Alexandra

In all fairness, dancers--and the company--have to be given a break on a last-minute substitution.

"Did," not "do" I don't think I'd like to see Kistler in "Diamonds" any more. (That was one.) The others really weren't created roles, but roles that, when I first started seeing the company, were Farrell's (in that she had taken over from the previous generation), so they're Farrell roles, to me, but not to the cosmos (Things like "Swan Lake" and "Symphony in D.") But to the point underlying your question -- is it possible for a subsequent generation to be as good or better than a creator -- Kistler was the ballerina who proved, to me, that the answer is a resounding yes. I loved watching Farrell, and I'd be happy to be watching her still, but I was just as happy watching Kistler, especially the 16-year-old, sunny, invincible Kistler I first knew. (as different from Farrell as it is possible to be)

Thank you, A.M., for your reports, and for taking the time and trouble to translate for us. There are many readers of this board interested in the Kirov (Maryinsky) and who don't have access to Russian reviews. It's wonderful to keep up. This reviewer sounds very interesting and very perceptive -- I don't happen to agree with her, but I take her seriously What she writes about Neumeier and the dancers is exactly what the Danish dancers say about him, by the way. That part could have been written by a Dane -- where Neumeier has long been the favorite modern choreographer. I see his value as a director and I understand why they like working with him, but I don't think being a good director is the same as being a good choreographer. Where he fails, for me and many others, is in the actual movement. It's a limited and often very awkward vocabulary.

Mary, I didn't mean cross-gender, I meant transsexual -- not that men danced women's roles and vice versa; of course, yes, that's been going on since the Greeks and Romans (and probably well before) but that this was a major role first danced by a woman that is now danced by a man, in the way that Shakespeare's women's roles were originally played by men (though for different reasons) and are now played by women -- and it would seem inconceivable to revert to the former custom, except in a deliberately stylized production. The Danes had one Franz who was a bully (Torben Jeppesen) rather than a sweet young thing, but I didn't see him.

That's a good question. There's one rather famous example -- I didn't see it, but have read about it. Balanchine created "Gounod Symphony" for (I'm not checking this, so I hope it's right) Maria Tallchief, a wonderful ballerina, and yet....the ballet didn't work. The reviews were of the "even a genius has an off-day" variety. Then, a few years later, Violette Verdy joined the company and Balanchine revived the ballet for her, and her "French perfume" brought the ballet to life. I liked Anthony Dowell AS WELL as Baryshnikov in "Other Dances" -- totally different interpretation. He wasn't as Russian as Baryshnikov (surprise) but he gave the second solo a darker interpretation. I was perfectly happy whichever man I saw in that ballet. I've liked Kistler as well as I liked Farrell in some roles, but I don't think better. Hmm. I'll have to think on this one and get back to you Any others? [ 05-17-2001: Message edited by: alexandra ]

I haven't seen many "Coppelias." I hated it when I was younger and avoided it until I started writing, when I had to see it, but still didn't seek out performances. I saw Kirkland do this, with Baryshnikov, and don't remember a thing. So, ABT's (I do remember Fracci's, largely because I was curious as to how such a great Giselle would fare in a comedy; she was lovely.) National Ballet of Canada's with Nureyev and an assortment of partners -- he was exactly like Colas, as I remember it. New York City Ballet's, which I do like very much (McBride; Muriel Aasen, a Disappeared Dancer who was quite promising in the mid-1970s; my programs tell me Ashley, but I don't remember her either). The production that made me love the ballet was the Danish one, the polar opposite of NYCB's -- masculine as opposed to feminine, character as opposed to classical. Only Swanhilda is on pointe. Everyone else is in boots. Even Frantz is a character hero. There is no divertissement of the bells in the last act, but the most extraordinary, spirited czardas, even in the early 1990s, I have ever seen -- that ever-present band of gypsies that roamed the hedgerows of 19th century ballet pops in and seems to seduce everyone on stage, including Frantz, but we already know about him.... The Danes had a ballerina tradition in this role that stretched through the century. In each generation there were two ballerinas: one was the Sylph, and one was Swanhilda. The last were Heidi Ryom (who was a very good Swanhilda, very light, very curious, and with a good heart) and Lis Jeppesen (sweet and heartless, and absolutely wonderful). The production was ruined after Hans Brenaa died. The last I saw it, it was coarse, the fun bled out of it. It was done so incessantly in the 1990s that everyone grew tired of it, and it hasn't been in repertory since 1994, I think.

I meant to put this up for Giselle and forgot, so I'll start a new "tradition." This can be a thread for oddball stories and the like. Here's one funny one to start. The names of the characters in "Coppelia" have long posed a problem for newspaper editors. Often a reviewer will find that his review of, say, the great Danilova's Swanhilda will be changed by a thoughtful copy desk to "the great Danilova's Coppelia," because, after all, that is the heroine, right? Or, worse, they'll look down the cast list and see that Sally Smith is Coppelia and have a great big headline: Freddie Franklin and Sally Smith Knock 'em Dead at the Arena." But I can top that. A friend of mine once woke to find she had reviewed a dancer's delicious portrayal of Swan Hilda. She had dictated the review and spelled the name, and the operator had jumped to what was, for her, the obvious conclusion.

