cargill

Here is another message I got from Mr. Rockwell, which I do think he wanted me to post. My comment on dance notation came from a very pleasant lunch I had recently with Hutchinson Guest, set up by Francis Mason. Wotta gal, old Broadway baby, etc. She's convinced that Labanotation holds the keys to the secrets of the universe, and I respect her belief without quite believing it myself. I do think we (meaning me, you and most of the people at Ballet Alert) fundamentally agree, albeit with clear, sometimes sharp differences of emphasis. Which was why I was so angry that WNYC "disinvited" Leigh Witchel from that program, after I had only agreed to do it on the condition that he and/or Alexandra Tomalonis be there, too. It could have been a discussion. It turned out, in the minds of the Ballet Alert folk, to be another rant by me into a vacuum. Why don't you post this, too!

I don't know if "good guy" is exactly the term I would use for Wagner! Great artist, yes, since he would be my desert island opera composer, but someone implying that anyone or anything has nazi tendencies (which the term misegination does to many people) should be careful about dividing the world into progressive and retro artists. That's all I meant. Here is Mr. Rockwell's answer to my letter. Dear Ms. Cargill: Thanks for your thoughtful letter, although I do hope that everyone who participates in the Ballet Alert forum doesn't now plan to write me and expect an answer. Anyhow, in brief, here are some thoughts on your letter, paragraph by paragraph: 1. In no way do I think that a lack of a past (which, after all, extends in ballet back 400 years) is an absolute benefit. I only meant that maybe the lack of a huge canon of certified masterpieces, relative to classical music, meant that ballet folk were more interested in creating new work. As for the lack of a regular system of dance notation, take that, Ann Hutchinson Guest! I was equating, perhaps clumsily, musical notation with ballet technique, not notation. 2. Sure, Diaghilev stuck with classically trained choreographers, however much Fokine et al. shocked conservatives and however classical you consider Ida Rubinstein's technique to have been. But D. was certainly interested in remaining au courrant, as in his eagerness to de-emphasize Russian primitivism after WWI. 3. Classically trained choreographers (and composers) have always incorporated influences from beyond "the academy," and more power to them. But influences from without are hardly always destructive (I just reviewed Twyla's "Nine Sinatra Songs," for instance, long since taken over by ballet companies). 4. I agree that ballet dancers often look too balletic in modern. I was just referring to the contention of some people (like my late friend Dale Harris) who argue that ballet provides the best, most universal kind of training, applicable to everything else. 5. I'm glad you enjoyed "The Peony Pavilion," a project I conceived and created, working with the director Shi-zheng Chen, whom I hired. Of course, it was canceled in Shanghai because conservatives there denounced it as an outrageous violation of the true kunju tradition. My Square Dance reference was definitely an error, though I got it from a review in the Times archives by Anna Kisselgoff. But what, in all of this, makes you think I don't respect ballet tradition? I just want to renew and extend it, and it seems to me that discussion about the best way to do that can only be healthy. John Rockwell

I didn't hear the radio broadcast, so I my impression of it comes only from reading reports, but I must say bringing up Hitler is a bit much. Especially since Wagner is one of his good guys in his newspaper piece. I certainly don't think artists are responsible for their fans and no one has any idea what Wagner would think of Hitler--I myself think (or perhaps hope) that someone as independent as Wagner would have disliked him--but certainly they would have had a lot to say to each other about the importance of racial purity. Again, since I didn't hear him, my impression may be wrong, but to somehow equate the hard core ballet audience (and by implication ballet in general) with Fascism is absolutely apalling. Especially since so many of the dancers in one of the academies he dismisses (De Valois' Sadler's Wells) spent a great deal of time either fighting Hitler or performing during bombing attacks. As for dancers who supported Hitler, Mary Wigman was as far from ballet as she could get.

