Alexandra

Thank you for that, Helena. I've read all of the "only the Russians can dance" comments too. I think you're right; that was a very general feeling and it lasted a long time. I think it would be very understandable. London had seen the Diaghilev Ballet and loved it. (For those interested, Nesta McDonald wrote a very detailed account of The Diaghilev Ballet in London and America). And then the post-War Ballet Russe, with the Massine ballets, was extremely popular, too. I think everyone, even its backers and most avid fans, would have said that early the Sadlers Wells Ballet wasn't on the same level, nor could it be expected to be. And I'm sure there are people who never "got over" the Ballet Russe and stopped going to the ballet when it died -- there certainly were Americans who did, and who never accepted New York City Ballet as a company on the same level. I think London, especially, took another Russian hit when the Bolshoi came in the mid-50s. So in that way things don't change. But I think Crisp is talking about a company's diminution compared to itself, rather than looking at a company at its best and moaning that they're not like the Russians. While the complaints, in this instance, about the Royal aren't new, they've been consistent since the 1970s, and become more insistent during first the Morrice and then the Dowell directorships. I think there will always be SOME people who will have a favorite and not be able to stand seeing anyone else in those ballets. There probably were prople who thought that Sibley and Seymour "were no Fonteyns" but I think most thought they were simply different, and were happy that the company was turning out a new generation of ballerinas. There was enormous excitement about the Byrony Brind generation that came out of the School at the beginning of the 1980s -- ah! The company would be renewed! But it didn't happen. [ January 03, 2002: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Thank you for posting that, Estelle. As Giannina would say, green, green, green!! Terry! Good to see you again. Now I know where you are. Could you email me? I need your new address so I can send your issue of DanceView there Sorry for the interruption -- back to the concours. I think it's quite wonderful that we have two people who saw it. Estelle will be writing about it for the next DanceView (which doesn't mean she shouldn't write about it here, although she may not have the strength ). Terry, was this your first concours? What was the experience like?

There was a piece in the NYTimes today about standard repertory in opera and classical music. It touches on many of the issues we bat abaout here, and is, I think, worth a read. Classics and New Work Through Fresh Ears Of all the performing arts, classical music has been the most hopelessly bound to past repertory. It's essential for those who want this art form to have a future as well as a history to encourage new work and cajole ensembles, orchestras and opera companies into supporting living composers. Yet such calls are not meant as a criticism of the standard repertory. These works have survived for a reason. The problem is that repertory staples are trotted out too often for their own good. It's easy to let performances of standard repertory sound standardized. To recapture the impact of staples like Tchaikovsky's "Pathétique" Symphony or Bizet's "Carmen," performers must reconnect to the daring and timeless elements in these works. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/02/arts/music/02NOTE.html

Now here's an easy question. What ballet would you nominate for the best new ballet (not revival) created in the calendar year 2001?

Thanks very much, Lolly and Calliope. More personal definitions, please! (Debates later )

Thanks very much, Lolly and Calliope. More personal definitions, please! (Debates later )

Interesting question -- thank you for raising it. I don't know much about them, but I've seen most of these dancers. Irina Tchistyakova - Kirov, I believe Tatyana Goumba - Bolshoi (but I'm not sure about that ) Steffi Scherzer - I have a very vague memory of her as an East German ballerina and a Varna medal winner from the late 1970s? But I never saw her and don't know anything else about her. Liliana Cosi - ballerina of La Scala and guest artist, I think, with London Festival Ballet in the 1970s. I saw her at a gala ("Italian Ballet Gala" in Washington in the early 1980s, but the memory is vague and I couldn't describe her. My impression is that she's the Giselle/Juliet type; at least at this gala, she did nightgown rather than tutu numbers. Marnee Morris - a soloist with New York City Ballet in the 1960s and early '70s. She created a role in "Who Cares" and (again, I think ) "Symphony in 3 Movements." Claire Motte - Paris Opera Ballet etoile from the 1960s. There's a photo of her in one of Serge Lido books where she's standing, back to back, with Claude Bessy; they could be twins. Anissa Curbelo -- never heard of her. Who is she? Has anyone seen these dancers and could tell more about them? Jeannie will know your two Russians, I'm sure

