Alexandra

I have to say I agree with leonid. I only saw Fonteyn at the end of her career and I didn't know her, but I've talked to many dancers who did, and their view is remarkably consistent -- and quite different from the New Fonteyn we're getting these days. (I must say I'm glad so many viewers who liked the film could see the artist. I thought she'd been pretty much buried.) I wanted to see a lot more about the dancer and a lot less about the Arias family. To me, this is a model of how NOT to do a film about an artist. In a way, it's to be expected. There's always revisionism, often put together by people who weren't around at the time and are all too eager to believe that anyone who says something that isn't party line is telling The Truth. But the boat usually rights itself eventually -- in another ten years or so, there will be another round of books and films and these will present a fuller picture than was presented in the 1950s (not because Fonteyn lied about herself, but because she was discrete in a time when discretion was expected, not considered a mark of cowardice or hypocrisy), and a more balanced one than can sell copies in our Age of Dirt. It takes a lot of time to sort out who's jealous, who's clueless, who has an ax to grind -- or is desperately trying to keep something important a deep, dark secret -- and who's merely, honestly, misinformed, but it can be done One thing I'd like to say about sources: using oral history, whether it's of the "I lived next to that man for 20 years and he's absolutely incapable of doing anything dishonest" variety or "everyone knew she was a slut and a drug addict" (or "I've never seen him so angry! The only possible explanation is that she had an abortion") is that such statements can't be relied upon and shouldn't be used without supporting evidence. They're opinions and opinions are often based on little more than an overheard phrase, or seeing someone at lunch with A Man Not Her Husband and jumping to a huge conclusion (they laughed conspiratorily and his hand touched hers for a moment....), and matching that with something else overheard. I couldn't count how many times heard ""But everyone knows that!" given as the reason for this or that story when I was researching the biography of Kronstam.

I love opera people Thanks for posting that, Helene.

Well said, Estelle!

I'll try one more time and then I'll stop :blush: I don't think I've expressed what I'm trying to say clearly. Every artist wants/hopes/tries to do new work. What I'm objecting to is the notion that they do so MERELY FOR THE SAKE OF DOING SO TO GET ATTENTION or for marketing purposes. I agree, there are a lot of artists who consciously develop new forms, and certainly know who which of their works are within a tradition and which are not. Stravinsky would say things like, "I believe that music expresses itself only" which certainly was a new notion then, and his works furthered that idea. But I don't think he sat around for months thinking, "What can I do that will be different, will get me front page coverage?" The idea was to allow his creativity free rein. I've written (here and elsewhere) that, although we often say that this artist breaks the rules, I don't think artists think that way. For them, there are no rules -- that's one way of saying it -- or there are rules, but they have a much wider interpretation and understanding of them. The rule isn't, for example, "You can't mix blue and lime within two square inches in a painting" or "you have to use the color wheel" but that one has to use colors in a way that -- terrible word -- "works." Some artists can make the very juxtaposition of two warring colors look natural, and when others do it, they look like they don't know what they're doing. The second artist needs the rules, the first one doesn't and we'll say he creates a new rule -- juxtapose colors in this or that way. But to him, he's just painting and using what he needs to do what he wants to do. This is very far afield from Lewis Segal's article, in a way, although if ballet choreographers stopped BOTH following and consciously trying to break rules, as if there were a list of them and they've got to find one that hasn't been broken yet, we might be getting somewhere.

I agree with the parallel, Carbro, but before we get some "how can you compare Dylan and Balanchine?" posts, I hadn't meant to compare the two as artists, but to give Dylan as an example of someone inventing something without consciously setting out to break boundaries. :blush:

I'd be very interested to read some quotes, BY, not about, an acknowledged master, who said, "I consciously set out to break boundaries and making something new for the sake of making something new is why I work." I've never come across that. [Editing to add: Except the current generation of Boundary Breakers, of course!) A lot of interesting points have been made on this thread. I think the Ford Foundation wake may still be going on, resentment coming from those who weren't working at the time. There is resentment in the modern dance community (understandable, if I don't agree with it) that ballet gets the lion's share of the resources (which is true) and that this is why more people attend ballet performances (which I don't think is true).

