cargill

It seems that the statement that the modern dance audience expects sex, violence and depravity and will leave without it in some ways says they are as conservative and the audience and critics the writer is damning--if you know what you will see you are hardly getting cutting edge or innovative material or a true rethinking. But of course, I am a middle-aged fogey!

I felt that, however much the choreography resembled the old much loved Royal Ballet version, the emphasis was different. In the Royal Ballet version, there was a sense of some over arching good (Lilac) who could defeat evil (Carabosse), and the rest of the court were to some extent not players in the drama. In the Kirov version, I felt for all its grandeur, that the work was more personal--the King agonizing between justice and mercy was an extension or an example of the choices all of us face. And having Carabosse come to the wedding (even though carefully guarded in the apotheosis) reinforced the lesson. I came out of it thinking, yes, I can make a choice myself, whereas I come out of the Royal Ballet version thinking something good is watching out for us all. I wonder if the timing of the Royal Ballet version had anything to do with the shift of emphasis (assuming I am not completely wrong!). It was produced right after the end of WWII, when evil had in fact been defeated.

Somehow, I don't think calling someone conservative who objects to some of the things he mentioned in Don Giovanni is insulting! Or accurate, either, since a great production of any work should take its impetus from the text or the music. A director looking over his shoulder at what has been done or ahead to the latest scandal and critical flap does not usually, it seems to me, have anything interesting to say. If the production cannot be justified artistically by what is already in the work, then drug dealing, etc., will only look false. And a critic who criticises a work which looks false is not being conservative, just as a critic who praises a work simply because it is offensive to certain perceived audiences is not being liberal. "It is new" is a description, not an evaulation, just as "It is old-fashioned" is not a valid criticism unless certain elements do not work--in which case the readers deserve to know why they don't work.

Ed, were you thinking about recasting Tonight We Sing, or doing a whole other movie about an impressario? I would love to see a Ballet Russes movie: Liam Neeson could be Denham, because he was so elegant, and I am sure there could be some accented role for Meryl Streep. It could center around the rivalries, and have lots of mothers and backstage intrigues, and could revive some of Massine's works, and let ABT's dancers have a chance to do real character roles.

About making people who mess with Swan Lake regret it, I was actually thinking about starting with Gorky, and eliminating all elements of the jester, and realism and Freud. There are so many bad Swan Lakes around (I can't think of a good one left), that it would probably take all my money!

I think it is a question of style and costume. People wearing tutus should not expose their rear ends, especially if they are long floppy tutus that hike over their heads like lampshades. There is a place in Liebeslieder, first section, where a few dancers insist on lifting their leg as high as possible and exposing their underwear, which totally breaks the mood of the piece--later, when they are wearing ballet skirts, they can show off. As for technique changing, it has to be appropriate--no one really wants to see Giselle whack away at fouettes, though the technique has changed since it was choreographed. But the changes Petipa made in the 2nd act seem fine (of course, that is what I am used to.) But the exaggerated developes in the vision seen of Sleeping Beauty that we saw from the Kirov seemed completely to destroy the mood of the piece, and distorted the upper body. I think the exaggerated extensions should be kept to ballets costumed in tights.

Kathleen, Yet another thanks for the review. You can't be THAT busy, so please write more! About Francy Free, as I understand it, Jerome Robbins danced the tango and the pas de deux at the beginning, but soon gave the pas de deux to the boy dancing the 2nd variation. I have seen it done both ways--Robert La Fosse danced the 2nd variation and the pas de deux, and Woetzel did the 3rd solo and the pas de deux. I really prefer the middle boy to dance the pas de deux, it seems to fit his character so much better, because he is shyer and more bashful. The tango boy would have certainly run after the girl, not wait behind! And I think it works better when the girl is more knowing, not leading him on, but she is a New Yorker and he is in the city for the first time.

Well, I'm from Wyoming, and run people out of the state who say roDAYo, but I do think that is how the ballet is pronounced. I just have a very hard time saying it that way without feeling like an effete Eastern snob.

This is probably illegal, but if I had oodles of money, I would hire people to make sure that anyone who messed around with Swan Lake would be very, very sorry. And then I would contribute what ever was left to Alexandra's program.