In David Vaughan's book "Frederick Ashton and His Ballets" (pp. 110-111): "At the beginning of the Wells season Ashton revised 'Les Rendezvous'; among other things he added the pas de quatre of the four 'little girls.' This was Margot Fonteyn's first creation of an Ashton role (she was still listed in the programme as 'Margot Fontes"). At this first encounter with the young dancer -- she was fifteen years old -- he found her, he has said, 'stubborn, difficult, but musical and elegant.' 'Le Lac des cynges' was given on 20 November [1934], with Markova and Helpmann. Fonteyn also danced as a Peasant Girl and a black cynget in 'Lac' and later in the season (5 February 1935) appeared as 'airy, fairy Lilian' in 'The Lord of Burleigh.' According to P.W. Manchester, 'that was the night everyone knew she was going to be the one.'" [she was still 15 in February 1935. I hadn't remembered that she was accepted as "the one" that early.] I'm all for debunking myths, but sometimes the debunking itself becomes a myth, and this seems to be happening now with Fonteyn. I've read a lot about that period and I can't remember ever reading "She's no Markova!" but I'd be very interested in reading that, if someone can find it. One other point on Fonteyn that may seem paradoxical. She was accepted as a ballerina very early, and yet she's considerered not to have reached her peak until very late -- when she was in her 40s (after the partnership with Nureyev began). He pushed her technically and emotionally. It's hard to understand this, not having seen her grow from that girl of 15 to the woman of 45 who, by several accounts I've read and heard, delivered an extraordinary performance at the Royal Ballet's premiere of Kingdom of Shades "besting" not only the three soloists, all ballerinas or ballerinas-to-be, but Nureyev. I suppose this goes to what Crisp and (on another thread/link, more specifically, Tobi Tobias) said about all of the things that go into making a ballerina besides birthright. If Fonteyn hadn't had Ashton, hadn't had an institution that nurtured her, she may well have remained Fontes. Lolly, thanks for joining in and don't be shy of speaking with a partisan voice It's nice to have a "we" be for the Royal Ballet instead of ABT or NYCB, so you are most welcome. You raise several interesting points, and I thought I'd address the "passing it on" one. Often great dancers don't make great coaches, and even when they do, they're only part of what makes a dancer. If a ballet is revived that the company management doesn't care about -- and the dancers will know this -- the original cast could come in and coach and it probably wouldn't matter. The dancers also need enough rehearsal time and, probably most importantly, they need to absorb the style, the way of moving, in their bodies and they need to dance that way consistently. Someone may be able to produce an interesting moment in a masterclass, but it will be gone when the ballet, given only two performances, say, comes back into repertory next spring. [ January 02, 2002: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Thank you, Manhattnik. "Turkey Lake," the next new thing.

Thank you, Manhattnik. "Turkey Lake," the next new thing.

Jaana, thanks for asking this -- and thank you, Leigh, for moving it here. I was about to do the same thing I think it would be fascinating if everyone gave their definition of "contemporary ballet" with examples, as Leigh did -- not worrying about being "right" or "wrong" but just want the term connotes to you. (I don't think there's an official definition yet, and that the term is used very loosely, which is why I'd be interested in knowing how it's construed by people.) I think there are country differences, too, not just between England and America, but continental Europe as well. I'd add a question. Do you think there is a meaningful difference among these terms -- "ballet," "contemporary ballet" and "contemporary dance"?

Jaana, thanks for asking this -- and thank you, Leigh, for moving it here. I was about to do the same thing I think it would be fascinating if everyone gave their definition of "contemporary ballet" with examples, as Leigh did -- not worrying about being "right" or "wrong" but just want the term connotes to you. (I don't think there's an official definition yet, and that the term is used very loosely, which is why I'd be interested in knowing how it's construed by people.) I think there are country differences, too, not just between England and America, but continental Europe as well. I'd add a question. Do you think there is a meaningful difference among these terms -- "ballet," "contemporary ballet" and "contemporary dance"?

