atm711

I received the program today and will probably see both programs. No one has mentioned that there is a 30% discount if tickets are ordered before Sept. 20, using a code they supplied in the brochure--$70. tickets go for $49; $50. are $35; and $35. are $24.50---Phew!! I tried to order online using the code---but it was not accepted!- It is a letter code, and they say only a numerical code is acceptable. Has anyone else had this happen?

Ah, Gene Kelly, my first school girl crush. For those too young to remember--there was a time when one could go to the movies any time of the day and sit through continuous performances of the same film--this is what I did when I saw "For Me and My Gal"--I sat through 3 shows :rolleyes: Gene Kelly is one dancer who could have played all of the sailors in 'Fancy Free" to perfection. Imagine!--someone could have made a film of him dancing all the solos and then splicing them together---what a show!

Quote from 'Dance Encyclopedia' (ed. Chujoy, pub. 1949) Ballet in Motion Pictures by George Balanchine It is absurd to regard motion picturees as only a relaxation and pastime. One should have the same attitude toward motion pictures as one has toward any other form of theatrical art. Films should be a product of greater imagination and fantasy than the theatre because of the larger scope which elements of space and time have in motion pictures. I also think that the responsibility of anyone working in motion pictures, whether he is a producer, director or actor, is greater than in the theatre because he is addressing not a selected group of people, not only a city public, but large masses of people all over the world. This is why I think a serious, artistic, creative, inventive and imaginative approach to the films is an absolute necessity. The importance of ballet for motion pictures is the element of pure fantasy. Although motion pictures have known quite a lot of fantasy, it has been limited to the field of comedy as exemplified by the Chaplin and Marx Brothers films. The average picture seldom deals with free fantasy, but is tied up closely with real life. The fairy-tale type of unreality has up to now been employed in the field of animated cartoons. This field, through the medium of the technical tricks of the camera and the freedom it has over imaginative conceptions, is most suitable to the motion picture, and as yet remains completely unexplored. People have got into the habit of going to the movies to see reenacted their own lives or the lives of people they envy, but the world of make believe and pure fantasy is still only a by-product of present day production. Naturalistic theatre has always bored me, as I think that essentially theatre art is based on the audience's desire to escape rather than to relive reality. It is mainly because of its purely imaginative---I would even say artificial---quality that ballet is important for motion pictures. It introduces a completely imaginative world whose form is of a plastic nature---a visual perfection of an imaginative life. This, for me, is the realm of complete fantasy. It has its own laws, its own meaning and cannot be explained by the usual criterions of logic. On the other hand, the possibilities opened by motion pictures for the classic ballet are of an even greater importance and interest. First of all, the frame of the screen is a far more movable think than the frame of the theatre; it does not bind the ballet to the visual square of thirty or forty feet. The same applies to the space and movability of the settings. It is far easier to create a complete space fantasy on the screen than on the stage. Natural elements like wind, light, and sound can be more freely applied to the screen than to the stage and thus become by far more important additions to classic ballet than they are on the stage. Another important point is that the spectator sees a stage ballet always from the same angle and from the same distance. On the screen, however, the spectator moves with the camera and thus can see the ballet not only from a wide range of angles but also from a wide range of distances. He may even feel himself amidst the ballet performance. This imposes completely new problems on the choreographer. It renders his task far more intricate and difficult, gives him new riddles to solve and a wide range of possibilities for his invention in the domain of fantasy. It is also quite important to point out the fact that in the film, ballet is visually equally complete, no matter from what seat in the auditorium one looks at it. The camera does the work. In the theatre a person sitting high in the balcony generally sees only wigs and heads and thus has only an incomplete view of the ballet performance. It appears distorted and obviously he cannot enjoy and appreciate it. The movies correct this error of the theatre and render it possible for every member of the audience to enjoy ballet fully.

In my trusty 'Dance Encyclopedia' (Chujoy, 1949) he cites a catalogue of Dance Motion Pictures compiled by George Amberg (one-time curator at Museum of Modern Art, NY) of 700 films. The list was published in the May 1945 issue of 'Dance Index'. Unrelated to this topic, there is also an essay written by Balanchine on ballet in motion pictures. If it is legal, and if anyone is interested I will type it in.

Paul, your reference to 'Les Enfants du Paradis' has won me over....maybe I will go to Chicago.

I have never seen the Monotones and I am a bit reluctant to see it. The three Gnossiennes and the three Gymnopedies are among my favorite music---I play my CD often. I suppose I think of Ashton's 'Symphonic Variations' which I have always found too static, and I fear what I will see in Monotones. This music has been described as having "an aerial line that seems to extend into infinity". But, given the opportunity to see it, I probably would. A masterpiece or not, Ashton is halfway home with that score.

I still have two pages of that 32 cent stamp---and I still can't figure out who the dancer is.

Of course they will, and one of the reasons is that is what classical music stations play. In New York City (a mere 8 million people) we have only ONE classical music station. I think most concertgoers who hear this music once aren't going to rush out and buy a CD---it takes more familiarity with the music---and there aren't many repeat performances on the radio.

I never thought of it in quite this way--but it is so true in regard to "Ballet Imperial". I saw both Marie-Jeanne and MaryEllen Moylan in the ballerina part, but it is Maria Tallchief in the secondary role that I can still vividly recall. This was at a time in her career when she danced with great gusto, Balanchine's make-over was still in progress.

Good Grief----I'm Shostakovitch---one of my least favorite composers. Perhaps I should listen to him more carefully.........

