Alexandra

Just a note to say that there are some very good points that have been raised here, and it's fine, Michael and BW, to start a new thread -- pull a topic out of a discussion and give it a life of its own. (Like cells splitting ) We've had threads on coaching before -- maybe it's time to have another one. Also the point about educating students. Yes, that's a "Moms and Dads" topic, but it's of interest to the general audience too. Either of those would make interesting topics on Aesthetic Issues, so do feel free I hope there will be more Nutcracker reviews, too!

Thanks for posting that, Kate. I don't know NYCB's casting policies, but one could make a very good case that height is a Cavalier requirement. (Height and genre of dancing; the small, quick guys aren't cut out to be Princes.) Having written that, 17 small, quick guys will be cast as Cavaliers, I'm sure

You saw ALL of those, Giannina? Feeling glutted (Actually, I gather you didn't, but you could tell us just a little bit about the ones you did. She wheedled.)

I certainly agree with that I'd say you've written the party platform, Mme. Hermine But I'm not sure we're in the majority. I've hopped up and down on the "stop saying you're pushing ballet over the edge" soap box for so long, I'm sure anyone who reads this site knows my views. I hope this thread will draw answers of all political persuasions.

In the U.S., there's Vaganova, Cecchetti, RAD and Balanchine (which, although Mel's right that he never codified his technique, is now being taught as a technique; the same thing happened with Bournonville. The "Bournonville Schools" were assembled by his pupils). I don't know the proportions -- perhaps some teachers do. 2) If you learn one method, is it difficult to learn another? Do most dancers master only one, or more? To me, the best way to understand style is to think of it as an accent. An American may become fluent in French, but a Parisian will always be able to tell he's a foreigner. Same thing with dance. Today, everybody dances everything. Some dancers are trained in one method, but adapt to others when they get into a company. 3) Do companies hire dancers based on the method they learned? Is there a mix of stlyes within a company? I think this differs from company to company. In America today, I'd bet that almost every professional company is looking for dancers WITHOUT a distinctive style, because there's been a blending of styles in the past 25 years. Someone with pure training would stand out. NYCB looks for dancers who have been trained in their style -- and takes most of its members from their school. Some of those students may only have studied at SAB for a year, but have generally come from schools elsewhere who teach, if not Balanchine Style, something compatible with it. 4) How can a beginner watching a ballet tell the different styles apart when watching? I don't think a beginner can. The differences are very subtle -- is the chest "pulled up" or relaxed? How are the hands held? If you're curious, go to an end of year show in your town -- the school will say what method they take, and you may well have an RAD, Vaganova and Cecchetti school to choose from. Once upon a time, you could tell where a dancer was trained by looking at him -- and many people could tell who his teacher was. One of my favorite Balanchine quotes is what he said when he first saw Ruthanna Boris in class -- "Ah, a little Italian girl." I read that my first year of reading about ballet and was so jealous -- I wanted to be able to do that too 5) Is one style more popular among professionals than recreational students? What method would the majority of professionals have been taught? I can't add more than I said in question [1]. And anything else you can think that would educate me more=) This is a good question -- other answers welcome. [ December 13, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

I didn't see this performance (and won't be going to any this week). From Harlem: More Fun, Less Filling "Dougla," a campy spectacle of Trinidadian nuptials, has for nearly 30 years served as the finale for many a Dance Theatre of Harlem program. It's a frothy, easily digested dessert. Now it has moved up to main course, its cartwheeling dancers and shivering red pompoms serving as the evening's center of gravity -- which is indicative of the direction this company is taking. Tuesday's program at the Kennedy Center Opera House, the opening of the company's week-long stay, was all soothing smiles and upbeat rhythms, a string of familiar hits guaranteed neither to offend nor overtax the attention span. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2001Dec12.html [ December 16, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Nice quote, Kevin. Thanks for posting that. I wish it were possible to revive Fokine -- not just a piece here and there, but a real body of work, so I could get a good look at him.

Thank you for posting that wonderfully detailed review! Go more!! I've never encountered someone who specialized in Nutcracker -- but didn't go to see other ballet Please let this post be an inspiration to others. Drew, did you see Atlanta Ballet's Nuts? How about the folks up in Boston? Philadelphia? Chicago? San Francisco? Anything down around your way, Giannina and Steve? Can we have a Nutcracker round up, please? Either on this thread, or start your own.

