Alexandra

I think people here are well aware of the ephemeral nature of ballet, which was why the topic was raised in the first place. It's a bit off topic to suggest that the exercise is either futile or not particularly bright I certainly hope no one feels discouraged from either voting or sharing their reasons for the vote. Tancos, in an earlier post you wrote: Perhaps this would be too complicated for a poll, but it would make an interesting thread -- why not start one?

Sarah and gwschloss, the link to this article is no longer active, unfortunately -- most newspapers remove articles to archives after a few weeks -- but the point of the article was not that Canadians are stingy. It was a long, thoughtful commentary in a Canadian newspaper about the state of the arts and arts philanthropy in Canada, and the struggles of one performing arts center. Balletstar, dmdance and Doris R -- you've hit on the big puzzle. Ballet and opera to most Americans are like garlic to a vampire. (And the vampire at least has good reasons for avoiding garlic!) Walking the tightrope between trying to pander to audiences who don't like ballet -- doing pop pieces, or a ballet about the Orioles in Baltimore, say -- and building an audience among people who do is probably one of the biggest problems in ballet right now. I think one of the biggest reasons for the current lack of interest is simply lack of exposure. Companies don't tour. While undoubtedly TV, video games and other post-1950 inventions would compete with ballet so that there isn't the audience for touring companies that existed in the 1940s and 1950s, this may be a chicken-and-egg problem. Companies stopped touring, an audience drifted away. Also, the Me Generation (which is becoming the Me Two Generation and heading for Me Three) where the prevailing ethic is "I'm not interested in anything that doesn't concern ME directly" or "What can ballet do for ME?" doesn't help. With all the education programs in the arts, schools (and families) have failed to give children and young adults a world view -- "You should be interested in this because it's part of your world and besides, it's interesting and you should know something about it."

Thanks, balletstar, for reviving this thread -- the no ballet in Baltimore problem is a puzzle. Perhaps its closeness to the Kennedy Center makes it difficult to start and sustain a local company? Baltimore was a big ballet town in the 1930s (big theater town, too; it was on the touring circuit) and still a stop on the tour during the '50s and '60s, when companies toured, but has never been able to support a local company, even a small one. And thanks Ed, Tancos and Diane for your responses. I hope more will join in.

There was a Live from Lincoln Center broadcast of NYCB's Coppelia eons ago. There's very little dance at all on PBS, as you've probably noticed Not as popular as cooking shows and rock and roll, not to mention the 700,000th rerun of the Antiques Roadshow and "As Time Goes By" in my neck of the woods. Write write write Agitate agitate agitate

Whenever this issue comes up I wrack my brains for the articles about how there really isn't much for women to do in Shakespeare. (There isn't, and there are reasons.) And how many Ophelias have rewritten their parts so that there is "more" to do? Does Lady Macbeth get to add four soliloquys? On the other hand, are men out there, carrying picket signs because there aren't any male Madonnas in Renaissance paintings? No. Once again, it's only ballet that has to deal with this issue. Perhaps it's my own gender bias, but the notion of looking at a work of art and saying, "There's not enough in it for ME to do and so I'll just have to fix that" or "and so it's worthless and needs to be changed" is foreign to me. I think the new repertory solution is the best. I haven't quite given up the notion that there may again, some day, be people who will look at Junker Ove and see that what he is given to do is dancing. I think if we have very forceful Princes it would help. The irony of Nureyev's step gluttony is that he didn't need to dance a step to hold the stage.

In poking around the net looking for next season's schedules, I noticed several dancers whom I remembered fondly -- Both Nancy Raffa and Roma Sosenka are teaching at the Miami City Ballet School. And Deirdre Carberry is now with North Carolina Dance Theatre -- or was last season; things change rapidly. Can anyone confirm these three? And then I remembered another dancer I've lost track of. Robert Wallace trained at the Washington School of Ballet, danced with American Ballet Theatre and Boston Ballet. Does anyone know what happened to him? Anyone else find dancers they thought they'd lost, or wonder about where someone is now?