In case anyone is interested, here is a letter I sent to Mr. Rockwell--I deliberately didn't read other letters, so I don't know if this repeats any points. Mary Dear Mr. Rockwell: I am writing in response to your recent articles about cross-over dance, and would like to take issue with you on a few points. It may be oversimplifying your original article, but you seem to imply that the lack of a past is a strength for dance, more specifically for ballet. First of all, ballet does have a past, and the strongest companies are those with firm roots in an academy. What it does not have is a regular system of notation, which makes it a much more fragile art, but I do not see that as a good thing. Based on what I see as your argument, drama would be in better shape if all we had were the 18th century revisions of Shakespeare, or opera stronger if we tried to recreate Handel based only on a few arias and some vague critical commentary. I think the ballet audience today is concerned that the great 20th century choreographers, like Massine, Fokine, Tudor, and even Ashton and to a lesser extent Balanchine, may go the way of St. Leon or Merrante. Even Petipa survives primarily in watered down or drastically retouched versions. We should be able to learn from this loss, and not repeat it. Your use of Diaghilev as a stick to beat up on those who you feel are less than open-minded is to rely on a very weak weapon. Diaghilev was rooted in tradition—even at his most experimental, he had his dancers take Cecchetti classes, and possibly his most influential production was his revival of The Sleeping Beauty, which emphasized to De Valois the absolute importance of the academy. His experiments in the early 20’s were, as I understand it, essentially pragmatic and certainly if you read reviews of the time, not universally acclaimed. His supply of Russian dancers had dried up, but even at his most disposable, he set trends, he didn’t follow them. And he was interested in Scarlatti as well as Stravinsky, in Renaissance paintings as well as Picasso. Certainly the most acclaimed works of his late period—Les Noces and Apollo—were strongly in the classical tradition, a tradition that understood demi-caractere. At the time he died, Diaghilev was planning to revive Giselle for Markova, so he could never be said to have abandoned classicism or to only look for the new. Nor does any ballet goer believe that the art form is closed. New forms of moving have always been incorporated, but they have been changed. Certainly folk dancing in the 19th century added a great deal to ballet, but it wasn’t just plunked down, it was refined. Even the character dancers of, say Cortege Hongrois, could not be mistaken for actual peasants, and the famous Raymonda variation is purely classical, for all its character accents. A more modern example of this would be Ashton’s use of the twist in his Swan Lake pas de quatre versus his use of it in Jazz Calendar; both bits use popular dancing but the moves have become either classical or character, and neither would be mistaken for an actual nightclub dance. You also seem to imply that modern dance has benefited from ballet training. Not everyone is impressed by the flexibility, the extension, or the general prettiness of ballet in modern dance, but, as you might say “Take that, Dudley Williams.” One of the most memorable artistic experiences I have had was the Chinese Opera a few years ago, during one of the Lincoln Center festivals. No one, as I recall, complained because it was a rigid, hidebound form which could use shaking up. Ballet has always been open to new ways of moving, but it does have a history and a devoted and passionate audience who cares about its preservation. (And anyone who can write that Square Dance was originally danced in hoe-down costumes could benefit a great deal from the often very knowledgeable posters to BalletAlert.com) If you can respect the Chinese tradition, I would hope you could respect ours.

I have heard Peter Martins say several times that he didn't think that Balanchine really liked his Apollo, that Balanchine felt that it was a demi role. In the wonderul Guggenheim Works and Process evening when Martins coached Stiefel in Apollo, Martins stressed over and over the non classical elements--no turn out, lots of sports metaphors, a very off-balance quality. I think it is a much more interesting role that way, than a purely classical approach.

I think speculation about Fonteyn today is a bit like saying if Mozart were alive today, he would be 400 years old! But I don't think it is possible to dismiss her technique at all. I saw her Rose Adagio when she was in her 50's, and she managed very well, far better spiritually and technically than most of the NYCB dancers that tried it recently. Technique is so much more than hitting your head with you foot, and the best technique makes things look easy.

It may not be dancing per se, but to me, the little I have seen, Jonathan Howells seems to be outstanding in Ashton characters--I remember his Alain especially. That is another important part of Ashton, I think, the ability to portray a character through dance movement.

I was struck by the New Yorker tone, as well. I really don't think a critic should tell a company do this and do that. It is one thing to say that the critic would enjoy seeing so and so, or to wonder why so and so is or is not cast, but I thought this article was a bit beyond that. Plus the example of Baryishnikov was not exactly proving her point, since, at least for me, even his Albrecht was a stretch, and Siegfried was way off base. Life isn't fair, and there is no way I can see Cornejo, with that body and that face, as a prince, though I think he is an absolutely wonderful dancer, and I think the definitive Puck in the Dream, and his Mozartiana was stunning. Now if she had gone on and on about Hallberg as a prince, I could see her point! Mary

Well, I guess someone who could describe Mozartiana as "eye candy" would also complain about someone being too much of a ballerina! Mary

I haven't seen the specific choreographers the article mentions, but, by substituting most of the new ballets I have seen, I think they made very good points, especially about technique not being a substitute for content. I wish modern ballet choreographers (especially Stanton Welch) didn't think that adrenelin equals soul.

The last time ABT did Sleeping Beauty, Ethan Stiefel did Bluebird, and he was just wonderful. Inhuman and very magical, with wonderful sit-in-the-air cabrioles. It was one of the greatest things I have ever seen.

I wasn't there, but a friend who saw the first PAMTAGG says that one of the men's costumes started ripping at the crotch, and when he returned from a brief exit, it was held together by a very large safety pin. I did see a couple of rips in the same spot during two different Lindsay Fischer performances of the first movement of Western Symphony--it seems like they didn't learn the first time!

I don't know if people saw the review in yesterday's New York Times book review section, but it seemed like the person writing (I forget his name) wasn't all that familiar with the material--he said Robbins was a big hit on Broadway with Fancy Free! The review was a good one, on the whole, I'm happy to say, so the book should sell well, but I was a bit disappointed that the NYTimes couldn't come up with someone better.

No, I don't think the excerpted pas de deux worked very well--Thais and Voices of Spring were exceptions, because they were choreographed as stand alone pieces. I guess it was easier to bring a few short pieces (less rehearsal, no scenery, etc.), and of course any Ashton is better than none. But it did a disservice to the kind of choreographer he was, I think. Think of how much less effective the pas de deux from The Dream would be performed on its own without sets--that is probably what happened to the piece from Ondine. If they wanted to showcase their company, they could have danced the whole of Birthday Offering! Of course, the pas de deux might be considered previews of coming attractions, but I'm afraid it was really leftover crumbs.