Leigh, I am just in the middle of rereading the Lucia books! They might make an interesting ballet for aging divas, and Dvorovenko would be perfect at Lucia. Von Aroldigen possible as Mapp? For guilty pleasures, I think it means something you know is really not first rate, but enjoy anyway, which for me definitely includes Slaughter--I love the music so much. But I have seen Kowroski and was a bit disappointed-it was just high kicks and no heart. For other guilty pleasures, I loved the first year ABT did Le Corsaire, before they started camping it up so much. Actually, I really love Minkus, too.

Joan of Arc might make a very effective ballet, with lots of nice opportunities for French folk dancing, and martial strutting, not to mention a pas de deux between Joan and the Dauphin. And of course, a very theatrical ending.

I think she made some good points about ABT dancers, but a bit short on specifics. Far too much canned history (and not terribly good history at that--saying Taglioni and sylphs set the standard for 150 years ignores a lot of history, and a lot of male dancing (like Bournonville) not to mention the buxom Imperial ballerinas. I would say that Pavlova really set the 20th century standard. Also, I don't know about the idea that a plie is a submissive statement--it seems like she is finding sociology when there is a perfectly good physical explanation. How were dancers going to develop strength, after all! Plus anyone that uses "privileges" as a verb has no right to make aesthetic judgements! I also thought her tone was a bit too arch and knowing, being condescending to Bruhn when it is not clear at all if she saw him dance. In the same vein,I think she was just too dismissive of the female dancers at ABT, too glib without giving reasons. I got the feeling she just likes male dancing better, which isn't the same as making some intelligent comments. Boy, do I miss Mindy Aloff!

And of course the original Giselle would have been lit by gas lights, which of course is something we will never see. I don't know enough about theater history--were the house lights being dimmed during the performances in the 1840's or did that come later? An audience chatting and oggling must have been distracting, gas lighting or not!

I must say I do enjoy reading British critics--I do think having so many outlets lets them be more honest--there are so many voices heard that one writer isn't giving the only thumbs up/down. I must say the whole concept of the Memories program made me gag, and if it doesn't really matter if the audience sees the complete ballet or not, I guess it is only a marketing ploy. One thing that struck me reading the reviews of The Leaves are Fading is that it seems people felt is was basically a Robbins ballet--drowing in chiffon and woozy romantic atmosphere. (With a few major exceptions, Robbins in NOT my favorite choreographer!) I saw it years ago with Gelsey Kirkland, and it looked like Tudor, full of complex and obliquely expressed emotions. The central pas de deux she did was just heartbreaking--she danced like she was trapped in a can't live with him/can't live without him relationship, and was struggling to break free, while her partner just stood watching her helpless, and just as trapped. Their last lift, where he carried her off stage just seemed so resigned--he had her, but not completely, because she was still reaching for something else. I have never seen it done like by any other dancer--it generally does look like Robbins at his most generically romantic, but I have never forgotten that performance. I remember thinking that the walking girl at the beginning and the end seemed like a symbol of eternity, or sort of nature's lack of interest in individual suffering--it didn't seem like the cliche of love remembered. Of course, I could be reading far more into it than was there, but it was one of the greatest and most individual and heartfelt things I saw Kirkland do.

Well, my first impression was that an art critic WOULD think that only art that can be seen is real, and that everything else is the audience's imagination.

There are a lot of other trouser roles in opera, Rossini used them. Massenet's Cendrellion had the prince sung by a mezzo. I think it was more the composers really liked the sound of a mezzo and a soprano, than gender-bending.

I think things that are designed to be contemporary and cutting edge and relevant have the most chance of becomming dated no matter how they are performed. Other works can become dated if they are not done well--like Ashton--but there is nothing older than yesterday's trend. Of course, issue-related works of art can retain their power if there is a universal resonance.

I think the article in Ballet Review hit on several issues we have been talking about--company style and what is a ballerina, and I enjoyed his comments (another way, I suppose, of saying I agreed with him!) I have only seen Lacarra in a few things. She was very good in The Cage, but I have never seen a bad performance of The Cage, or one that convinced me that the ballet is anything more than ballet's shabby little shocker. I did see her white swan in one of those galas, and I must say it left me absolutely cold. It is hard to dance out of context, but I never got the feeling she was trying to convey real human feelings, or that that body was human at all. To me, it was just exaggerated shapes with no sense of impending tragedy. As a human rubber band, she is certainly effective, but a whole company of dancers modeled on her, would, it seems to me, not be at all interesting. I think that was partly what the article was saying.

