, it sounded as though everyone realized this except Youskevitch. That would be difficult too -- the dancer thinks he's in a temporary slump caused by an injury, or whatever, and it's obvious to everyone else that, at 45, it's the end of the road. Bruhn stopped relatively early -- at 44 -- when he was still in good shape (Danes generally last long) because of illness and, when he returned to the stage, did so deliberately in nonclassical roles and roles that he hadn't danced before he stopped. A model way of handling things, I think. Kronstam stopped classical roles even earlier -- James at 36, everything else at 40 -- because of a prolapsed disk and torn Achilles -- but danced character roles until there was nothing left in the repertory that interested him. And Niels Kehlet was bounding about like a kid in his mid-40s. He's over 60 now, and I think he still has a jump! All that to say that, like stopping driving, there shouldn't be a mandatory age limit. A freelancer, like Nureyev, wil go solely on appetite for pain and box office. He was still selling out when he couldn't walk. If there's a strong company, the director can says, "No, it really is time" if the dancer doesn't know that him or herself.

Thank you for your "notes" Leigh. On the lack of turnout, I think this is related to genre and employ again. Once, demicaractere dancers weren't expected to have turnout, line or perfect placement. Michael, I've heard the line you quoted, but heard it attributed as Vestris to his pupil Perrot. It's usually been interpreted that this was said because Perrot was ugly -- as in, not a pretty face. But I think that's an error. It's because he had no lines and (possibly) poor turnout. If you stand still a lot, people will notice that. If you're a winged zephyr or a whiplash turner, no one will care. More NYCB reviews, please! I'm very cheered to hear all the good reports of "Vienna Waltzes." I was afraid that, like "Union Jack," might not survive its Balanchine era cast.

Welcome back, Mary! All good points -- thank you for making them. I think the key to the "but there's no dancing" is for the performance to be so strong you are satisfied watching it, but I've seen performances like that and still gotten into conversations that begin witih "but there was no dancing" and go the route of "that's because he can't dance." Glebb, I agree with you on the Russianness of "The Firebird's" music, too. It's grape picking music, not cotton picking music! And yes, ABT did have the Fokine Firebird (that was broadcast the same night as the Kirkland/Baryshnikov Theme and Variations, I believe, with Cynthia Gregory as the Firebird) as did, earlier, the Royal (which is also on film, with Fonteyn and Michael Somes). Royal Ballet films of performances always look a bit self-conscious to me; they know they're being filmed and They're Going To Do The Right Thing. Their movement was freer in live performance.

I'll second Juliet's message For those of us who love the Royal but, by accident of geography, don't get to see it often, it's wonderful to be able to keep up with the company. Thank you, Sylvia.

Definitely NOT ballet, but I was enthralled by the creativity of a modern dancer I read about 20 years ago in Dance and Dancers. I don't remember her name, alas, but she performed at 8.75 months pregnant. Or actually, her unborn baby performed. She was a choreographer. She put pieces of paper folded into shapes on her abdoment, played the baby-to-be's favorite music and. . well, the choreography was all kicks. Marie T never thought of that!

HazelBee, it opens TONIGHT! Here's a link to a description on LondonDance (a good site for you to bookmark) as well as pricing and booking info. http://listings.londondance.com/dl/page.ph...&id=L1781629352 www.ballet.co.uk also has a weekly listing of performances in London (and lots of other good info as well, as well as a forum) and for information about just about any ballet company in the world, try www.balletcompanies.com It's a list of links to ballet and dance company web sites.

Good point about "being able to do modern" Jeannie. (I wonder why Paul Taylor's company doesn't do "Symphony in C" or "Agon" to "prove" that they can do ballet? Note to Paul.... ) The NOTRegional companies seem to be required to have an entire evening of Beyond Paul Taylor -- an entire evening of buttkick ballets (those that, as the artistic director will tell you, proud that he's being outrageous, "We're gonna kick ballet's butt into the 21st century) specially chosen to attract people who don't like ballet to attend ballet performances, hence expanding the audience.