I remember reading somewhere a description of Fanny Elssler's Lise that she danced in Russia, and the description of the mime (where she dreams she is married with 1 - 2 - 3! children) sounds very like the mime we see today, so it is possible that it is somewhat authentic. Even if it isn't, it is still one of my favorite moments in all of ballet!

A few years ago the Kirov brought the Fountain of Bakschiserai to New York, and I absolutely loved it. All that harem scarum, and wonderful slinking around for Zarema. Also along those lines, I love Scherezade.

I think the general technical level is a problem, for whatever reason. It may be partly because the corps is so very young, and learning so many new roles, but I have never seen so many falls before--it seemed like at least once an evening, someone would take a spill. And it wasn't the type of fall that comes from trying too hard, it was just tripping over their feet. The quality of the pure classical variations, like those in Raymonda, was really off, I thought. Though Ballo was the great exception.

Once, when I had way too much time on my hands, I went back and reread all of Kisslegoff's Diamond Project reviews--I ws puzzled by a remark she made summing up the last one to the effect that finally it seemed to be on track, since I hadn't remembered her ever saying it was off track. I have to say that it seemed that she pulled all her punches--it seemed that after every DP season, she said something to the effect that "finally, it seems to be working"--she praised the ida that they were all crammed into one week at one time, and then the next project, praised the fact that finally the new ballets were spread out over the entire season, that kind of thing. "Whatever is, is right" seemed to be her motto. In addition, she is the one who wrote (I am quoting just from memory) something to the effect that Nilas Martins was the great classical ballet dancer at NYCB--at a time when Boal and Hubbe were at their peak!

I thought it was a little more serious and less OTT than I might have expected--no card tables or birds of black thought or exploding heads. But there wasn't even the morbid pleasure of a lively awfulness, it was just swathes of dullness interspersed with the most tasteless ideas I ever hope to see. Balanchine as a miserable tortured genius, looking and looking and looking for his ideal, rolling around on a chair while clutching his head. There were plenty of awful moments, unrelieved by any campy fun. Watching Le Clerc's legs turn into rubber was quite simply spitting on someone's grave, and the Balanchine-Farrell pas de deux when he buries his face in her crotch is spitting on someone who is still alive. It was just choreographic graffiti. I don't care how many audience members it attracts, it is, to my mind, a complete moral failure.

I saw Part's, and much as I have loved her before, I was just knocked over. She has technique enough for it, got through the fouettes without major difficulties, but she is the type of dancer that is so far beyond technique that it doesn't even seem to be an issue. I would rather see her stand on stage and point her arm than see any number of turns no matter how brilliant. To me she is just from another world, a fairy tale, say, of a princess who spins velvet on the moon. I have no critical facilities left, I am just someone worshiping a goddess!

Paul, Your piece sound perfect for Paul Tayor to me! There could be a comic dance to the Tom Lehrer song about the elements--foolium and falium certainly sound like fun. There are just so many works that would make perfectly terrible ballets, and so little time to think of them! But unfortunately, when I do think of them, it seems that someone else has too. I don't know if someone mentioned this, but in the I Remember Balanchine book, there was a mention of a Lincoln Kirstein project for a ballet on Moby Dick. This was in his early Americana stage. I think Tarzan would make a wonderful ballet. Classical dancing for Jane, macho jumping for Tarzan, and lots of character dancing for the chimps. There could be a secondary love interest for Cheetah, and lots of drums for the natives. Not to mention a great villian in an evil white hunter. I see Stanton Welch as the choreographer, but who could do the music?

It didn't work for me, as you can tell from my review! I thought the "It was all a dream" ending just eviserated all of the drama, and I loathed the idea of turning the character dances into sexy turns. But I thought it was well danced.

Have you seen the Kirov's version of Eugene Onegin--the opera, not the ballet? They set the ball scene in the snow, and believe me it wasn't pretty! A little hard to believe Titania and Onegin chatting in ball room clothes while standing in the middle of a Russian winter. But it saved money on the sets.

I saw her when the Kirov was here in New YOrk in the late 1980's I think. (It was the year they brought Scotch Symphony.) I wasn't blown away by her Scotch, but I was too busy watching that wondeful corps, and Lezhnina as the Scotch girl! I did see her in Sleeping Beauty, and I'm afraid that I can't think of a dancer that I have enjoyed less. She seemed so mannered and arch, and my gosh, she milked those curtain calls, longer than any Russian I have every seen, and that took some doing! I also saw her Lilac, which I enjoyed a lot more. She was the only one who wore a tutu during the vision scene, but like so many other Westerners, I can't really see what the excitement was about.

Sorry, Leigh, I see Odette more as one of the ballerinas with a gentleman patron! Those whiny women always seem to find someone to latch on to. Maybe the can can is an option for Odile when she is tired of fouettes.