Yes, Kevin, I'd read about that case -- but it was a brief, factual blurb without much background. One hears something like this every now and then. There was a case of it in San Francisco about 15 years ago -- the critic claimed he was very ill and couldn't go. (Not enough of an excuse, in my book. Not to write anything, much less a pan.) Does anyone know the details?

We just got this press release from Boston Ballet and I thought it might be of interest: DANCETALKS IS AN UP CLOSE LOOK AT BALLET Boston Ballet Welcomes the Enthusiasts and the Curious for an Insider's Glimpse December 12, 2001 (BOSTON) - Boston Ballet and the Boston Ballet Volunteer Association present DanceTalks, an engaging lecture/discussion series that provides enthusiasts and the curious with an insider's look at a wide range of dance related topics. This series is part of Boston Ballet's education and community outreach efforts and was created to enhance the understanding and appreciation of dance with in the Boston arts community. This season, the Boston Ballet Volunteer Association will organize three special evenings at the Ballet's Clarendon Street studios in Boston's historic South End. Each presentation will last approximately one hour, beginning at 7 p.m., and is followed by an informal reception where guests can talk with featured artists over refreshments. Tours of Boston Ballet's studios are also offered to attendees beginning at 6 p.m. WHAT: DanceTalks WHEN: Tuesday, February 5, 2002, 7 p.m. Thursday, March 7, 2002, 7 p.m. Monday, April 29, 2002, 7 p.m. WHERE: Boston Ballet 19 Clarendon Street, Boston TICKETS: Advance registration is encouraged. Individual tickets for each program are $12 or the complete DanceTalks series is only $27. For advance ticket information and an order form, please visit our website at www.bostonballet.org; click on "Support Us" and register for DanceTalks in the "Events" section. For additional information, call (617) 695-6950 ext.239. Tickets may also be purchased in person at the Ballet studios beginning at 6 p.m. the day of the event. DANCETALKS DETAILS "Past and Future Perfect" with Laura Young Tuesday, February, 5, 2002 Coaches, who pass along to their students the knowledge and artistry they gained in their performing careers, perfect ballet roles. Laura Young, former Principal Dancer with Boston Ballet, and currently a teacher, coach and Principal of Boston Ballet School, will discuss her exceptional career as a ballerina and how she passes her experiences along to her students. Join Ms. Young as she coaches her students in both the steps and theatrics that make the classics continue to come to life. "From Barre to Grand Jeté" with Peter Pawlyshyn Thursday, March 7, 2002 Whether you are a beginner, professional or star, all dancers must obey a daily regimen that prepares their bodies for practice and performance, which is ballet class. Join Peter Pawlyshyn, former international dancer and member of Boston Ballet's Center for Dance Education faculty, as he demonstrates how he structures a ballet class to go from basics at the barre to moves in the center of the studio that push the students toward linking ballet vocabulary to dance and virtuosity. "Introducing our Artistic Director" with Mikko Nissinen Monday, April 29, 2002 In September 2001, Mikko Nissinen was appointed Boston Ballet's new Artistic Director. During this DanceTalks session, Mr. Nissinen will discuss his career as a dancer and Artistic Director for ballet companies throughout Europe and North America. He will also give patrons a sneak preview of his plans for the 2002-03 Season.

Nureyev and Hookham, though -- now there's a softshoe act for you The Irish Washer Woman's Jig that Fonteyn wrote was her favorite dance as a child would have come in handy. Julie Kent danced in Washington when a teenager as Julie Cox, and Hilary Canary, a Washington Ballet dancer who danced with ABT for awhile, became Hilary Ryan.

Interesting news. I'm not familiar with Ms. Homan's writing, but I am with Mindy Aloff's -- she's one of the writers I'm always interested to read, and I hope she has another outlet, as they say in the trade.

Hello, Ed. Always good to read you I think you're probably right, but the question is really more a theoretical one than a practical one. Suppose our committed citizen could get the funds, what would you want for Detroit, say ? How would you build the Detroit Ballet?

Before those who enjoyed ABT's Nutcracker are driven away, I'd like to point out that this production is a polarizer -- as this thread shows. The audience seems to like it -- there's lots of applause. And it's a good opportunity to see a lot of ABT dancers, especially soloists. I hope those who've enjoyed it as well as those who won't see it again will chime in here. Bard's B, how was Sunday afternoon???

