Alexandra

I'm going to move this thread to Anything Goes, as it turned away from Aesthetic Issues (except for Cliff). I've posted a separate "What is Western about classical ballet" there, and I hope we can have another go at that question, sans article. I think I must say, since there are so many people from so many different places, backgrounds and, I would assume, political persuasions who read this board, that Ballet Alert! is neither right wing nor left wing, and that I will happily accept subscriptions from Republicans as well as Democrats -- or Communists, Druids and Nonbelievers Those who wish to do so can go right ahead bashing Derbyfield's opinions (or defending them) to your hearts' content [ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Liebs, I'm sure you're right. Everyone, or almost everyone, in ballet is there because they love it, but artistic director salaries in the larger companies are now counted in fractions of a million -- quarter-million, half-million -- dollars PLUS if the director is a choreographer, there may be royalties on top of it, and certainly are if his or her ballets are taken into another company's rep. So I think there are some people at the top -- and on the exec side, too -- who are doing very, very well financially. Several $100,000 salaries must have some effect on ticket prices! (There are still dozens, perhaps hundreds, of people who are helping out on subsistence wages, or as volunteers, too, but the tip of the pyramid is getting pretty heavy.) [ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Thank you, Nora. I'd forgotten already -- yes. Miami City Ballet's "Jewels"

I'd like to sit in lots of different places all at once For me, it depends on the theater and the ballet. For Balanchine, I'd like to see the patterns -- I can live without the dripping sweat. For the 19th century classics, I'd like to be halfway up the left aisle in the orchestra, because the patterns read better from the left. I seldom get to see ballet "dead on," sitting in the center, and have been surprised when I do. There are a lot of ballets (especially by less experiencned, or lesser, choreographers) that look great when you're sitting dead center, and a mess when you watch from an angle. I used to love standing in the Kennedy Center. Best seat in the house, and in my day, it was $2 or $3. I'd try to switch from the right to the left side every night -- I learned a lot about ballet that way. You had a completely unobstructed view, there was enough of a rise that you could see the patterns, and yet the Kennedy Center is an intimate enough house that you could see the acting, if there was any (and far enough away not to be driven mad if there wasn't and there should be.)

In Cuba, ballet is extremely popular. It may be the result of the political situation -- that Cuba has been so isolated it's had to look inward -- but the ballet has been a great source of national pride. Alonso was also in the position of being ablt to present what she wanted to present and to educate an audience -- anyone, rich or poor (of course being rich doesn't mean one has better taste; being well-educated, however, means that at least one has been exposed to good art) needs to be educated to appreciate fine art or literature. I think the arts will depend on rich donors, which is why New York City can support two big, and several small, ballet companies. If you need to raise $500,000, getting it in $10 checks is a much more daunting task than being able to tap five people who can be convinced to write a $100,000 check. The situation in France is quite different from here, I think, since so many of the smaller companies outside Paris have been turned from ballet companies to contemporary dance companies. I've heard two rationales for this. One is simply that contemporary dance is so much cheaper -- smaller cast works, no pointe shoes, etc. -- and the other is (Patrice Bart said this in the recent DanceView interview) that "ballet does not stand mediocrity" and that it's better to have one top-of-the-line company than a dozen lesser lights. IMO, this is a mistake and one that will eventually cost French ballet dearly. If most of France is cut off from ballet -- never sees it -- but sees only contemporary dance, well, gosh, that's what they're going to think of as dance, and Paris Opera Ballet is going to be even more distant and foreign -- and the cries of "why do we have to support that elephant?" will grow louder. Lincoln Kirstein had a theory that what kept ballet alive was all the small companies -- even the really tiny ones, the infamous Dotty Dinkles of the world. That gives lots of people a connection to ballet. Ballet in America was richer, I think, in the 1940s, '50s and '60s when several companies toured incessantly, bringing ballet to even tiny towns. But you still need people with money to fund it. High ticket prices is a knotty question, and no one looks at the costs of producing ballet. It's not just the dancers and musicians, or even the stage unions (who used to get all the blame) now. It's very high salaries to administrative and artistic staff. Departments of education, community outreach, marketing, special programs, etc. That all has to be paid for.

Rich people have always supported the arts. I'm very happy they do -- it means they're there for the rest of us to enjoy. I agree. I don't think "elite" is a dirty word. Or "literate" or "educated."

Alas, I've never seen a heavenly performance of "Concerto Barocco" although I believe in it. (I came to CB during the Heather Watts era.) Spiritual Heavens: Kingdom of the Shades (especially the Paris one, because it's so cold), Monotones II, finale of "Four Temperaments," first pas de deux in "Chaconne" Happy Heavens: Symphony in C, pas de six and tarantella of Napoli Modern Heavens: Pond Way (Cunningham), Esplanade (Taylor)

Calliope, I think you're a speed reader The whole fund is $50 million; ABT has put in for a share. I agree with Calliope that ABT subscribers are unlikely to be overly upset by this. If they'd cut a new full-length, which would have been on more subscriptions, it would have been more difficult. I'm sorry to see a new program be dropped, but I can understand the need. The arts in NYC are hurting -- the long-term effects of 9/11 aren't yet clear. The fact that so many financial companies moving to the 'burbs has a practical effect: all of those young singles with disposable income aren't downtown any more. Then there's the return to home and hearth (video, DVD and other home entertainment equipment sales are up, according to last night's news), the switch many philanthropists have made from anything else to 9/11-related activities -- it's going to be hard.