That's really a different thing, though, I think. They weren't making something new for the sake of making something new. They were making a new ballet that turned out to be groundbreaking. That's it, I think. The genius does what he does. The Martin Scorsese film about Bob Dylan was on PBS a few weeks ago, and I think Dylan was an exemplar of this. He took one of the oldest song forms imaginable -- the ballad -- and made it new, not on purpose, but because he understood it so thoroughly that he picked up the lute, as it were, exactly where it had been put down, strummed the strings, and sang in the voice of his time. (Ahead of his time, of course, but that's also what geniuses do. They smell/sense what's going on, it speaks to them and they to it, and 25 years later it's hard to know which came first.)

Perfect sense :blush: How many geniuses jumped out of bed in the morning and cried to the sun, "Another day! I must Break Boundaries, make something that even They will think is new, and, above all, Be Relevant To Our Times." Short list, I would think.

Helene, we were posting at the same time. Yours is an excellent point. I think many would take a couple of nice second-rate geniuses :blush: But pretending that the fifth-rate stuff that keeps getting served up is groundbreaking and wonderful just won't do.

Someone sent me a quote of Sir Frederick Ashton's, from an old TV interview, that bears on this subject. One must understand how he's using the words, of course :blush:, but the thought is relevant to this discussion: I kept thinking of that while thinking of Mr. Segal's article. Ballet is a language. Modern dance is a different language, tap another, etc. Each has different things to which it is particularly suited. A tap "Sleeping Beauty" might be charming, but is unlikely to be infinitely durable (although a tap genius may well disprove this!). In the same way, a ballet about the situation in Lebanon is going to be thin. A modern dance/contemporary dance/ballet on the same subject would have more tools at its disposal. What disturbs me about these articles is that, unlike Ashton, who simply didn't go to see work he didn't like but didn't insist that his work was The Only Thing Out There, the people who constantly attack ballet by either calling on it to be something it's not, or condescending to it, or dismissing it utterly, or damning it with faint praise really do want classical ballet to become something different, and kick it for being what it is. And they do it ENDLESSLY. How many of these articles have we read? How many more do we have to read? We've gone back to the Forties, when John Martin scorned Balanchine and urged him to go back to Europe where he belonged. But Martin kept looking, and finally saw that Balanchine's ballets weren't "just classroom steps" (the usual charge against any work that actually uses the ballet vocabulary in which its dancers are trained). He came to understand ballet. This did not make him turn against Modern Dance; he continiued to be its champion (and there was much to champion). But he took a long, hard look at what was there instead of taking a half-glance and pontificating about what was not there. There ARE some ballets that don't move beyond classroom steps, but if one looks hard enough one can tell the difference between "Divertimento No. 15" and the ballets made in its image but without its subtexts, and without Balanchine's genius. The idea that the only way to "save ballet" is to make it "relevant" is so misguided. We joke on this forum a lot about new versions of the 19th century classics where Giselle is a hooker or Odette is in love with Odile (the affair between Wilfrid and Albrecht having been consummated long ago) but can anyone seriously believe that would save anything? Dancers, especially late career dancers, often sound off on what they don't like in their repertory. Sick of dancing Princes, are you? Choreograph something else. Okay, that's not fair. When Ashton and Balanchine were working, there were a lot of backkstage complaints about them, but dancers didn't leave in droves to go dance somewhere else. The problem is that there are very few good ballet choreographers, and the perplex is that one of the reasons for this is that ballet companies have been looking to modern dancers for the past 40 years for its new repertory and not developing classical choreographers. Fix that, and you fix the problem. To me, it's the faux classics and desperate attempts to be "relevant" that are damaging ballet. Not to mention all those new works that the press releases tell me "are thoroughly grounded in the classical tradition" and turn out to be thoroughly grounded in contact improv with a soupcon of Mashed Potato. I agree with Ashton. I don't think that dancing has to be one style and that anything I don't like is "bad." And I definitely don't believe that anything beyond the handful of choreographers in ballet or modern dance I admire shouldn't exist. But I'm damned sick of reading people who want to change everything into what they like and mock everything else. (I actually don't think Segal is doing that. I think he's writing a provocative summer piece, like the "Is New York REALLY the center of the dance world these days" pieces that often appear at this time of year, intended to throw some ideas out there and see what people think.)