Though the trolls in Bournonville's Folk Tale aren't really monsters, Muri's first appearance, with that wonderful music does make me believe she is wicked, if not truly evil. When done right, Kaschei, in Fokine's version of Firebird, with those long fingernails is really frightening. Way back when, when Swan Lake was done straight, I remember Roghbard being a hovering, shadowy presence in the back which was certainly more effective than today's prancing ninnys. But these aren't really monsters, I guess, more individuals who are evil. I agree, the baldies in Prodigal Son are the closest things to real monsters I think I have seen--which of course has a lot to do with the costumes.

What I miss in Liebeslieder, or at least missed the last time I saw it, was the place where Verdy (not that I ever saw her, but I did see Nichols in the Verdy role) points to the ground, sort of like saying "That is where I am going, and very soon." Also I remember in the 2nd pas de trois in Agon, the one with 2 men and the women, with the difficult balance, she used to come forward to the audience at the end, and nod slightly. It was such a witty moment, asknowledging the audience and sharing a moment with them.

Michael, as someone who was very disappointed in the recent T&V, I don't know if "hostile" is really the right way to describe my, or other people I have talked with, reactions. Someone once said of a librarian that to him "every decimal point was a moral issue", and I think that sort of passionate response to what to a realtively normal person (!) would think utterly trivial turns up in some people's reactions. I was so upset at that T&V I couldn't sleep, and I know I should get a life, but to a large extent watching ballet for me is a life, and Sleeping Beauty and its descendants, like T&V, for me, are the ultimate art form. To see it treated so cavalierly, so badly cast and so misunderstood, doesn't provoke hostility as much as rage and despair. A slight case of overreaction, I suppose, but I don't think people are criticising Abi Stafford because of Peter Martins, I think they are criticising Peter Martins because of cases like Abi Stafford, where dancers are given deeply loved and revered parts too young and too unprepared, which means ultimately that the ballets will become watered down and meaningless.

There is the famous quote from someone (Denby?) who was asked what is musicality, and said "Watch Allegra Kent". It is a question I find can only be answered by example, and the best one I can think of is Nicol Hlinka. She was dancing Who Cares once, a ballet I suspect most people in the audience had seen many times, and which held no real surprises. Hlinka just flicked her wrist on the downbeat so perfectly that the audience burst out laughing, it was so witty and perfectly timed, it seemed like new. I have seen that moment many times afterwards by different dancers, and that moment has usually gone unnoticed. To me a musical dancer is one who can make the audience feel the music, who seems to be dancing for the music, not using it as an excuse for steps.

The first time I saw it, van Hamel was dancing, and that is one of my unforgettable experiences, though I am ashamed to say I don't remember who she danced with. Kistler, not surprizingly, since she was such a radiant Aurora, glowed. I was not fond of Ashley in it, since I was constantly aware of how hard the steps were. I have very fond memories of Judith Fugate dancing with Peter Boal, and being so moved by their pas de deux. Not surprisingly, I also LOVED her Aurora. I don't much like ABT's production with its cutsy costumes and black backdrop I would crawl to see Gillian Murphy and Marcelo Gomes dance it. She was so regal with an underlying warmth, and he danced with such graceful power. I have only seen Youskevitch dance it on film, and he is one of my time travel if only's.

As I wrote once, it's like all of the beauty and none of the sleeping! But no, I don't think if only it survived, people could get a good idea of what the complete Sleeping Beauty was like--both the moral dimension and the humor, as well as the general sence of expansiveness, are missing. But I do think that T&V captures the essence of Aurora and Desire--there is Aurora's youthfulness and technique in the opening (like the Rose Adagio), the yearning of the vision scene, and then the triumph of the wedding--distillation, essence, gloss, whatever. Probably some of each. Certainly it is a great ballet on its own, but knowing something about Sleeping Beauty adds so much to watching it, and I would suspect, to dancing it and to coaching it.

I saw Stafford in Theme last night, and have to say I thought she was completely miscast. Theme to me is one of the holy ballets--all the grandeur and majesty and power of Sleeping Beauty in about 20 minutes, and all I saw was a decent technician with a not very classical body (short arms, short neck and large head)who just concentrated on the steps, not on phrasing or music or her partner or anyone else in the ballet. I don't think I have ever been so depressed at a performance, just thinking of the waste of talent and lack of understanding that casting her showed. One the other hand, Jenifer Ringer in Raymonda danced the role just about as beautifully as I have ever seen it done.