Alexandra

Thanks, Barb, for the information on how a good tape can be made. I found it fascinating.

I understand that orchestras are expensive but there is an edge to live music that just can't be replaced, even by a good tape, I think. The unpredictability is gone. And I'd miss the horn player (in the Kennedy Center orchestra, some guy has managed to play the same wrong note in every performance of Romeo and Juliet I've ever seen. But he always plays it wrong a little differently).

alexandra

p.s. Hi Ed! Good to hear from you. Missed you.

Did anybody see anything really truly great in 1998? Dancer, performance, new ballet, old ballet, moment from a ballet? Live, preferably.

alexandra

Celia -

The 50-second Corsaire was just the man's solo. Sorry I wasn't clear.

I'd also say that in live performance, a live orchestra matters. It's part of the electricity.

Dale -

Agree wholeheartedly about the little Russian touring companies. It's especially unfortunate when they make tapes to accommodate five-minute curtain calls -- except the audience stops clapping after about 90 seconds, and there's just dead air and huffy dancers.

alexandra

Paul,

I sympathize. I don't think there is very much first-rate classical dancing around these days, and what there is, well, it depends on where one lives! Since you're into videos, I'd recommend watching some Kirov Sleeping Beauties, or the Paris Opera in classical ballets.

As for the smiling, it's not that they're supposed to look grim, but they're not supposed to look like they're in a musical comedy, either. There's a story I got in Denmark about Ashton, when he was setting Romeo and Juliet in 1956. At that time, the Danes had been through a 30-year demicaractere period, where grinning was encouraged. Ashton did not want this for Romeo and told them, "Smile with your eyes, because when you do that, your whole face lifts -- but don't give me any grin."

I think the idea for a classical or neoclassical ballet is to have a pleasant, relaxed look about the face, show emotion where appropriate, but, as in acting, do not overemote. As absurd as it sounds, since classical dancing is as artificial as one can get, a dancer is supposed to look natural.

Make any sense?

alexandra

Oh, no, Angela, I wasn't at all offended. Sorry to have given that impression.

You pose an interesting question, and one that will probably pop up here often. For me, the short answer is both: both technique and dedication -- and artistry.

Personally, I don't prefer technicians over artists, and if Melnikov has stopped developing, that's a shame, because he danced beautifully in Sleeping Beauty and Esmeralda when I saw him.

I do think that it's difficult to judge dedication of a dancer from performance. I've seen dancers who look as though they could care less when they're on stage, and then seen them in class and they're the hardest workers there. (And I don't mean that dedication backstage is an excuse for poor performance onstage, just that it's hard to tell.)

I agree that there are often differences between what American and European audiences appreciate, but, like everything else, it's not across the board, and it depends on the sophistication (I wish I could think of a more neutral word) of the audience/audience member. The general American audience (and maybe those elsewhere as well) like dancers who grin and have obvious "personality" and find dancers who don't "jump into the lap of the audience," as Violette Verdy once said in an interview, to be cold and unfeeling. It's often the quiet Prince who's upstaged by the bounding Jester, and I usually prefer the Princes.

alexandra

Taped music has a "dead" sound, for one thing, and, probably more importantly, there can be no interplay between the conductor/orchestra and the dancers. It's also hard to find a tape that's exactly the right tempo. I watched a rehearsal for a competition once in Copenhagen with a young dancer struggling with Tape A, the 50-second version of Corsaire, and Tape B, the 90-second version. He simply could not dance slow enough to fill out the 90-second version (he was a demi) and the 50-second version would have defeated any human. So both practical and artistic reasons, I think.

But, since Balanchine could live without sets or costumes but kept the orchestra (with an excellent conductor, as long as he was alive), I'd trust his instincts!

Any more musically sensitive and/or aware people out there with other ideas?

alexandra

Thanks, Angela -

Melnikov wasn't at all dull when he was with the Kirov -- he was very classical, i.e., he didn't throw his hair around, or grin, or make faces to show he was feeling the music. I saw him nearly ten years ago, so I suppose he would be in his early thirties now? And, of course, he could have changed.

alexandra

All this book and magazine talk is very interesting, and I hate to be a traffic cop, but I created a whole forum for reading material, and I'd love it if this discussion could continue there.

As a helpful hint, I'm closing the thread!