Frantz is ballet's first transsexual. He was born a girl (either because there were no men around, as the usual version goes, or because the girls-playing-breeches-parts was well-established by the time "Coppelia" rolled around and the audience liked this conceit). Females continued to dance the role in France until 1961, I believe, and I think I read POB was reviving that version -- perhaps for the School, not the company? Estelle? Later productions made Franz male (the Danes did this instantly; they had plenty of male dancers and, although they liked breeches parts, too (witness the two little cadets in "Far From Denmark"), there seems to be an instinct there that chemistry is important, and cross-gender roles don't work dramatically. (The Danes call them "Franz" and "Svanilda.") Even there, though, Frantz's character seems a bit thin, and not just because he literally has to sit out the second act. He's a nice guy, a little foolish (he falls in love with a doll, after all), curious, not especially law-abiding -- it seems as though there could be a lot of scope for imagination in that character, but generally, dancers don't get past the "nice guy" part. Has anyone seen a Fran(t)z who did more than just be a cute, dumb guy?

The Danes play the score completely differently from any other company I've heard. It's robust, dark, and surprisingly masculine. (I generally think of Coppelia's score as the ideal feminine ballet music.) Their production, which endured for just about a century with very few changes, was both comic AND with darker undertones -- not as dark as 4Ts analysis (with which I agree), but definitely dark. Croce's review mentioned an interesting Coppelius whom I have never seen, not even a smidgen on tape -- Frank Schaufuss, who played him while still a young man, which Croce said added to the horror. Niels Bjorn Larsen was the dry old scientist, set on his task; the fact that he took out Franz's heart -- i.e., killed him -- didn't bother him a wit. Some of the Danish Coppelius's have been very nasty, crotchety old men who hate children, which makes the nastiness of the children easier to bear. There's another Danish take on Coppelius that is worth noting, I think. It was hinted at in Larsen's portrayal, according to newspaper accounts, and Kronstam used it to develop a character he rehearsed but never danced on stage -- that Coppelius is Jewish (and was, perhaps, intended to be Jewish in the original production). And a Jew in the 19th century way of looking at things. This would explain why he is a pariah, kept apart from the village (of course, he could just be a dotty old man), and also why the Mayor thinks he can be bought off with money -- and (and this, again, is the 19th century stereotype) would allow himself to be bought off, even though not only his worldy possessions, but his dreams, were destroyed.

Good question (it was #8, but that's ok ) I think Kathleen's explanation is right. But one still reads "ear of wheat," which confuses things further. (An "ear of corn" which, if shaken, would rattle, might be cause for concern.) I also think Mary's point, that the ear of whatsit is a deliberate reference to nature -- peasants trust nature, we read newspaper horoscopes.

Thanks to all for posting about NBOC! Paquita has been faithfully keeping us posted on the company for quite awhile now, and she must have felt a bit lonely, as we very seldom had anyone else join in. So thanks, helga -- mom2 and syncopation, if you went, please chime in

Which companies? Choreographers/directors? Were they traditional productions? Any little quirks? Good, bad, indifferent?

Well, Giannina, that's the way it's usually performed, so it's no wonder you look at it that way

I love the "high crime" district. "Coppelia" is the last surviving ballet of what is often considered the Romantic Era (although pedants will say that it's really a ballet of the Second Empire), as "La Sylphide" is the first, and I think they make nice bookends. James starts out, all fresh and happy, looking for an ideal (woman) and running into the forest (i.e., nature) to find her. Coppelius, now as old as James would be had he either A), lived or B), walked down to Hungary having many unrecorded adventures along the way, ends the era trying to fashion his ideal out of cloth and wire. Croce wrote a wonderful review of "Coppelia" pointing out the darker sides -- man versus woman, the feminine soul versus "the male world of machines." The notion that Coppelius is trying to control his love -- no real woman will ever bow every time he asks her to, nor switch from a Scotch to a Spanish dance so seamlessly -- is certainly timeless. That he can be so easily duped -- as was Franz -- makes a case for this being the first feminist ballet. I think there is a lot in Coppelia.

We actually have done this before, but quite awhile ago, and it never hurts to revisit an issue. Thanks for your list. There are so many great female personalities in modern dance, especially in its early days, that ballet's women often get forgotten.

I agree with Luka. I think people sometimes don't take "Coppelia" seriously because it's a comedy. There are actors who will tell you that often comedy is more difficult to bring off than tragedy, and I think comedy tells us just as much, if not more, of the human condition than tragedy. Also, as Juliet noted, the score is a fine one and, like "Nutcracker" and "Swan Lake," probably one of the main reasons why "Coppelia" has endured.

I was just about to post something like that, Juliet Working on Broadway would probably be a good experience -- there's certainly precedent! I know it's not possible to know everthing about a person after a half-hour conversation, but I did an interview with Wheeldon about a year ago for Interview magazine, and he seemed very serious and level-headed -- as though he actually is interested in choreography and building a career over time. I would imagine he realizes the importance of his position

Just a note -- we'll get to dancers of today eventually, but please keep this thread to Swanhildas of THE PAST. McBride and Jeppesen are rather recent past, but they are no longer dancing the role, so that's okay. But please, no one still dancing the role, until we've gone through the history and choreography parts.