Pleiades, many European companies have "opera" in their official title and/or share a building and administration with the opera company. Originally, ballet was a part of opera -- the dancers appeared in operas; in the very early days, dancing, singing, music and poetry were all intertwined. It took ballet a couple of centuries to break away. I think the official name is (in translation) Ballet of the Paris Opera. I agree with Leigh that Paris breaks the rules. It hasn't had a great native choreographer in several lifetimes. It's kept its identity through its school -- which has changed radically (from French to Italian to Russian-influenced) while retaining something intrinsically Parisian. National Ballet of Canada was once a smaller-scale Royal Ballet, I think (when I first saw the company in the 1970s). Very much modeled on what DeValois had accomplished in the '40s and '50s, but without a native choreographer. I saw them do "Merry Widow" about 15 years ago and was struck how BIG and important they made the ballet seem. They knew how to fill the stage; very much in the old Royal manner. It wasn't exactly an identity, but it wasn't globalglot either.

I think pleiades has hit upon the fundamental distinction. There's another one of company mission, which would originally be determined by the founders, of course, and then either maintained or changed by succeeding boards of directors. NYCBallet was always intended to be New York's company -- with the confidence that New York was a cultural capital and would attract the best. ABT was designed to be a more national company, and spent much of its early years (especially the 1950s) outside of New York, taking ballet to the hinterlands -- and, I think, doing much to fuel the ballet boom by so doing. People won't love ballet if they don't see it. Paris. Ah, Paris. It's just the way they are. Walter Sorrell's Dance in Its Time takes it back to the 12th century. The city has always had a sense of flair -- not trying to please anybody, which might be the best way to please, or at least attract the attention of, everybody.

I'd suggest, then, you add another toggle: that "I" know something about ballet. Call me a pessimist but I don't see another way to do it. {That is not to suggest that others may ) It is an interesting question. What would you do? Build or buy? What model would you use? ABT or City Ballet (or something else). To really play "let's pretend" you could be the meddling sort and suggest repertory. [ December 10, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Well, of course, the City Council would jump to its feet, do a triple pirouette (in perfect unison) while saying "Oh, goody goody! A ballet company!!!! That's just what we need!" They'd vote the money instantly and then....and then..... Hmmm. I don't see a happy ending here. They'll hire a search firm (the way things are done these days) who'll hire the artistic director with the snazziest resume, undoubtedly a "He turned ballet on its ear!!!!" type who will charm the council out of millions of dollars for a wonderful, big new studio/theater, put on several Festivals of New Ballet, and then....and then..... There will be a board revolution, because all the other guys wanted (at the prodding of their wives) a Pretty in Pink ballet company. So Director Number 1 gets the gate, and we instruct the search firm to hire someone who will have our 24-member company in swan tutus by next season. Since we're not quite in the $250K-plus salary range, we don't get, perhaps, the very best tutu-man on the block, but someone with a long, l-o-n-g track record who puts on budget productions of the Tchaikovsky classics as well as a dozen or so of his own creations. Nice thing about Sim City is you can just go in, wipe the slate clean, and start all over again. I'd call up Uncle Lincoln and suggest a grand tour. We'd go around the world, in search of a great choreographer who'd just lost his job because his boss died and was working in a cabaret. I'll send you a postcard. [ December 10, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Thanks for posting that, Michale. MORE NUTCRACKER REVIEWS, please.