This is an interesting topic indeed. I'd agree with BW about success in the personal sense, but I take Calliope's question to be what do newspaper writers mean when they say "flop". I thought, especially with regards to Broadway, "flop" means a failure at the box office. I've often read "the show was a flop even though it was excellent, ahead of its time, etc." or "The critics loved it but it bombed at the box office." Nancy Reynolds deals with this question a bit in "Repertory in Review." One example I remember is "Divertimento No. 15" which she said "the dancers fought for for 10 years." It wasn't popular. Now (perhaps because it's a small-scale tutu ballet) it's in the repertories of several small companies. Two of Balanchine's ballets that were box office "hits" were "Jewels" and "Vienna Waltzes." Neither are probably his finest work, and "Vienna Waltzes" is, at present, not very popular -- in five years, it, too, may make it bigtime on the "full-length ballet" circuit. Kenneth MacMillan's "Manon" is another curiosity as flops/hits go. A flop when it was new -- dismissed by critics, not very popular with audiences -- it's now firmly entrenched in the Royal Ballet's repertory and viewed as a "classic" -- and quite popular. This fascinates me, because I can think of a lot of ballets that critics loved and audiences didn't like, or vice versa, but I can't think of another one where almost everyone was BORED when the ballet was new and now many people love it. Then there's Nutcracker, the ultimate ballet success -- even though each version is different. I think Morris Neighbor's standard of when a ballet makes it into other repertories it's a success is a good one, although one has to be careful here, too, because then we get into the mass market question. Does a classical ballet have to be a mass market success? I don't think so. I think some of the ballets that really only work on their home turf were/are quite successful -- Ashton's "Symphonic Variations" is one, Bournonville's "Folk Tale" is another. Finally, when does the statute of limitations run out? "California Poppy" was hugely successful in its time; it may not be revivable now, although another Pavlova may come along any moment now Estelle, what is the Gardel ballet that has the most performances in the Paris Opera repertory? Long gone, and long forgotten, but a success. Bournonville's most successful ballet was Valdemar, flushed in 1929, but beloved until that time.

Thanks for the question, Pavlovadancer, and all the responses. There is a beautiful book about Pavlova by Keith Money -- it's huge, loads of photos, but Money writes about her as if he'd seen her (I doubt that he did) and really places her in her repertory. She wasn't only delicate -- she was also a great gypsy in several roles. She was a very dramatic dancer. Money points out that Pavlova was willing to appear in small parts, in opera ballets, which many of her peers would not do. She wanted to dance!

I'm beginning to feel very sorry for Taglioni and Elssler, not to mention Lully and Beauchamps. How quickly they forget

I'm beginning to feel very sorry for Taglioni and Elssler, not to mention Lully and Beauchamps. How quickly they forget

Tobi Tobias reviews Feld's new season in New York http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=5932 The review ends with this question: This is a question that's been raised since the late 1970s. Anyone have any ideas?

Another tough choice -- I agree with Helena. I want to see all of them. (That, when pressed, I voted for Bournonville may not be a surprise.) Aside from its difficulty, though -- very nice poll, Ari. I like the detail

Another tough choice -- I agree with Helena. I want to see all of them. (That, when pressed, I voted for Bournonville may not be a surprise.) Aside from its difficulty, though -- very nice poll, Ari. I like the detail

Hi, Prince Henrik Hope you have a great time! Re Jeanmaire, I saw her only very late, but admired her Carmen (on film) very much. BUT I cannot imagine a less appropriate Bournonville-era ballerina! The ballets, of course, are very anachronistic. Bruhn's dancing is very interesting, though. It's in a "No, Not Patineurs, but Close!" number. He's very young and very very fast -- and it's the only film I know of him before he transformed himself into a danseur noble, so it's historically very interesting.