Oh, dear. It seems as though Mr. Rockwell is riding his favorite hobby horses again. One correction: THE FACT THAT A WEB SITE HAS THE NAME "BALLET" IN ITS TITLE DOES NOT MEAN IT ASSUMES THE SUPERIORITY OF BALLET ANY MORE THAN A RESTAURANT WITH THE WORD "ITALIAN" IN ITS NAME ASSUMES THE SUPERIORITY OF ITALIAN FOOD. This really isn't as complex a distinction as Mr. Rockwell seems to think, but it is a rather basic one. Much more importantly, I have to say that anyone who could write this -- -- shows a very curious understanding of the nature of ballet. This isn't an issue of superiority and I'm perplexed how "is" is sometimes read as "is better." Call it the silly little inferior art form of ballet if that helps, but understand its nature.

There's drink aplenty in "Napoli." Peppo and Giacomo (the two unsuitable suitors) drain a glass or two in Act I, and in the Act III wedding celebrations, people sit outside an inn and are liberally served as they watch the dancing. But the best story is that King Frederik IX (I think that's the number), the present Queen's father, loved "Napoli" so much that he not only conducted it on occasion, but would, from time to time, send a glass of champagne (real champagne) backstage for each tarantella dancer, to make sure that the dancing was filled with high spirits. In "La Sylphide" Act I, there's the fortunetelling scene, in which Madge drains two glasses of some evil spirits as payment for the telling. And surely it's not an accident that the token of Hilda's identity in "A Folk Tale" is a drinking cup. In "Swan Lake," the dances des coupes ends the first act. "Fancy Free" takes place in a bar, for good reason.

Great thread, Mel! Watching the video of the grand old Italian ballet, "Excelsior," I thought how relevant it could be made with just a titch of tweaking. (In the original, the Spirit of Darkness is in a death battle with the Spirit of Light to prevent Civlization from moving forward. It starts with the end of the Inquisition and goes through the incidents I'll describe below. The only change is that NOW the Spirit of Darkness would be the Spirit of the Kyoto Accords, and the Spirit of Light would be Corporate Interests. Civilization, of course, is now Globalization.) Synopsis: Globalization applauds the new steamship, the Roberto Fultoni. The Spirit of the Kyoto Accords (hereinafter SKA) pleads with them to stop, predcting how this will destroy both the environment and the fishing industry, and, hence, their way of life. Globalization cheers on the fine fellows who are blasting a tunnel through the Alps. SKA tries to stop them, but fails. Globalization is there as the Suez Canal is built, as Arab women do belly dances for their entertainment. SKA begs them to stop, predicting the Middle East conflict. We'd probably have to cut the pas de deux where Civilization tames the Savage (in a loin cloth), but -- oh, wait! Globalization tames the Amazon Rain Forest Native would do. AND we could add the Ballet of the Tropical Breezes to deal with Global Warming. A corps of bellboys dances happily to celebrate the birth of the Telegram. SKA is hopping around distractedly hoping to stop this vile new method of communication, predicting the breakdown of the family and internet porn. Globalization finallly dumps a ton of sludge on his head and he dies. Corporate Interests crowns her Queen.

