cargill

A somewhat related question is, if Albrecht lives in the castle visible from the village, why didn't Giselle recognize him--he must have been wandering around hunting with his buddies for years. The solution I came up with is that the castle belongs to Bathilde's father, and Albrecht is from another duchy visiting his fiance. Of course, that does not explain how he hooked up with his real estate agent.

I know I have told this before, but the most powerful Albrecht I was was Nureyev towards the end of his dancing career. He was completely contemptuous of Giselle, laughing at her beind her back, just playing along. When Hilarion grabs her, he just turns his back, not even trying to protect her. Clearly a heartless rake, who perfectly happy to kiss Bathilde's hand. During Giselle's mad scene, he just stood there stony faced, angry that this little nothing would embarass him. He didn't even reach towards her as she ran to him just before she died. Then when she lay on the ground, it all came tumbling in on him, and he realized what he had lost. Nureyev just bent down and touched the hem of her dress in a daze, no melodramatics, no "acting", just the most profound grief. I think it takes an older dancer to carry off this approach, but I have seen others as well. Desmond Kelly, with the Royal Ballet in the early 70's, was wonderful at it. At the very beginning, when Wilfred is trying to convince him that he is wrong, Kelly just kissed his lips, as in "Oh, la, la". And I remember Robert Hill at ABT sort of automatically giving Giselle's friends the once over. Though certainly naive Albrechts in love with Giselle but too heedless to think of the consequences work very well too. Malakhov gives it that approach, and so does Corella, which suits them very well. Albrecht is such an interesting role. I suspect it had deepened over the history of the ballet.

I read, in Ivor Guest's book on Giselle, I think, that originally in France she did stab herself, like Marc says. Then when Giselle went to Russia, she wasn't allowed to kill herself on stage due to religious proscriptions. To me it makes more sense for her to kill herself and be buried in unconsecrated ground, because the wilis are afraid of the cross. They wouldn't be running around in a Christian burial ground. But then there is Giselle's mother's concern about her dancing with a weak heart. Maybe her weak heart helps her mind to unhinge and then she stabs herself. Lovely though the ABT second act sets are, I think they are stronger on atmosphere than dramatic sence, because it is clearly set in an old graveyard with lots of crosses and a ruined church. Again, not the place where ghosts who are powerless in the face of Christianity would dance.

It sounds like a wonderful performance. I will be interested to see what people think of McKerrow, since I find her Giselle with Malakhov so full of wonderful details, and very believable. Did Carreno tone down his second act "I will get every ounce of applause I can get" bow-from-the-ground-moment after his dance? I hope so, because it looked so phony in the middle of the performance, and he is usually such an elegant dancer.

Jane, it was in an old issue of Ballet Review, in the early 80's. There was a picture in it from the original production, but no other indication as to where they got the identification. I had never seen a sister mentioned before, but I guess I can think of her as the sister for myself!

I was reading an interview with Maude Lloyd yesterday (she was the original Caroline), which had a picture of the original production. There was a girl in a white dress, which looks like the dress of the girl who cries and brings Caroline her cloak, labelled the Sister. Presumably Caroline's sister, which makes a lot of sense, because she would know what was going on. The productions I have seen have not identified this character, and I am wondering if anyone knows what happened to her.

When I was going regularly to Covent Garden in the early 1970's, the programs (which cost something, probably about the equivalent of $ 1 or $2 in today's terms), had farily extensive plot summaries for the story ballets, and some very interesting supplemental essays about the music, about the history of the piece, and about the choreographer, written by critics in an accessible, jargon-free, but not puffy style with some historical pictures. A very long way from the pieces in Stage bill. These gave the audience that was interested some background and definitely helped with some of the details. I think newer members of the NYCB audience might be interested in knowing some of the history of Serenade, for example, about the use of the girl who falls, or a brief report on the first performance, which is a long way from "explaining" what is really going on. And a ballet like Harliquinade would certainly be richer if the audience knew some of the background of the Commedia del arte characters. I do find the personal jottings or literary quotations of some of the European companies somewhat irritating and pretentious, but notes like Leigh mentioned are very useful.