Thanks for posting this, NO7. I think it's a topic that deserves discussion. I posted another, sister thread, to get at the "to be [accessible] or not to be [accessible]" question, but I think this case deserves a discussion all its own. I think it's just an excuse for the magazines to show skin, and I sense the meddling of the marketeers here -- skin sells. It's amazing how many of the smaller or mid-sized American regional companies use nearly naked bodies -- as often beefcake as cheesecake -- juxtaposed with a woman in a tutu or nightgown on their brochures. The audience has become bifurcated -- or it's perceived that way by company managements, I think. Half wants "modern" which somehow has come to mean "nearly naked" and the other half wants "classical" which is often interpreted merely as anything where the dancers wear tutus (or nightgowns). There's been a push in the last 20 years to see dance as sport -- you see a lot of young dancers with a signature line of "Dance is my sport." Sport pays big bucks. Sport is cool. Sport is on TV. Why wouldn't people, especially young people, want to emulate sport, especially when there is absolutely nothing else in school or media to tell them that art is anything at all? [ December 19, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

I'm copying over a quote from Leigh on another thread that I think warrants discussion. He wrote: "Maybe it's just me, but isn't culture for anyone (even if it's not for everyone)? Why should we make ballet for the uncultured? I'm all for making ballet available to everyone. I don't think it should or needs to become mass media. If it needs to do this to survive. . .maybe it shouldn't survive." There is a push to make ballet more popular in the sense of selling more tickets -- we've discussed this often, in various ways -- but is the only way to do it making it mass media? (I'd agree with Leigih -- if it needs to do this to survive, maybe it shouldn't survive.) How do we solve the popularity problem? How can ballet be made more accessible without compromising its very nature? (Or, if you think it shouldn't be made accessible, chime in. Or if you think it has no right to exist unless it is accessible, let's hear that too.)

A companion to Calliope's thread above, for non-ballet performances. Shen Wei's "Near the Terrace," for its beauty and competency (especially the first section) Compagnie Jani-Bi of Senegal?s ?Le coq est mort," another tanztheater piece, this time with a very African flavor, that was extremely powerful. Paul Taylor's "Dandelion Wine." (Not new, of course, but new to me). A New Century version of "Diggity," another "light" Taylor that I loved.

I'm trying to think. I'm trying to think. Hmmm. Peter Boal in everything he danced during the Farrell mini-season here. Jonathan Howells as Alain in "La Fille Mal Gardee" with the Royal. Not the richest ballet year in D.C. This year promises to be better. As for new ballets? None. For new (or new-to-me choreography) I found this only in modern dance. I'm going to start a 2001 wrap up on the Dance Forum too. Calliope? Your turn to chime in!

Hasn't anyone gone? Reports, please.

Nope, didn't go, Manhattnik, but I certainly enjoyed reading about it Off-topic for tonight's casting, but wasn't Beskow supposed to have a solo this year in the divertissements? (I forget which one.) Did anyone see that? She's the only traveling female Dane, so I'd like to know how she's doing.

Welcome, Farrell Fan! What a wonderful quote -- thank you for posting it. So that more people will see this, I'm going to move the topic to the Anything Goes forum. (The Welcome forum is primarily for introductions, and not everyone checks it every day.) (I hope this doesn't turn into a debate as to whether or not ballet is always poetry, at least in this thread, but to the sentiment the author meant to convey )

Auvi, I have no reason to believe Maryland Youth Ballet is stealing boys from other schools, just that they have a successful recruiting program for boys. There's safety in numbers -- I think that's part of it. If the program is the same as in years past, there will be a photo of all the boys. I think that, alone, may be the added push one little kid, dragged to his sister's recital and suddenly excited by seeing other children on stage, may need.