Mary, to your off-the-track (but really on the track ) comment, what I've read and been told was that Markova was very much missed at the beginning and yes, many people were convinced that the company couldn't go on without her, but Fonteyn wasn't pushed out as the company ballerina instantly -- there were several candidates and Fonteyn, at least was very, very young (17) so I thought people realized that there was potential but knew it was too early. They were still writing "hope she doesn't grow too tall". I've never gotten the sense that they thought she was inferior. There's one story -- and I can't remember which book it's in now -- that there was a performance of "The Lords of Burleigh" where, the author said, "We all knew that night that Margot was THE one." I do think that Ashton was skeptical at first, but since the story is always "but then she broke down and cried in rehearsal and I knew I could work with her" I've always wondered if her "hopelessness" was that she wasn't doing what he wanted. At any rate, she was, still, in her teens. I agree with your comments on Cojacaru. We're running an interview with her in the next DanceView (by Marc Haegeman) in which she makes very similar comments. She's not complaining, just describing how things are. I think that goes to both Crisp's and Tobias's article -- there may very well be young dancers who could be ballerinas (and I think Cojacaru is one of them) but they not only have no choreographers and get no help from their companies, in some cases they're actually pushed off-course by the companies. [ January 02, 2002: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Local is just fine! Thank you, G More tours. Ah, that would be nice.

Local is just fine! Thank you, G More tours. Ah, that would be nice.

I'm going to post this here and on the Teachers Forum -- I think we'll have different perspectives on this, but it's a subject of interest to everyone. An article from Mirella's TuTu Review: Dance Injuries - Inherent Risks or Improper Training ? Theatrical dancing has always had its tragedies of physical suffering and mental anguish, and its occupational dangers. One thinks, for instance, of the young, 19th-century ballerina Emma Livry whose tarlatan skirt was ignited by a gas lamp during a performance, resulting in eight months of agony before she died from the burns. But the idea that the very practice of dance - in particular, of classical ballet - would come to be associated with injury is comparatively recent, a phenomenon of the past twenty years or so. In part, this may be owing to the dancer's own willingness in recent years to be candid about the subject. Mikhail Baryshnikov's ravaged knees, Edward Villella's tortured back, Darci Kistler's shattered foot have all been widely discussed in the media, frequently by the sufferers themselves. I am speaking now of injuries incurred entirely in the course of dancing - injuries and conditions for which dancing itself is deemed responsible. The issue of injury in dance is such a recent concern that very little real study of it has surfaced until recently. Much of the information seems to be anecdotal, and many questions remain to be asked. http://www.mirella-dance.com/Issue2.html

Hey! Wake up, Posters! This is a topic anyone can ring in on. Be serious -- what do you hope to see in the next year. Or let your imaginations run wild. What will ABT's next classic be? What joys will the Diamond Project hold? Who will (a tad early) be named "perhaps the best young choreographer of our day?" in 2002? Will "The Fear Factor" or "Survivor" tap into ballet? Be hopeful, be outrageous, but let us have something to look forward to in 2002!!!!

Hey! Wake up, Posters! This is a topic anyone can ring in on. Be serious -- what do you hope to see in the next year. Or let your imaginations run wild. What will ABT's next classic be? What joys will the Diamond Project hold? Who will (a tad early) be named "perhaps the best young choreographer of our day?" in 2002? Will "The Fear Factor" or "Survivor" tap into ballet? Be hopeful, be outrageous, but let us have something to look forward to in 2002!!!!

An article from Mirella's "TuTu Review" by Tobi Tobias on the appeal and importance of costume. (Tobias, in addition to being New York Magazine's dance critic, wrote a book last year about fashion called "Obsessed by Dress.") YOUNG, DRESSED UP, & DANCING Years and years ago, I asked Bill Carter — a demi-caractère dancer with American Ballet Theatre, a flamenco dancer manqué, and one of the most soulful artists I've ever known — if his vocation had already been evident in his childhood. "Oh, yes," he reminisced, "I was always dressing up and waving scarves around." Since that conversation, having raised a dancing child, who now has a dance-mad little daughter of her own, I've met with much evidence that there's a profound connection, especially in the very young, between dancing and costume.... Like dance, costume is a means of self-expression, which is nearly as essential to human life as air, nourishment, and sleep. http://www.mirella-dance.com/TuTuReview.html