I remember about 10 years ago I was talking to the mother of a girl who was dancing in the SAB workshop, and she said in SAB under Peter Martins, there was a definite change from worring about fat to worrying about being too thin, that he had been accepting dancers into the company that were all shapes, and that SAB was emphasizing healthy eating. The dancers in the 70's and early 80's were, I think, a lot thinner as a general rule than they are now, a very good thing, in my eyes.

And Segal is really quite off the wall in only blaming white male directors for the pressure to be thin, since, in the 19th century,when men had a lot more power, dancers were a lot heftier. Tastes change, but I don't think it is mature to blame someone "out there" who is foisting images on us helpless little folk. (After all, remember the Edsel!) The super thin look as I recall became popular in the 60's with people like Twiggy, and ballet was to some extent I suspect following that trend rather than purely setting it. I also remember Alexandra pointing out that the current vogue for leotard ballets probably has something to do with the emphasis on emaciated body shapes, since leotards show everything a tutu hides. And if Guillem is an Amazon to Segal, heaven help the rest of the world! I agree about Lacarra, though I haven't seen her a lot. I thought her white swan pas de deux was completely unwomanly, all attenuated shapes and mannerisms, and her thinness bothered me very much.

I remember reading in Petipa's autobiography that he loathed what Gorsky did to Don Q, which, as I recall, involved making the peasants more peasant like and less like a formal corps de ballet.

Well, it was a little over the top, but I guess nowadays you can blame white males for anything. But I think the emaciated look isn't limited to ballet--look at the heroine chic models. Personally, I really dislike the superthin look, and much prefer the 1950's shape of ballet dancer. And it seems his article is implying that you don't have to the superthin anymore, since he says Darcey Bussell is so famous. I wonder if the Soviet style ballets with all their heavy lifting contributed to the pensil thin look, since that would make them so much easier to cart around and save the men's backs.

This is actually not an April Fool's joke, but I just read that a play in New York has a sign posted in the lobby warning the audience that the play contains "excessive violence and cigarette smoking".

I love all mime, and any I see nowadays is wonderful! But among the pieces I really loved was Fredbjorn Bjornsson (Royal Danish Ballet) as the nice troll Viderik in A Folk Tale. His agony at hearing the bells from the church and his pain when Hilda insisted on giving the gold away was so perfect. I feel so privileged to have seen such a great artist. Recently, I was impressed by Guillaume Graffin's Radjah (ABT spelling!) in La Bayadere. He made such simple gestures as getting up and walking so powerful and threatening. As for the question, what is bad mime, I think a good example is ABT's Carabosse, who camps it up no end, almost winking at the audience, making a broad joke of being Bette Davis playing Queen Elizabeth I. It absolutely destroys the power and dignity of the part. ABT's Madge, too, can sometimes be very jokey.

Alexandra, The Brits still have a sense of humor! It was an April Fool's joke. Sorry, I just saw your first note. I didn't realize the cover had already been blown. [This message has been edited by cargill (edited April 02, 2001).]

When Peter Martins was being interviewed by Leslie Stahl a couple of years ago (for the Friends of NYCB, I think) he mentioned that Balanchine had always told him the Apollo was a demi-charactere role and slightly gave the impression, to me anyway, that Balanchine wasn't truly satisfied with his approach. Stahl didn't follow up on that like she should have, and there wasn't time for questions afterwards, so nothing else was said.

Among Balanchine ballerinas, I think you have to include Tallchief and Diana Adams. He made such glorious works for them, and so diverse. Adams was Liebeslieder as well as so many more modern ones.