Estelle, we were posting at the same time. I disagreed with most of his examples and statements about ballet -- I'd offer this as a good example (preacher's hat on) of the difference between the perfectly valid opinion of a fan and a review by a critic with a larger context. I think the people who are so happy when something "goes beyond ballet" think the same thoughts -- the music is dumb, etc. It's just that he likes them, and the ballet-haters, or ballet-skeptics, don't. I think what he means by "something out of nothingness" is that there is nothingness until the body moves, and then there is something. But he also could simply mean that all those shapes and patterns, not to mention the underlying meaning and the poetry, are "nothing" but the jump makes it "something." (For non-American readers, National Review is a right wing monthly political magazine, which probably explains the Tora Bora image, and may be why the author emphasizes the athleticism. He's writing it for his colleagues, who probably think ballet is sissy as well as dumb.) [ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Manhattnik, I hope you will read it before discussing. It's more than just the last quote. I agree with what Dale posted on the Links thread -- I don't agree with many of his points, but it's good to see ballet "coming out ahead," as she put it, in an opinion piece. I didn't focus on the PC aspects of it. Of course, I agree that there should be a way of celebrating one's culture without bashing someone else's, but that's not the article's main point. It was interesting to me that the frame of reference was completely virtuosity -- to my mind, he's not really a ballet lover. I agree with Leigh there; he's a dancer lover. (I wonder if the same dichotomy exists in opera. There are the divamanes, but there are also people who are fanatically devoted to the music.) In a way, this attitude -- that it's good because they sweat and doing it right is really, really hard -- is the Evil Twin of the anti-ballet party. They're seeing ballet in exactly the same way -- the Shades are dumb, anything in between the jumps is a bore (except the anti-ballet people would say the jumps are pretty boring, too). It's always interesting to me that someone can go to the ballet repeatedly -- as this man obviously has -- and finds nothing to look at in the Shades except women going down a ramp. If ballet says anything about Western civilization -- and I definitely think it does, whether it's better than the Stamping Toad Dance of the Galapagos Cloggers (a made up example) or not in the same league as the Noh play -- Shades, the abstraction of an idea made into physical form -- would be a prime example. I think it is worth considering what is Western about ballet. Western Europe is the only culture that produced a dance art form independent of social and religious function (some might argue this is its main flaw, others its glory) AND pulled dance out of the larger theatrical context (the same argument applies here). Japan and China have great classical dance forms; they're part of something else. India and Indonesia have developed great classical religious dance forms; they serve the gods, not the public. Why? (And America isolated dancing still further, down to the steps, in some cases, or the movements, without context, libretto, costume, set or music.) That says a lot about us, too. [ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Thanks very much to Tancos, who posted the link to the full article in The National Review on today's Links thread -- or I never would have seen this. I hate to give away a writer's punch line, but the last paragraph struck me as discussable: "And in times like these, over and beyond the esthetic pleasures of ballet, I feel a great pride in it, as having come from us, from our civilization. Who but Western man has brought so much exquisite beauty out of nothingness? This is ours, this is us, this surpasses anything created elsewhere by a hundred, a thousand orders of magnitude. Stand up for your civilization, your culture: Go see a ballet next chance you get. Hey hey, ho ho, Western civ's the way to go!"

Thanks for that review, Auvi -- I do hope you'll report on the other Nutcrackers you see, especially Pennsylvania Ballet, which hardly ever gets covered on this board. I saw Maryland Youth Ballet a few years ago and what impressed me was not only the number of boys they had, but that they had good roles for several boys. They had a young ballerina at that time, but she's graduated now, so I'll be interested to hear who the new crop of dancers are.

Thanks you, Estelle and Alymer, for this discussion and for so much background and detail. It's my understanding that Mortier's tastes in dance lean strongly to the contemporary rather than the classical. What that means for POB -- well, we'll just have to wait and see

Thanks for that, Bards B. I thought the company looked better this year, too. I have to chuckle about your complaint about the latecomers. I had the same reaction. There was one guy -- huge, looked like a linebacker who kept walking up the aisle, and after the third time, I seriously considered tripping him! And it's not only the latecomers, but the little kids who decide they have to go to the bathroom as soon as the dancing starts.

Thank you for that, Sonja. I love reading about your master class experiences, and I'm always grateful that you take the time to post in so much detail. All those little stories were wonderful

Hello, Ginny. It's always good to hear from you. (Ginny is one of DanceView's Charter Subscribers). I edited the post to fix the truncation -- I just said I wasn't planning on going to DTH. I don't know what happened. I've switched to Netscape as a browser and sometimes it seems to cut off lines. Thank you very much for your report. Often Saturday matinees don't sell out, I'm told, but it may be the season -- and, as you noted, that it followed the Cubans and ABT so closely. Mitchell is still director. I think many of the problems might be traced to money -- DTH has always had to scrabble to make ends meet and there just may not be enough for new productions. The company does have a huge turnover; why, I don't really know. Alicia Graf, who should be the company's ballerina now, suffered a career-threatening injury about three years ago and has never made it back. Mitchell has a proud track record of developing dancers -- of having the knack, as he did with Graf, of seeing someone with star power, if an uneven technique, and using them well, putting them in exactly the right rolls. So it's sad to think that the company isn't being renewed. Did anyone else go? Calling again for reports -- and from New Yorkers as well, since the company was there recently.

Thanks very much for posting that, Calliope. It was especially interesting since you hit a cast with lots of young dancers. (I'm always very grateful to people who take the time to post such detailed reviews, and I'm sure the rest of us enjoy reading them, too.)