Thanks,

alexandra

Celia --

Yes, I do think it's possible. I think you'll know it when you see it. Watching ballet is a process of refinement. What you think is hot stuff your first season, may be less enticing later on. (First there's ice cream, then there's champagne.)

It's like the processions in the old Petipa ballets (or Giselle's hunting party entree). First come the most beautiful women in the most beautiful gowns you've ever seen. Eight of them, better than a fashion show. Then come two or three others -- even more beautiful, with gowns that are unimaginably gorgeous. That last one MUST be the Queen, or Bathilde, or whatever Star is expected. And then, as the beautiful ones walks around the stage, showing off the clothes and the way they walk, there's a little pause and on comes -- the Queen. And you know it's the Queen, and you're embarrassed that you were ever taken in by the ladies in waiting.

alexandra

Celia --

Yes, I do think it's possible. I think you'll know it when you see it. Watching ballet is a process of refinement. What you think is hot stuff your first season, may be less enticing later on. (First there's ice cream, then there's champagne.)

It's like the processions in the old Petipa ballets (or Giselle's hunting party entree). First come the most beautiful women in the most beautiful gowns you've ever seen. Eight of them, better than a fashion show. Then come two or three others -- even more beautiful, with gowns that are unimaginably gorgeous. That last one MUST be the Queen, or Bathilde, or whatever Star is expected. And then, as the beautiful ones walks around the stage, showing off the clothes and the way they walk, there's a little pause and on comes -- the Queen. And you know it's the Queen, and you're embarrassed that you were ever taken in by the ladies in waiting.

alexandra

Thanks to all for joining in on this one -- Olivier, it's wonderful to have a dancer respond with such lovely stories.

Celia, "understanding the grand classical style" is related to what Margot wrote about Danilova's explanation of Sleeping Beauty. It's partnering, and presenting the ballerina, but it's more than that. It's the way the dancers actually move, the way the head is held, the fingers, the movement of the shoulders, that a foot is brought up to the knee cleanly, that a ronde de jambe describes a circle, doesn't just flap around. It's all the things that it takes nondancers years to see (and most fans don't care about too much, which is fine). But if you get into it, it's those "classical niceties" that separate great classical dancers (usually, but not always, those who have had the opportunity to study at one of the great academies) from good ones, or interesting ones.

I can't comment on Evelyn Hart, because I haven't seen very much of her, and not at all lately. There are some dancers who are more aura than technique, and I've loved some of them. There are some who are both.

Celia, a wonderful "game" to play is to rent some videos -- oh, four different Swan Lakes, or Raymondas, or a couple of those great "Greatest Hits of Our Glorious Russian Tradition" thingies, and play them back to back and see how different the dancers look.

Margot, Danilova addressed the Dance Critics Association's conference on Sleeping Beauty about ten years ago. She wore a red Chanel suit and three-inch heels (the floor had just been waxed. We were all terrified every time she got up to demonstrate something, which she did at any excuse.)

It was obvious that she had been burning with comments about Sleeping Beauty for years. From a Russian Imperial point of view, the Royal Ballet's Sleeping Beauty was too homey and middle-class. Marriage for love, balderdash. "Princess must be little bit snitty," said Danilova. I didn't quite understand what that meant at the time. (I've been helped greatly in understanding ballet by keeping mental note of sentences like those that I hear or read, things that don't make sense to me but that I'm sure are true, and keeping them in my head until I figure them out. Takes a long time, but it's worth it.)

alexandra

Thanks to all for joining in on this one -- Olivier, it's wonderful to have a dancer respond with such lovely stories.

Celia, "understanding the grand classical style" is related to what Margot wrote about Danilova's explanation of Sleeping Beauty. It's partnering, and presenting the ballerina, but it's more than that. It's the way the dancers actually move, the way the head is held, the fingers, the movement of the shoulders, that a foot is brought up to the knee cleanly, that a ronde de jambe describes a circle, doesn't just flap around. It's all the things that it takes nondancers years to see (and most fans don't care about too much, which is fine). But if you get into it, it's those "classical niceties" that separate great classical dancers (usually, but not always, those who have had the opportunity to study at one of the great academies) from good ones, or interesting ones.

I can't comment on Evelyn Hart, because I haven't seen very much of her, and not at all lately. There are some dancers who are more aura than technique, and I've loved some of them. There are some who are both.

Celia, a wonderful "game" to play is to rent some videos -- oh, four different Swan Lakes, or Raymondas, or a couple of those great "Greatest Hits of Our Glorious Russian Tradition" thingies, and play them back to back and see how different the dancers look.