I think Nurevey could probably survive in the new corporate environment, as long as he brought in the audiences. But what probably wouldn't happen is any exciting, interesting choreography being created for him, just more of the whatever will sell or , as of now, attract the "new, hip, audience." Arts administration is a very fine line, I think. Clearly, the artistic director (who is usually I believe a choreographer or sorts), can't cavalierly spend other people's money, but arts administrators can't really believe that the arts can be run exactly like businesses. (Though I do think we are being sold "New Coke" a lot of times.) The most successful model, it seems to me, other than Diaghilev the great exception, has been the European royal court, and clearly the choreographer was not solely in charge. He had to answer to the taste of the audience, but he also didn't have to worry so much about the administrative details. To some extent, I think, this model was followed in the Kirstein/Balanchine era. If you have people of genius, judgement and good taste (with some family money!), you will probably get good art. And if there aren't many good choreographers around, you will get solid revivals of good work to serve as a model/inspiration for the future. If not, no matter what corporate model you follow, you will get derrivative shlock. I am sure there were plenty of dukes with bad taste who put on bad ballets, but they haven't survived.

I only saw the Royal Ballet production once quite a while ago, so some of the details may be fuzzy, but in addition to the problems mentioned (like having rifles all around and the prince hunt swans with a cross bow), the original production had the swans wearing helmets like, someone wrote, laminated bobby pins. The lake scene is grotesque, a big oval pit. But the worse thing I remember is Siegfried in the 3rd act, when he is supposed to be mooning around thinking of Odette, and he comes bounding out goosing all the guests with Benno. I suppose it was to give the Prince more dancing! And Rothbart comes in wearing a skull with little skeletons accompanying him, as if someone like that would really fool the court. Not to mention that they dropped the Ashton waltz in the first act, and don't do his wonderful pas de quatre. However, as classics go, it is not nearly so awful as the Royal Ballet's current Sleeping Beauty!

Mu ultimate Myrtha, again probably because it was one of the first ones I saw, was Deanne Bergsma of the Royal Ballet. She was tall and absolutely gorgeous is a very exotic way so she looked like a magical creature. Certainly not vulnerable, though. She was also my ultimate Lilac Fairy.

Mu ultimate Myrtha, again probably because it was one of the first ones I saw, was Deanne Bergsma of the Royal Ballet. She was tall and absolutely gorgeous is a very exotic way so she looked like a magical creature. Certainly not vulnerable, though. She was also my ultimate Lilac Fairy.

And they are both on the list of ballets I would prefer not to see again!

I did like Christopher Wheeldon's Slavonic Dances, though it was a bit long. But the windswept solo of Monique Munieur really stunning. But it would be a very short program. I also was very moved by Leigh Witchel's solo for Peter Boal. And Susan Stroman's very brief piece for NYCB to Duke Ellington with Maria Kowroski as a clutsy ballet dancer was succinct and funny. The thread in these, I see, is the ability to use an individual dancer in an unexpected or different way. I can come up with some other new works I wouldn't mind seeing again if pressed, but the thought of seeing most of the newer pieces would make me run screaming from the room, I'm afraid. [This message has been edited by cargill (edited March 06, 2001).]

I think there were lots of great American ballerinas, who did different things well. MacBride was a wonderful wonderful dancer, who I think had a capacity to look different in different roles, always with a special charm, but was more of an artist than a superstrong personality. (I mean that as a compliment.) But I think it is limiting to try to rank dancers to try to come up with the BEST whatever, in this case American ballerina; that might be nice for PR but isn't necessary for anyone who goes often. I also think it is bad for ballet in general to stress stars too much. Ballet is so much more, and if ABT, for instance, in the 70's and 80's when there were real stars, had worked to develop a real company and a less star-struck audience, it might have been better off when the stars disappeared.

Back to the question as to what we would like to see Farrell doing (with the understanding, of course, that our opinions count as nothing!), I would like to see her work with established dancers, passing on her roles. She has shown so strongly that she is a wonderful coach, able to bring out the best in a dancer without making her a mannered, Farrell clone. There seems to be a certain individualistic quality missing in some lead dancers today, and anything that helps would be so welcome.

I can't remember the year, but it was in the late 80's I think, the 3rd movement was put back briefly, but I am sure it was before the Balanchine Festival. It was danced by Damian Woetzel and Nicol Hlinka and was lovely, lots of jumping and oddles of charm. I really cannot think why it was dropped again, certainly NYCB has lots of dancers who could do it very well.