I think these questions keep being asked by those who are expecting ballet to be "popular" in the same way that TV or movies is popular, and that has never been the case, not even in Boom times. Popular art is realistic and relevant to our day to day life. High art is usually not -- and if it does deal with something contemporary, it does so at one remove. That's the point of it. It's not for the casual viewer (neither is opera), but for people who have taken the time to make an investment in its world -- unless, of course, one was lucky enough to grow up in a family or school that introduced you to that world. I'm very eager for new works, but new BALLET works. Creative classicism is in crisis, and has been for years. The fault is not in the form, but in the artistic direction. Encourage classical choreography, and you'll get it. Critics, too, are unhelpful when there is a new classical work and it's squashed with, "it's not trendy!" "It's just classroom steps!!" (which may be true, but is often not) and only works which "smash the bounds of tired old classical ballet!!!" are greeted with approval.

Ouch. This was a huge part of NYCB's identity. I think the Royal Ballet (under Stretton) tried programs "with catchy titles" and quickly became un-catchy. Remember its "Heritage Evening," with three lyrical ballets "for the older audience" and three New Now Ballets for "the young people we would rather have" (I'm paraphrasing, of course.) I liked Peter Boal's take on it (he's quoted in the article in Dale's link.)

Gentlefolk, this was not a two-mintue warning, nor an invitation for more of the same. Please discuss the issue. Do not discuss each other. Thank you. Alexandra

In D.C., the racial polarization is acutely noticable. The only time there's a significant percentage of African-Americans in the audience is at Dance Theatre of Harlem or Alvin Ailey (or other predominantly black companies) performances. This is regardless of what is being danced. DTH's "Giselle" had the same demographics as a evening with "Dougla." The reasons? Targeted advertising? If a German company is in town, one hears a lot of German spoken at intermissions -- does the embassy contact German citizens? Do people go because they want a taste of home, or to support the home team? It's a very complicated question, and an interesting one. Problem is, the only people who know are the people who aren't going

I agree, Glebb. I can't believe this isn't revivable. The Ashton people said that "Dante Sonata" and "Enigma Variations" weren't revivable, and dancers proved them wrong. There must be dozens of people still alive who remember that ballet, and there must be work tapes. (I saw it in the mid-70s too, 1976 to be exact. Nearly everyone in that cast is still working.)

Hmm. A one-act, "more abstract" version. What a novel idea at NYCB I did see it, Richard -- with not a great cast, unfortunately, so it dragged a bit, but I'd love to see it again. It was more abstract -- or, at least, not realistic, which, to me, is a plus. No fruit throwing, or shooting the bird on the part of the peasants, a real sense that this was taking place in the Renaissance. SOMEONE should revive it!

I think it would have been a different audience. (Meaning, those who liked Lifar wouldn't have come to the Opera.) In the 1930s, Leo Staats was the choreographer and he was a good one; Balanchine admired him. Ashton's "Les Rendezvous" and "Les Patineurs" look, to me, as though they're modeled on Staats' "Soir de Fete." I'd guess the people who loved the formalism of Staats would have been quite pleased with Balanchine. Generally, audiences leave if they don't like what's being served. Balanchine would have catered to the French taste, as he later catered to the New York taste. I don't think Balanchine could have failed anywhere if he had his own company. Now, if he hadn't recovered from the tuberculosis, or if all companies in the world had been closed to him -- who knows? He might have given Hermes Pan a run for his money in Hollywood

In Europe, too, World War II would have been more of an obstacle, shall we say I think he always maintained an affection for Paris -- all those girls! -- and, watching the DVD of "Jewels," I couldn't help but wish he could fly down just for three rehearsals and MAKE THEM MOVE!!!!!! I agree with the "genius is genius" line, but if he hadn't brought his company to New York every year or two, we might be worshipping Robbins and DeMille today. And Tudor might have been more prolific. These questions are always so interesting! IF Balanchine hadn't gotten sick and hung on to Paris, and IF Ashton had gotten that letter and wanted to go to ABT. Not to mention if World Wars I and II, and the Russian Revolution hadn't happened . . .

Not as far as I know. In fact, I'm not aware of any Cranko available commercially. !!!! If I'm wrong, I hope to be corrected!