This is an interesting question and I hope others will respond -- especially READERS, not just the writers. And it's a knotty question. In the best of all possible worlds, I'd like the specialist, insider view (whether I agree with the writer or not) because someone who's watched rehearsals as well as performances, talked to the dancers, had the opportunity to ask the choreographer questions, etc. should be able to provide a richer insight into the choreographer's work. [Devil's Advocate would say, doesn't matter. All that matters is what you see on stage.] Well, yes, again, in theory. But it takes time to see things. Daily critics faced with a premiere are writing a review that's basically a pop quiz. It's not the deepest take on a new work. Finding the balance between "Ah! Now, after seeing it for the fourth time, I understand what he's doing" and "Well, it's really not that bad, I guess" is one of the trickiest things in ballet watching. Is the insider writer liable to be caught in a conflict of interest? Almost inevitably. What happens when the Favored One makes a klunker? What does bother me when I read someone write a piece that I consider a shill is that they never say, "I'm interested in Maestro X. Nobody's ever heard of him, but I think there's something in his work. I gave up my entire summer vacation to hang out in his studio and watch the rehearsals for his new ballet, and this is why I've trudged all the way to Dry Gulch to see the premiere of New Ballet 17 and write about it for The Big City Gazette." They don't say that. They say, "Miracle in Dry Gulch!!!" as if Maestro X had a big, wondrous magnet that pulled all art lovers to him. I think that with not-yet-established-choreographers, Truth will out. There are a lot of people who have been named, prematurely, "perhaps the best young choreographer of our day" and yet have not been able to create a body of work, or works 7 through 55 don't live up to the promise of the first six. (Or maybe they do, but that's a different story.) When someone writes about an artist who's already established, that's a different thing. Sometimes it's just bandwagon jumping, sometimes it's something deeper (like Croce and Balanchine). I'll always be interested in reading Joan Acocella on Mark Morris, because she knows his work far better than I do and she sees, and she'll see something interesting, so I'm glad that knowledgeable, committed voice is there. For the general reader, even the interested reader, though, they may never realize the connection. How many people picked up the Times and thought, "Oh, [good/damn-and-blast] there's Rosalyn Sulcas again on Forsythe!" I think most people will accept it on its face -- a piece in the New York Times on Forsythe.

Hate to tell you, but it's already been simplified three, maybe four times, and clarified. As a friend of mine commented about this production, the next time some bright soul suggests they bring in a playwright (USA) or dramaturg (Europe) to "fix" a production, this is the poster child. Wendy Wasserstein was the librettist originally. There were several pieces in the first act that got axed -- some saw it in New York or California, and might be able to report. Last season, there was a totally confusing scene in the first act where Drosselmeyer read the Hoffman tale (not the Dumas version, of course, only the "darker," hence, more modern and right-thinking version) which was acted out. Never did I think the time would come when A) a company would actually ADD a mime scene and B) I would join the chorus of thousands saying "Cut that mime!" I think the unicorns (there used to be two) and the fairies were aimed at the "market" of people who buy calendars with unicorns and fairies on them. I can't see any other reason. The Giant, Popping Rubber Flowers (which may not look quite so menacing at the Met) are special though, aren't they? The drunken party guest was there Thursday night, I heard from a friend. Perhaps this is a nod to the Baryshnikov version? In that, all the guests were a bit ill-behaved and it was a particularly tipsy one who smashed the Nutcracker. [ December 09, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

Andrei, I agree, and your definition of "provincial" as opposed to what goes on in the capital is what most people would probably mean when they use the term. I think, though, that even capitals can be provincial, in assuming that their way is not only the best, but the only way. But I do think that the distinction Leigh makes is valid -- different, but valid. Companies who create a repertory geared to the tastes of its audience, in contrast to companies who borrow repertory from here and there.

I thought I'd intervene to keep this discussion within the parameters of Leigh's article -- which is posted on the Ballet Talkers Reviews thread. It isn't really about ranking, but of "Provincial" being a distinct style developed by and for its home audience or "international" being a less distinct style, with no specific identity. (I'd like to avoid the "we are not regional" arguments, at least on this thread ) I agree with Leigh's points, although I think the naming will cause confusion. I've about this several times, and have used an analogy of "boutiques" versus "department stores". Or small, cuisine-specific restaurants versus fast food joints. I'm one who thinks the great companies are all provincial, and that "international" leads to bland, accentless dancing. The notion that when a company loses its identity and surrenders to "global glot" is when it not only loses its soul but its greatness is one of my Causes, so I'll stop there, and hope others will enter the fray. (Leigh's article is long, but definitely worth a read We're repriting it in this month's Ballet Review so that it will have a print life. )

I like the Lowensjkold better too (I'm not sure if I'm spelling it right either, Manhattnik!) I think he was only 21 when he wrote it, and I don't think he wrote another. (That's written without checking!) But he wasn't composing a new score to old steps -- the choreography for Bournonville's version was completely different. (I think the reason a new score had to be composed was for copyright reasons.)

Good point about Petipa -- I think this was done quite often in the 19th century (it's one of the things Noverre and Fokine railed about, the whole idea of taking sets from here, music from there, and steps from around the corner). Roland Petit did a similar music switch for "Le Jeune Homme et la Morte", but that was deliberate, one reads, to shake up the dancers (from jazz to Bach -- or was it the other way around?). So avant-garde of him [ December 07, 2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]