Good point about "being able to do modern" Jeannie. (I wonder why Paul Taylor's company doesn't do "Symphony in C" or "Agon" to "prove" that they can do ballet? Note to Paul.... ) The NOTRegional companies seem to be required to have an entire evening of Beyond Paul Taylor -- an entire evening of buttkick ballets (those that, as the artistic director will tell you, proud that he's being outrageous, "We're gonna kick ballet's butt into the 21st century) specially chosen to attract people who don't like ballet to attend ballet performances, hence expanding the audience.

Thanks for the news update, Kevin!

I think when one talks about a star "outside their discipline" that means someone known to people who have little knowledge or interest about the art form, so the interest would be completely about their private lives and not their art, wouldn't it? (Although I don't know a thing about Pavarotti's life!) Nureyev was the prime example of someone know generally for things like getting arrested, dumping a plate of spaghetti on someone's head at a party, etc. Known as a dancer, but not more than that. Fonteyn's public personal was very discrete and much was kept hidden. I wonder about Taglioni and Elssler. It's hard to say, since Entertainment Tonight wasn't about in those days. Women imitated Taglioni's style of hair and dress -- how many knew about her mal de genou? (I don't know.) I think there were just as many vicious rumor mongers and gossips back then. They just didn't get into print! Back to the original question posed by Ed: Yes, yes, a thousand times yes, to both Victoria's and Ed's points. Lots of gold medals, little individual or national style.

Haven't seen it yet, Sylvia, so I can't help, but I'm fairly certain there are several people who post here regularly who have seen it -- I hope they see your post and respond

Adding a brief note -- Hazel, we always advise students not to depend on the internet primarily when doing research, as there is so much that's NOT available on line, and it's sometimes difficult to judge the accuracy of what is on line. The Net is great, though, as an in-home library catalogue, where you can do a search for printed material, and here's a link you might find helpful. It's to the catalogue at the Dance Collection of the New York Public Library. You should find a list of articles about nearly any dance subject you need. http://catnyp.nypl.org/search~b1o1c1i1p1r1a1

Thanks, HazelBee. Glad we could be of some help. I'll be interested to read what your discussion group says. In Washington there is an excellent dancer/choreographer called Shizumi who integrates American modern dance with traditional Japanese dance. I've always admired her work -- I don't know enough about traditional Japanese dance to appreciate and understand everything she puts into it. Color and costuming are VERY important to her, and while I realize she is using color symbolism, the colors and what they symbolize are from another culture and I can only guess at them! She is an extraordinary performer and uses Japanese folk themes, but made more "dancey" through modern dance technique. In one piece, for example, through the use of masks, but also body language and gesture, she was a demon who took the guises of an old man, a young woman, a child and, of course, his demonic self Are you allowed to interview the choreographer? Or must it be a guessing game? It might be fascinating to interview Shobana Jehasingh about Indian classical dance, and how she blends the two forms, especially since Indian classical dance is very much about gesture. Hand and finger movements, even eye movements, have a very specific significance. Hard to use those elements for an audience who can't "read them." As for Bourne, you should be able to find a lot of reviews and articles about that Swan Lake as well as interviews where Bourne speaks about how he choreographs. Keep us posted

Hi, Hazel -- Welcome! You've posed an interesting question. I can't be of much help, because I've not seen Shobana Jehasignhs "surface Tension" and phantasmaton" But general rules about analyzing a choreographer's style would apply to anyone. How do the dancers' move? Where is the movement centered (torso, limbs)? What are favorite or repeated steps and motions? How are the works structured? Do they use the score as a road map, or use music as a general atmospheric guide (or perhaps not at all)? Once you analyze one particular piece -- really look at it and see how it's constructed (try to dance a few of the movements yourself so you can tell how they feel; that might give you some clues, too!) then you can look at another piece and compare it. Sounds easy! The most important thing is to try to train yourself to look beneath the surface, at the bones of a piece, and try to figure out what the choreographer's intention was, and how he went about fulfilling it. Not very specific, but I hope this helps a bit I've asked one of our Board Hosts who's a choreographer to look in on this if he has the time -- he'll probably be able to give you something more specific. I am going to move a copy of this to the choreographer's forum -- good idea, Victoria -- because the question is a good, general one and might spark discussion. This board exists to discuss classical ballet, and the works you're interested in are modern dance or contemporary ballet, but how to look at a work is the same no matter what the genre Good luck!