I wish I could answer something concrete to your question. The Apollo Theater on 42nd Street was my introduction to ballet, via two Warner Bros. films of the Ballet Russe productions of 'Gaite Parisienne' and 'Capriccio Espanol'. I can't recall the two films you mentioned, but I did like Micheline Presle--who later went on to a Hollywood career.

Funny Face's experience sounds a lot like the movie-going public. One of the perks of being retired is that I can go to the movies in the afternoon and sit in a relatively empty theater---maybe a dozen people. However, last week I went to see "Seabiscuit" and the theater was crowded. I had a large family nearby and they never stopped shopping for food!--constantly up and down the aisle. This, combined with audible chatter and the sickening smell of tubs of popcorn convinced me to wait a few weeks before seeing a popular movie. :shrug: P.S.--I loved "Seabiscuit"

And not to forget---Amazon ships free on orders above $25.00 B)

In "Dance Encyclopedia' by Anatole Chujoy (pub. 1949) there is the following notation on Volynsky: (real name Flekser) (1863-1926), Russian critic and balletologist whose work Kniga Likovanii (The Book of Exultations), published in Leningrad, was an attempt to formulate a philosophy of the ballet dance. The book has not been translated into English except for one chapter, Verticality and the Dance on Toe, which appeared in "Dance News" (Oct. 1943) in a translation by Anatole Chujoy. I would guess that this could be found at the Performing Arts Library.

In looking over Amazon's DVD's I came across a "Swan Lake" that looked interesting. It is of the Deutsche Staatsoper, Berlin with Barenboim conducting. Most of the plaudits are for Barenboim, but this Patrice Bart interpretation was well received, it seems, by the few people who reviewed it--as was their opinion of the ballerina, Steffi Scherzer. Since my library does not have it , I might have to buy it. I would like to hear from people who have seen this DVD, or a live performance, and particularly about the ballerina.

Ah, Mary,--your second reaction, was my first reaction. It's all so sterile. Bah! As to donations---I prefer giving my money to small groups, who will no doubt put it to better use. (Can I give Leigh a plug here?)

If any of the above does not work for you--try Tower Records.com.

what is the status of the Balanchine stamp for 2004?

Thanks Jorgen and Dale for your replys. I did have success with other DVD's. Both the RB Coppelia (with Leanne Benjamin & Carlos Acosta) and "Essential Ballet"--a compilation of two programs; The Kirov at Covent Garden (worth seeing if only for Assylmuratova's 'Leaves are Fading') and a much improved 'Red Square Concert', which I have on a very poor tape. Thanks, Pamela. I was hoping you would reply. Alexandra said you have a review of the production---I'd like to read it--but I can't find it.

Having just acquired a DVD player, I was looking forward to my first 'look' at a DVD recording. At my local Library I got a copy of the Royal Swedish Ballet's Peter Wright production of 'Swan Lake'. It was a live recording and I was greatly disappointed in the quality of the film. Act l was dark and murky, not unlike a poor videotape. The Prince, who wore black tights was almost obliterated. The background of Act 2 was even darker, which made the Swans stand out, but not much more. Sir Peter said he wanted to tell the story f rom the Prince's perspective. I thought he was rather heavy-handed in his depiction of the Queen Mother--sort of a wicked Queen from Snow White---but he did get his point across--this Prince had a problem with his mother. Nathalie Nordquist, the Odette/Odile, has a beautiful long-legged line and strong technique. I don't know how old she is (she appears to be very young) and as she matures, it should work into a fine interpretation.

All these casts for 'Pas de Quatre' are fun to contemplate--but none of them are up to the one I saw in 1948 at the 'Met': Alicia Markova (Taglioni); Nathalie Krassovska (Grahn); Mia Slavenska (Grisi); Alexandra Danilova (Cerrito). That was a real battle of the ballerinas.

Thank you, RG, for your detailed reply. I did look it up in your book first and I assumed that the listing was the tape---I was still hoping to see another Giselle.

A question, please, for RG. Amazon lists a DVD Giselle for ABT in 1969. Nowhere do they list the performers! There were quite a few criticisms for poor camera work, cut-off feet, etc. Can this be the Bruhn/Fracci 'Giselle'? Since I already have this on tape, I am hoping for a different set of dancers, cut-off feet or not.

On another thread, Leigh mentioned that he would like to see 'Helen of Troy' revived. The first time I saw this delightful romp Paris was danced by Andre Eglevsky. He was a big favorite of mine during the 40's. Nowadays I cringe when I view the NYCB tape of him and Tallchief in 'Scotch Symphony'. Maybe it's the camera angle, but he looks so big (not unlike a certain NYCB male dancer ) and lumbering. When he danced with Ballet Theatre he was slimmer, had a beautiful leonine grace, a very soft landing, and was boyishly handsome. I did not see Zorina as Helen, she had already left the Company, but I did see two very good Helens--Maria Karnilova and Nana Gollner. Hermes was danced (?) by Jerome Robbins who was soundly reprimanded by many fans as being "too Broadway" in the part. At one point, he sauntered on to the stage from the most down-stage wing, munching on an apple. This was at a time when many ballet-goers were hoping to have Ballet taken more seriously as an art form. (Does anything change?) I did not see Eliot Feld in the part--I wonder if he incorporated the apple.

My wish list for ABT is to have them pour as much money into their Tudor legacy as they have into those recent flops 'Othello', 'Pied Piper', and 'Hereafter'. Shame! Shame! :green: