atm711

This video was a wonderful nostalgia trip, the black and white grainy texture and the unfortunate way the camera makes the dancers look chunky or svelte notwithstanding. However, the video only identifies the principal dancers (Tallchief, Eglevsky and Royes Fernandes). The excerpt from the Raymonda Pas de Dix does not identify the many soloists. I am assuming they are from NYCB. Is that Barbara Walczak in the first variation?

I was thinking of Balanchine's admonition:--if you don't like what's on stage, close your eyes and listen to the music. Much easier to do with Swan Lake.

Doug writes: "Many people today might have the same reaction to a reconstructured Swan Lake as they have to the new-old Bayadere" I really don't mean to be flippant, but this could happen only if they are tone-deaf.

I liked the show so much that I saw it twice with the original cast. It did not, however, translate well to the small screen. I wonder how many viewers turned it off while watching the first segment--"Swinging". What was so charming on the stage, seemed leud on the small screen. The bleeping in the Queens Restaurant was unfortunate. Not only was the offensive word obliterated, but also the important following word---"rolls". (in case the producers forgot, that word got the laugh). Charlotte D'Amboise lacked the sweetness and deep sadness of Karen Ziemba in the original cast, but I can forgive her because she was fighting against those terrible camera angles. The same can be said for the final segment--the camera ruined it. The Girl in the Yellow Dress was too stiff in the upper back--she seemed as rigid as a board--where was the fluidity?---only in flow of her dress!

Gail Grant's Technical Manual says the following: Leader. A leading member of the Corps de Ballet. One of the grades in the cadre of the Paris Opera.

Lolly and Alexandra---I did get a reply from Dr. Schmitz. She said she found no books on the Littlefields, but got her information mainly from 1930's articles in Dance Magazine, and also parts of old books. I found out pretty much the same on the NYPL site with the Ann Barzel Collection. But there is something very intriguing about the Barzel Video collection. Loads of excerpts that were originally on 16mm on Video tape---from the 30's 40's and 50's. I told Dr. Schmitz about BalletAlert, so maybe we will be hearing from her.

IMO a ballet can be performed to ANY music---be it classical, modern, popular--whatever---as long as the dancing technique is CLASSICAL.

Thanks so much Lolly, I have sent the e-mail. It's a long way to Philadelphia via England and Guam!

Thanks Alexandra, I will try Alibris, although I haven't given up yet on NYPL. Lately I have been watching tapes of 'Serenade' and realizing that this work was not created for 'Balanchine dancers" or anyone familiar with his style. Balanchine did work with accomplished dancers when he arrived in America, and although I have a smattering of information about that period, I would like to delve more deeply into it.

I have been trying without any luck (NYPL website) to locate a book about Dorothie and Catherine Littlefield's Company. Either my search is wrong, or there aren't any books about them---which I find hard to believe. I seem to recall a book entitled "The Littlefields of Philadelphia". I have located a book on the Christensens which I expect soon.

During curtain calls I love seeing a ballerina pluck a long-stemmed rose from her bouquet and present it to her partner. Sigh!!!

Definitely not 'Bayadere'. When ABT was planning the Makarova version a number of years ago (at a cost, I think, of one million) I wrote a protest letter to the Company questioning why they were spending so much money on this 'chestnut'. I did manage to find some merit in the watered-down versions though. This latest "Kirov' version will have a hard time getting me to see it again. 'Bayadere' will never knock 'Swan Lake' off its pedestal---the opening strings of the orchestra are enough to send chills up my spine in anticipation of what I am a bout to see.

I subscribe to 'New York Magazine' for two reasons: l. I am hooked on their puzzle. 2. Tobi Tobias, my favorite NYC critic. I , too, shall e-mail the Magazine.

I subscribe to 'New York Magazine' for two reasons: l. I am hooked on their puzzle. 2. Tobi Tobias, my favorite NYC critic. I , too, shall e-mail the Magazine.