Ari, I really think there's a certain element -- even in the 1970s -- which thought of ballet as an alien art form. Modern dance is American. Ballet is European. There is much that's distastefully unAmerican about ballet -- its hierarchies, the notion that one must decide on a career when one is ten, its structure and traditions. That's one school of thought that's wafted and waned since the beginning of this century, but it has a very strong voice in publishing. Exceptions, as always, of course, the major one for many blessed years was Robert Gottlieb at Knopf. Check any of our threads on great or favorite books and one notices how many were Knopf books.

Ari, I really think there's a certain element -- even in the 1970s -- which thought of ballet as an alien art form. Modern dance is American. Ballet is European. There is much that's distastefully unAmerican about ballet -- its hierarchies, the notion that one must decide on a career when one is ten, its structure and traditions. That's one school of thought that's wafted and waned since the beginning of this century, but it has a very strong voice in publishing. Exceptions, as always, of course, the major one for many blessed years was Robert Gottlieb at Knopf. Check any of our threads on great or favorite books and one notices how many were Knopf books.

I think it's the pull of the stage. It's also that dancing is part of a dancer's identity, his very being. I don't fault them for that. I wish there was a way to use great dancers well into their 70s. There is, of course, and not as the leads in Giselle. It's just out of fashion now. I'm always very torn about this -- I wish Nureyev had stopped years before he did. I understand why he kept on, I'm even sympathetic to it, but I'm sorry I saw it. On the other hand, I came to ballet through a "Nureyev and Friends" program with Margot Fonteyn, age 55. I thought she was 35. I wouldn't have wanted to miss her. I'm seeing dancers now in their mid-30s who look old on stage -- partly because everyone else is encouraged to look 17 (nothing wrong with that, unless you're 31) and partly because the repertory is so HYPER -- jumpjumpjump turnturnturn -- that there's no room for anyone much over 17. I like seeing young dancers, I'd like to see some mature ones, too. I don't want to see another Nureyev, c. 1989.

I think it's the pull of the stage. It's also that dancing is part of a dancer's identity, his very being. I don't fault them for that. I wish there was a way to use great dancers well into their 70s. There is, of course, and not as the leads in Giselle. It's just out of fashion now. I'm always very torn about this -- I wish Nureyev had stopped years before he did. I understand why he kept on, I'm even sympathetic to it, but I'm sorry I saw it. On the other hand, I came to ballet through a "Nureyev and Friends" program with Margot Fonteyn, age 55. I thought she was 35. I wouldn't have wanted to miss her. I'm seeing dancers now in their mid-30s who look old on stage -- partly because everyone else is encouraged to look 17 (nothing wrong with that, unless you're 31) and partly because the repertory is so HYPER -- jumpjumpjump turnturnturn -- that there's no room for anyone much over 17. I like seeing young dancers, I'd like to see some mature ones, too. I don't want to see another Nureyev, c. 1989.

Katherine, I'd add Leo Staats to your list. Also scorned now, I've been told, as too old-fashioned a/k/a steppy. I think part of the charm of Nureyev's productions is for the reason Estelle mentioned -- they are technical exercises. They give the whole company, not just a group of ten or twelve, a classical work out. This doesn't help today's audience member, perhaps, unless one focuses only on the dancers and not the choreographer (which many are quite happy to do) but in the long term interests of the company, it's not a bad bargain. If that keeps the classical technique ALIVE for the dancers -- not just as classes, but as something they believe in and want to dance, and perhaps inspire a young choreographer (how about Bart?) to do something new in that language, then they're worth keeping. I can't totally dismiss Petit and Bejart. I don't like them -- I do like Petit's Les Rendez-vous, Jeune Homme, Le Diable Boiteux, and Carmen, but some others are simply Cabaret. But he's not incompetent. I haven't seen enough of Bejart to really tell, but the bits I've seen show a sure sense of craft underneath all the feathers and black leather dance belts. Some Petit, with the right stars, can be good theater. I wouldn't want to build the repertory on either of them, but I'd rather watch them than Nacho Duato and crew.