The press release: NEW YORK CITY BALLET APPOINTS FAYÇAL KAROUI MUSIC DIRECTOR New York City Ballet announced today that it has appointed Fayçal Karoui as Music Director. Mr. Karoui will join NYCB on December 1, 2006, succeeding Andrea Quinn, who, after five years with NYCB, returned to her native England at the conclusion of the 2006 spring season. Born in Paris, Mr. Karoui is one of France’s leading young conductors and has worked with various orchestras and soloists throughout that country. He made his New York City Ballet debut in January 2006, conducting Peter Martins’ full-length production of Swan Lake. He has continued to appear with NYCB as a guest conductor throughout the past seven months conducting Ballo della Regina, Fearful Symmetries, Firebird, and Symphony in C. In making the appointment, NYCB’s Ballet Master in Chief Peter Martins said, “I am thrilled to welcome Fayçal to the New York City Ballet family. In the past few months we have all been won over by his enthusiasm, youthful energy, and, above all, incredible talent. I know that he will be a wonderful leader for our orchestra, and a terrific custodian of the Company’s extraordinary musical heritage.” “This is a big honor for me, and I am very excited to be joining the New York City Ballet,” said Mr. Karoui. “I will do my best to keep the performances on the same high level as they have been and to continue the great work of the orchestra. The history of this Company is so incredible, the repertory is unbelievable, and music is at the center of everything here. I can’t wait to get started.” Since 2001 Mr. Karoui has been the Music Director of Orchestre de Pau, Pays de Béarn, in southwest France, where his repertory has ranged from classical and Romantic symphonic works by Bach, Beethoven, and Mozart, to new works by living composers. Mr. Karoui studied conducting at the Conservatoire de Paris where he obtained a First Prize in Conducting in 1997. The following year, Mr. Karoui became the assistant to conductor Michel Plasson at the Orchestra National du Capitole de Toulouse. There, he conducted The Sleeping Beauty for the Ballet du Capitole de Toulouse, his first experience conducting for ballet. He has also conducted gala performances for the school of the Paris Opera Ballet, with the Orchestra of the Paris Opera. In addition, Mr. Karoui has conducted such prestigious orchestras as the Paris Orchestra, Lille National Orchestra, and the Monte-Carlo Philharmonic Orchestra. In 1999, he was a finalist at France’s prestigious Besançon International Competition for Young Conductors. Mr. Karoui will become New York City Ballet’s fifth Music Director, following Andrea Quinn, who came to New York City Ballet during the 2001 season. Leon Barzin was NYCB’s first Music Director (1948-1958), followed by Robert Irving (1958-1989) and Gordon Boelzner (1990-2001). New York City Ballet’s music director search has been funded by The Frank & Lydia Bergen Foundation.

Not forgetting the boyfriend, who bicycles through the rain to fetch his soccer coach, who tapes up Mette H's ankle, which she sprained right before the performance...... I saw a copy that had been taped off TV in California about 15 years ago. Now THERE'S a warm trail But the Disney channel, or some other cable channel may broadcast it again, so keep an eye out.

It's called "Ballerina" and was released as a feature film in Europe, but (as you remember) a TV episode in the U.S. The company was the Royal Danish Ballet, and used several of their dancers (including Kirsten Simone, as the young girl's mentor, and Henning Kronstam as their partner), as well as actors from the Royal Theatre. The young ballerina was Mette Honningen, who became one of the star ballerinas of her generation. Jenny Agutter had a big role as the a young dance student. It's awfully hokey today, I think -- almost unintentionally funny. The mother has to leave the performances to scurry home to get supper on the table, and has most of her conversations with her daughter while ironing. She constantly worries that her daughter won't have a full life, like hers, if she becomes a dancer. Dance sequences include bits of "Coppelia" (but a standard production, not the Danish one); a nameless ballet by the choreographer, whose name I forget; a tiny bit of the reel in "La Sylphide" (with Peter Martins in the corps); and some rehearsal footage. I don't think it's commercially available.