It's a wonderful 'tome' and I urge all to read it--if it is only partially true, it is quite devastating. Hurrah for 'collective bargaining'.

My dancing days are long, long over, but I have managed to recapture some of the joy I felt in moving and stretching my body by swimming! It's a great feeling to hurl myself through water with a rhythmic stroke, point my toes and go! It's also nice to see how your legs float up into very easy battements.

Much has been written about Melissa Hayden's career with NYCB, but I have fond memories of her early career with Ballet Theater. I always loved her in Jerome Robbins "Interplay" (a score by Morton Gould), in which she danced the PDD. (In those very early days she was known as Millie Herman). I also remember her from the classes we took with Mme. Anderson-Ivantsova and she was most friendly and down to earth. I also remember her from a wild class we took at SAB (with Balanchine)--He turned it into an audition for her entrance into the Company.

The worst ever?--surely Matthew Bourne's fiasco.

At a recent performance of "Bayadere" at the "Met" there was lots of clunking during the 'shades' scene. It wasn't any one performer, it was all 32 of them plus the ballerina (Daria Pavlenko, in this case). I thought it might be the flooring.

Manhattnik's signature says it all: "Every dance is too long, but some are more too-long" This was definitely the latter. I saw Daria Pavlenko (was expecting Gumerova) It was a good 2 hours before there was any real dancing on the stage. During the first act, if any of the dancers had suddenly erupted into the Hebrew Slave's Chorus from "Nabucco", I would not have battered an eyelash. I sat through their 4-hour "Sleeping Beauty" and as far as I was concerned it could have gone on forever. That was a wondrous production--and it had Tschaikovsky's score to boot. Pavlenko is a beautiful dancer to watch but I was put off by a lack of depth in her portrayal. Her Solor was Viacheslav Samodorov, and the Gamzatti, Ekaterina Osmolkina, who really broke loose in Act !V when she finally got out of those low-heeled shoes. I remember seeing the Golden Idol being carried aloft on a large pillow, but that was the last I saw of him--I know they omitted his solo, but why have him parade in and then disappear? I swear I was fully awake during the entire performance.

Alexandra, thanks for exempting me f rom that 50's and 60's crowd. It wasn't just the modern dance world that opposed him--it was also the 'Ballet Theatre' crowd of the time--it was always--:"But they only dance from the waist down". I never could forgive John Martin---the only thing he admired in ballet was Alicia Markova's 'Giselle'. (Nothing wrong with that, but the poor man missed so much--at least we had Denby, and to a lesser extent, Terry.) To further appreciate what ballet had to go through then, there is a wonderful cartoon parody (by Alex Gard) depicting Walter Terry with a copy of 'Ted Shawn' jutting out of his pocket, and John Martin with a copy of "My Life by Isadora Duncan".

I will be seeing Bonnefoux in Chautauqua next week during my annual visit and will pose the question to him. He is in residence there during the summer with the North Carolina Dance Theater.

Balanchine's 'Dream' was never one of my favorite ballets. I found much of it tedious and boring. I saw it originally with Hayden but I saw some of its redeeming features when I saw the sublime Farrell. I found Ashton's version very enjoyable and "tight". It moved swiftly and was never tiresome. I saw Ferri and Steifel, but could not get Farrell out of my mind. P.S. I write this as one who places Balanchine way up there above Ashton---it was not easy!

Balanchine's 'Dream' was never one of my favorite ballets. I found much of it tedious and boring. I saw it originally with Hayden but I saw some of its redeeming features when I saw the sublime Farrell. I found Ashton's version very enjoyable and "tight". It moved swiftly and was never tiresome. I saw Ferri and Steifel, but could not get Farrell out of my mind. P.S. I write this as one who places Balanchine way up there above Ashton---it was not easy!

I certainly hope that Sister Wendy stays clear of the Evangelicals and John Ashcroft. I wonder what they think when she is standing in front of nude female and male bodies and extolling the beauty of the naked form.