An article by Tobi Tobias for Mirella's "TuTu Review" that struck me as discussable. The Ballerina - A Swan Song? Apart from a few senior artists whose powers have been waning for some time, neither NYCB nor ABT harbors anything you could genuinely call a ballerina. It may very well be that the species is nearly extinct. http://www.mirella-dance.com/Issue3.html

Thanks to rg, who tipped me off to Mirella's "Tutu Review" last night, I've found another online source of ballet articles. Mirella (the costume people) have a site with several articles, each with its own collection of links, by Mindy Aloff (dance injuries), Clive Barnes (Frederick Ashton) and Tobi Tobias (Ballerinas Today and Dance and Custume). There are four so far, and I'm going to post each one of them separately. Since they're permanently on the web, they may be useful not only for discussion now, but for browsers (and Homework Helpers) in the future. The article on Ashton is by Barnes, long a champion of Ashton. There are lots of photos, and a collection of links at the bottom. Sir Fred - A Twentieth Century Original Original, passionate, innovative, and marvelously unique, Ashton simply is one of the finest classic choreographers of the last century. *****LINK NO LONGER AVAILABLE***** [Edit: added] http://www.mirella-dance.com/Issue1.html

What struck me about that statement (and the writer may well have seen NYCB in other situations) is how important repertory is when a company tours. When Paris Opera Ballet goes around with "Le Parc" people get a very different impression of the company than on "Bayadere" nights. In DC, there are two ABT audiences. The Nacho Duato audience and the Weekend Classics (pardon the use of the term, when related to some of the ballets shoved on us in the past few years, by ABT and others, as classics). It is the blind man groping the elephant -- but it's not the groper's fault. Lucia Chase once wrote that she'd fought hard to open with "Les Sylphides" when the company visited London, although the presenters wanted an All-American evening. She was afraid that if they only did the contemporary ballets, they would never be considered a classical company, and that was her ambition. The writer, if she'd (or he; I don't know this person) had seen NYCB in the past may well have assumed from that repertory that that represented the bulk of the company's repertory, that Balanchine is as relevant to NYCB as, say, Ashton is to the Royal. I was struck, of course, by the writer's comparison of ballets to the deconstructed operas and plays. And I continue to be fascinated by the situation in Scotland and the coverage. It has really stirred passions. Without judging the quality of the works in the Scottish ballet repertory (I've never seen them, but they once were said to have done an excellent "Napoli," so they can't be all bad ), I'm heartened to think that so many people think it's important to have a national ballet company -- no one is saying that there shouldn't be contemporary companies as well, but that they should not exclude classical ones -- and that the sole consideration of the direction the company should take should not be money. That's what started this whole controversy. The board announced that they were going to be hip, be new, be now, that no one wanted to see those silly old ballets (I think that shows through in the writer's tone). After heated debate, it came out that they wanted to keep the company very small and not have to pay for toe shoes. Well, damn, there have to be better reasons than that. There has been weekly coverage of this controversy in Scotland for the better part of a year. Solid coverage, of both sides of the issue, from several vantagepoints. To me, it is a huge dance story and affects all of us -- or will, in time.

Manhattnik posed several profound questions. What would we like to see happen in 2002? New ballets. And what do we realistically think might happen in 2002? There will be new ballets. And what scares us to death about 2002? Those ballets sure will be new, won't they?

Manhattnik posed several profound questions. What would we like to see happen in 2002? New ballets. And what do we realistically think might happen in 2002? There will be new ballets. And what scares us to death about 2002? Those ballets sure will be new, won't they?

A good point, Calliope. I think the Scottish choice (which has been in the news now for months; it's been a real fight) is seen there as being between "the classics" and works that were created this week. There's nothing in between there -- no Balanchine, and no Ashton, either. It's also odd that Robert North (a modern dancer) is now the champion of "classical ballet." Perhaps because the model for national companies in Europe includes being able to mount respectable productions of the classics, that is his frame of reference. In any event, I think he's contrasting traditional versions of the classics with what's been the trend in opera and plays for years now -- deconstruction, Freudian analysis, etc. It reminded me of something Leigh wrote on another thread a week or two ago: I'm tired of seeing things deconstructed. I want them to construct something. (bad paraphrase, sorry, Leigh)