Margot, Danilova addressed the Dance Critics Association's conference on Sleeping Beauty about ten years ago. She wore a red Chanel suit and three-inch heels (the floor had just been waxed. We were all terrified every time she got up to demonstrate something, which she did at any excuse.)

It was obvious that she had been burning with comments about Sleeping Beauty for years. From a Russian Imperial point of view, the Royal Ballet's Sleeping Beauty was too homey and middle-class. Marriage for love, balderdash. "Princess must be little bit snitty," said Danilova. I didn't quite understand what that meant at the time. (I've been helped greatly in understanding ballet by keeping mental note of sentences like those that I hear or read, things that don't make sense to me but that I'm sure are true, and keeping them in my head until I figure them out. Takes a long time, but it's worth it.)

alexandra

There are a lot of male artists, I would say (perhaps more in the past). Malakhov's dancing is certainly beyond technique. Alexei Fedayachev with the Kirov. Nureyev's certainly was.

The charms of the Princes in the 19th century ballets are not always evident on first viewing, especially if the man dancing the Prince isn't really a Prince. I think you need a good understanding of the history of the ballets, and an appreciation of the grand classical style, before you see what the Prince is doing, instead of thinking, "Why isn't he dancing?" (I have a grave historical bias towards dancing!)

alexandra

There are a lot of male artists, I would say (perhaps more in the past). Malakhov's dancing is certainly beyond technique. Alexei Fedayachev with the Kirov. Nureyev's certainly was.

The charms of the Princes in the 19th century ballets are not always evident on first viewing, especially if the man dancing the Prince isn't really a Prince. I think you need a good understanding of the history of the ballets, and an appreciation of the grand classical style, before you see what the Prince is doing, instead of thinking, "Why isn't he dancing?" (I have a grave historical bias towards dancing!)

alexandra

Hello, Celia, and welcome. I'm fascinated that you'd buy a book about a dancer when you weren't a dance fan! You're the reader all publishers want to reach!

What made you buy that book?

I found your "career path" through ballet interesting, too. You have good instincts!

alexandra

This is more to Jane's post than Ed's original one, but yes, you have a good point. ABT used to have a crew of dancers who wore their opinion of the choreography on their sleeves -- not quite what you mean by Wall, the artist who couldn't condescend to the material, but sometimes commentary is permissible.

The best/worst of these was Leslie Browne. She would practically hold her nose when forced to dance something she didn't like (MacMillan's Concerto, first movement, I think, comes to mind.) No transcending here.

alexandra

hello and welcome back, Dale - Hadn't read you in awhile, and I missed you! Have you been to many Nutcrackers?

I'm a fan of all your choices. I read "After Images" once or twice a year for ten years, until I'd practically memorized it. I especially found the essays at the back of the book useful. I must say that I did not always agree with her, but I always took her seriously. So many of the things she wrote about in the '70s and '80s have come true. I particularly remember her writing about the Royal when they came here in the mid-'80s, after running through a list of things that were wrong with the company, saying, "But what's the use? It's like straightening the pictures in a house that's been bombed." I thought that harsh of her at the time, thought, "Oh, come on. They're not that bad." I didn't see what she saw until the early '90s, when they came with a new Swan Lake and a new "improved" dancing style.

Yes, she did get bitter, perhaps, but that happens when everything you loves dies on you. She is very much alive, still going, and writing a book about Balanchine's ballets.

I also loved "Balanchine's Muses" -- the photographs as well as the text. When you get dancers talking about dancing, it's the best of all.

While we're on Balanchine books, I also learned an enormous amount from Nancy Reynolds' Repertory in Review; I only wish it had been updated, if only until Balanchine's death. I poured over that book, trying to figure out his way of categorizing dancers and casting.

alexandra

Hello, again.

I have so many favorite dance books I couldn't put them all in.

The first book I bought was Keith Money's book about Margot Fonteyn "The Making of a Legend." I love all of Keith Money's books; this one is like a scrapbook, and it's full of love for Fonteyn. I bought it partly because I had just seen my first performance, with Fonteyn, and partly because it was the only book about ballet in the bookstore. I read it over and over during my first year as a balletomane, although it was difficult, as most of the ballets -- nearly all the ballets -- were unknown to me. (I didn't know much about the '30s and '40s in British ballet then.) I used it as a guide for years. When I'd see the Giselle or Swan Lake of a dancer called "great" and I couldn't find out why, I'd get out those sections in "Legend" again and look at Fonteyn, and compare her to the new Great One I'd just seen, and figure out why the latter was wanting. She never failed me.