Helena, a belated thank you for this -- I've been on a deadline and hadn't had much time to read and respond to posts, so I'm sorry I didn't respond sooner. The costumes may have been executed, as they say, by Craig Wright, but the designer of both sets and costumes was Jens Jacob Worsaae. I saw this production (by both RDB and SFB) so long ago that I don't remember the fairies' cavaliers in the last act, so I can't place how Lund might be there. I haven't seen him in a few years -- and there has been no first rank classical coaching in that house for a decade now, so.... and I'm glad to hear that Boesen was impressive. (I'm pretty sure Haley Henderson is not Danish. It was interesting, though sad, that so few of the names you mentioned were Danish.) The Theatre, by the way, is about to be replaced by a nice big new big modern -- did I say big? -- theater so that the company can do the big big big classics that the rest of the world does and become really important. So I'm glad you enjoyed sitting in the Old Theatre (They'll keep the building. I think the drama department will move back, which is good for them, as they've been exiled from their own theater for nearly 20 years and pushed into the ugly New Stage across the street.)

Thanks for posting that, Effy -- this is a hurried response, as I have to leave in a few minutes, but I wanted to note your post. I'm glad to hear that Greve is not only dancing SOMETHING but actually seemed inspired by a role. I've only seen Lindstrom in two things (back in January 2000, Odette/Odile and Valencia in Merry Widow) and was not impressed at all with her dramatic ability, so I was interested in your comments and would like to have seen her. I'd seen both Jeppesen and Ryom several times in the early '90s and found their portrayals quite rich -- richer than Haydee's, actually. I didn't think them merely a one dimensional "poor little me." I'm also glad that Lassen is getting a big role relatively young, and not waiting. She was one that showed promise literally from the age of 6. It is good to read that the company can still pull off a dramatic ballet. I know the last time Onegin entered the repertory a friend called me, very excited, saying, "They were fighting for it."

A belated welcome to the forum, Lucy -- I've been busy and haven't had a chance to check on all the posts for the past few days. I think meeting a dancer can change one's opinion, as often the idea we have of that dancer is different from the reality. I've changed my mind about so many dancers it's hard to remember them! Often it's because a young, rather callow dancer simply grows up. It's one of the advantages of being a reviewer. I have to go to performances that I might not choose to see otherwise, and I'm often surprised about dancers. Often for the better Allegro, I think what you wrote about Guillem happens with a lot of dancers. The first few times we see them we see the brilliance -- and many people only see a dancer once or twice, so that's enough. But if we keep seeing them in different roles, we see that they don't have a very broad range.

Excerpts From ABT's 2002 Spring Season Including The Dream and La Fille Mal Gardée Highlight Gala Program President George W. Bush and Mrs. Laura Bush will serve as Honorary Chairmen of American Ballet Theatre's 2002 Spring Gala on Monday evening, May 13 at 6:30 P.M. at the Metropolitan Opera House. The Spring Gala, which opens ABT's 2002 Spring Season, will feature excerpts of the season's ballets including highlights from the Company premieres of The Dream and La Fille Mal Gardée. Co-Chairmen for American Ballet Theatre's Spring Gala are Caroline Kennedy and Blaine Trump. Corporate Co-Chairmen are Jack Kliger and Gedalio Grinberg. Hachette Filipacchi Magazines and Movado Watch Company have generously underwritten the evening. Friends Co-Chairmen include Peter Bacanovic, Sloan Lindemann Barnett, Tory Burch and Susan Fales-Hill. A Gala dinner under the Tent at Lincoln Center will immediately follow the performance. Gala benefit tickets include the performance and the post-performance dinner. For Gala Benefit ticket information only, call the American Ballet Theatre Special Events office at 212-477-3030, ext. 3218. Performance only tickets are available by calling the Metropolitan Opera House at 212-362-6000. The Metropolitan Opera House is located at Lincoln Center at Broadway and 65th Street. American Ballet Theatre's 2002 Spring Season at the Metropolitan Opera House is sponsored by Movado Watch Company. For the past 16 years, Movado Watch Company has been a principal benefactor of American Ballet Theatre.

Thanks very much for posting that, Sonja. There are a lot of Stuttgart Ballet fans in the U.S. and, as is often the case with European companies, we very rarely get reviews of this company in its regular repertory. So this was very nice to read.