Alexandra Danilova, Margot Lander, Inge Sand, Margot Fonteyn, Svetlana Beriosova. None of these have I seen, but I've read about them. Fonteyn and Beriosova wouldn't seem to be ideal Swanhildas, but they danced the roles quite young, I believe, and I have friends who saw them and admired them greatly. Danilova was THE great "American" Swanhilda. Any others? Who are the great Russian and French Swanhildas? AntoP, does Coppelia still exist in Italy? Any great 20th century Italians?

[Note that his house is in the same location as Albrecht's; same realtor, obviously ] Is he just the local toymaker? Is he a symbol of something dark and sinister? Is he a long-time resident of the village? Has he just taken up making dolls -- or, at least, letting them be seen?

"Coppelia" [there should be an accent, grave, I believe, over the "e" in French; in Danish, there's no accent. I'll be Danish on this thread ] "Coppelia" is a ballet that's been a bit out of fashion lately -- a staple of semi-professional companies as a spring show, but no longer a vehicle for star ballerinas -- at least, not often. One of the most revolutionary things George Balanchine ever did was to stage a "Coppelia" in 1974, at the height of the triumph of post-modernism, two years after the Stravinsky Festival with its oh, so modern ballets. It was a year before I came to ballet, so I only know of the shock this caused second hand. But it did cause a shock. So, with that preamble, and since we have posters of several generations here, do you take "Coppelia" seriously as one of the great ballets? Why or why not.

I didn't see the other casts, but three friends who did liked the Carreno cousins very much and agreed with Sarah Kaufman that they made a big difference. I also was told that Thursday night (Carreno night) the applause was very tepid, but weekend audiences were generally very, very enthusiastic. I've found opinions on this one very polarized, which is always interesting. Two other people I talked to saw it exactly the same way I did, two others enjoyed it. Everyone I've talked to agreed with what's been said here, and in the Post, about the orchestra; I felt about the ballet the way others felt about the orchestra There are at least four other Washingtonians here out of hiding; any of you see it?

I didn't like the first act at all the first time I saw it. I was with a friend, and both of us actually started laughing at the musical juxtaposition when the second act began. While this will never be either my favorite Balanchine or my favorite "Midsummer," I've come to like the second act, and see how it's related to the first. It's a kind of abstract apotheosis. All those mismatches have been put right. It's the glorification of love, and human love (as opposed to magic love or fairy love.) In the original cast (which I didn't see) it seems that Balanchine was also making a point, that two mismatched halves can make a whole. (Oberon and Tatania are short/tall; in the second act pas de deux, I believe it was Verdy and Ludlow, the opposite, and more usual, short woman/tall man). This doesn't necessarily make the act more likable, if one doesn't like it, but it isn't as tacked on to fill out an evening, as I had once thought.

I think it's very hard to know whether someone's support of the arts is window dressing, unless one is really knows them. And I think the attendance of famous people at ballet generally does good -- and that politicians care enough about dance to sit through an evening is to the good, for two reasons. One is that it raises the profile -- monkey see, monkey do. Many Kennedys attended ballet here (I write as one who's watched Kennedy Center audiences for 25 years). Joan Kennedy was a regular balletgoer, often with her children. JFK Jr and Caroline Kennedy attended a lot as well. If some people also attended because the Kennedys put the idea in their heads, or they wanted to hang out with John-John, it got them in the door. On the other hand, on balance, I've noticed many more Republican politicians in the audience at ballet performances than Democratic ones, and Republicans aren't known for their generous policies to the arts -- although it's quite possible these people give privately. FBI directors, CIA directors, not only Kissinger but Brzezinski; several Senators. Sandra Day O'Connor is the only Really Big Wig I've ever seen at a non-glamorous event. I've noticed her at smaller modern dance performances, even some ethnic fare at the Smithsonian. Back to Jacqueline Kennedy, Lady Camelot, one of the most exciting stories I've ever heard about politicians, possibilities and the arts was how Mrs. Kennedy was attending a gala at (I believe) DAR hall and phoned her husband at a break saying, "You've got to come over and see this." He did. I like the idea that a President is four blocks away from dance and can just "pop over," and that one would. I don't think that can be a bad thing for dance. I think we're at a pendulum swing on the Kennedys now. He was very unpopular in many circles at the time of his death, then became sainted, and now is in the disembowelling stage. There's a quote from Jackie Kennedy that was used as a promo for a PBS bio that seems appropriate here: "It is difficult to separate the good from the bad [in a person]. And perhaps there is no need to do so." I think she was a lot wiser than her pillbox hats.

Hi! I, and I'm sure others, have really enjoyed reading these posts about the performances, but to avoid conflict, I think it's best that we not characterize companies (their behavior, training, etc.) and use the rule for dinner parties: avoid discussion of religion and politics Please stick to the performances Thanks!