Margot, dancers writing about dance offer a perspective that nondancers can't, so the books fascinate me. If they can write well, you get a bonus. If they can't you get information and point of view. Every scrap of real information is valuable. (Now, how to tell the real from the well-intentioned errors, the folk tales and the self-promotion is the problem.)

I love Karsavina from photos; she's one of the dancers I'm going to see first when I get to Heaven. Booked long ago. But I have to admit I didn't love her book, much as I wanted to. I did love, however, Kchessinskaya's memoires ("Dancing in St. Petersburg") because her personality blares forth from every page, as she tells you how kind she was to her rivals (hah!), how she had to ask "Nicky" (the Tsarevitch) to intervene in this or that backstage brawl, how it didn't really matter that Pavlova didn't have turnout, not one little bit -- and how she broke it to her parents that she wanted to leave home to become the Tsarevitch's mistress, and how she got that nice little house from the Grand Duke -- and all the things that make small children think they want to be ballerinas (although I was hardly a child when I read it).

Last word on books for now, and apropos: I remember reading Camille when I was in high school, before I knew what ballet was (but I knew about theater) and thinking that a courtesan was a great job, not because of the flowers and dresses, but because she had box seats at every theater in Paris. Mon dieu! Where does one apply?

alexandra

p.s. Use the search engine at Barnes and Noble on our shop page to find books. You can search by author, title, or subject.

Actually, I think we should start a new thread, because this one is so long. (But it's fine to write long, long posts, Margot, or anyone.)

Estelle, if you'd like to keep a book list, feel free. I already have four jobs!

Thanks all,

alexandra

jump to favorite books#2

I'm not going to go first this time! What books have you read that have made a difference to you? What books do you love?

Of course you can talk about any magazines you want -- my only request is that if anyone ever has a comment on an article that appeared in either Ballet Alert! or DanceView that they talk about it on those threads. I'd like to get an interactive "Letters to the Editor" column going.

On magazines: my all-time favorite was the old Dance and Dancers which I devoured; DanceView was modeled on it. I also read (and have written for) Dance Now, Dance International, and Ballet Review. I think there should be dozens and dozens of dance magazines, each with a stringently different point of view.

All right, Estelle. I'm going to start a forum on Books and Dance Critics right now.

Any further comments, please go there.

alexandra

alexandra

Linda Hindberg. Not the ideal Teresina (too Russian), but OK. Villumsen's mad scene is one of the great scenes on video. I've shown it to every class I've ever taught. (They all like the shorts and can't believe it's from 1842. Well, in 1842 they wore tights under the shorts, but they still wore the shorts. Shocked 'em back then, too.)

I was watching that the other night, and couldn't help but cry. All those dancers are gone now (and not because they're too old) and it's unlikely you'll see a Napoli Act III and/or tarantella like that again.

To Someone who wrote me not knowing who Arne Villumsen and Lis Jeppesen were, they were the Danes leading couple in the 1980s and early '90s and were wonderful dancers. Villumsen stars in this Napoli video (which I think has been pulled off the market; copyright rental period expired, or something) and Lis Jeppesen dances the girl-with-the-purple-trimmed-skirt in the third act.

alexandra

Hello, All!

This is a continuation of the thread Ed Waffle started called Audiences, where many of us "confessed" to how we became interested in ballet. That thread has gotten so long, it takes a long time to load and is hard to read.

So please continue telling your stories here. Everyone is welcome! (as to all threads, of course).

Thanks,

alexandra

Thanks for the suggestion, Estelle. I'll add that sometime this week -- and I'll post a suggestion down on Talk Ballet Alert! for other people to nominate special categories.

alexandra

I'm also going to start a new Audiences thread, because this is getting so long. I'm going to call it "How Did you Discover Ballet?" Please make any comments you have, and, I hope, tell your stories, on that thread. Thanks.

Yup. She's in. Love to go -- actually, high on my "To Do" list for this site is to put a link to Air France on the Paris Opera page! I have a lovely postcard photo of Loudieres in Arabesque in that same Don Q. A model of the Parisian arabesque. That will go up too, some day.

alexandra