Thanks for mentioning the extensions. What impresses me about the LeClercq film is that that leg went OUT, quick and straight, like an arrow. I remember watching the video of the Balanchine celebration -- and really liking Jaffe and Hubbe in that section. But, remembering that there's always the remote chance that older can be better I got out the older film and, yep. I think this is definitely a place where skykicking is a misreading. We are getting away from Paris -- did anyone else go? Any other comments? Is this a very good year (the famous wine analogy?), a so-so year? I feel I should mention that Claude Bessy is generally very highly regarded among teachers, at least the few I've spoken with. I don't mean to dismiss Katharine's view, and I'm all for bucking the conventional wisdom, but I think it should be noted that the general take on Ms. Bessy's effect on the school is that she turned it around and is responsible for turning out very fine pupils. If they don't turn into etoiles, I think that may be due to the ballet masters in the company.

Lucky Luke was gone by the time I clicked on him, unfortunately (I got a 404, File Not Found). I think Balanchine's cowboys and dance hall girls were very much of their time -- the 1950s and cowboy movies. I remember the TV series "Gunsmoke." Miss Kitty was a dancehall girl in every sense of the term, but I had no idea of that until I was quite grown up. I'd like to see the dancehall girls be a little sexy, actually. Usually the complaint about Balanchine is that he's "just the steps" and, since I missed LeClercq, I've never seen the wit and the hint of allure that must have been in that ballerina role, at least, at the beginning.

Interesting question, Calliope. The issue of young dancers in Barocco seems to be a hot spot -- I've heard several dancers refer to that, worried because Barocco had always been cast with mature (not old, grown up!) dancers. My theory on that bit of casting, and others like it, is that when a ballet stops being alive in the mind of the director, the casting is delegated and can become careless. I don't mean this as Martins bashing! Balanchine let Serenade and Swan Lake drift in the mid-70s. These weren't cast with very young dancers, but with older dancers who hadn't developed, but who still needed to have something to dance. (That's what it looked like, anyway.) At ABT, I watched "Theme and Variations" being demoted from a ballerina ballet to a soloist's ballet. The same attitude is what causes a ballet to have eight casts. When it's new, people (audience and the choreographer, I think) often expect to see THAT cast. But when it becomes last year's news, then anybody can do it, and anybody does. As for the development of dancers, I think dancers have to be brought along, and the sink or swim method that has characterized American companies is not helpful to the dancers. It looks to me as though the regional companies are way ahead of the Big Guns on this one. The casting that I've seen in San Francisco Ballet and Miami City Ballet, especially, is excellent, striking a balance between giving young dancers a chance and giving them everything.

Not to deflect the discussion from Calliope's assessment, but a brief response to one of Leigh's questions: No!

Thanks very much for the reviews, Katharine, Terry and Estelle. We've had a prohibition on reviewing student performancess, which Katharine couldn't have been aware of, as the discussions about it preceded her coming to the site. We're also reviewing the prohibition -- my reason for it was the journalistic rule that children are not reviewed as professionals, but since the NY Times and NY mag, and others, regularly review the SAB workshop, we may decide to allow that this year, with some restrictions. (The history on this site is that, about 3 years ago a student using not only another name but another identity reviewed a workshop and very harshly criticized his/her classmates, writing descriptions of them that were quite cruel. Rather than fight the battle post by post, and having someone decide what was on the line and what was over it, we just said No Student Workshop reviews.) I would like to put in a word about reviewing student dancers that I got from a Danish coach. "There's something I don't understand that critics don't understand," he began, and went on -- I can't quote exactly -- that he didn't understand how people could expect a "17-year-old to dance as though she's 30." He was referring to very harsh reviews of a 19-year-old Danish Aurora and said, "When you're that young and take on a big role, there is so much to do, it is not possible to do it all the first few times no matter how good you are. Just getting through it, the technique, the partnering, the pacing, is so difficult. So of course they often look cold, or frightened, or there is something about the head or the arms that aren't right. That comes in time." I think he had a good point, and that it's worth remembering.

I just tried this one and got there -- it will say "operan" but the ballet is part of the opera. http://www.operan.se/