cargill

Lifar's autobiography has some information about his tenure during the war, but I don't know how accurate it is! It has been translated into English and is certainly interesting reading.

On the question of what has harmed ballet the most, I suppose oddly enough, its popularity in the 1970's. Now nothing is good enough unless it attacts a huge audience, so everyone is looking for the next great superstar, and hyping promising dancers to the skies without letting them develop. Every new ballet is scrutinized, and choreographers can't develop on their own. Not to mention the salaries (yes, I know the dancers deserve them) which are reflected in ticket prices. They are so high that it is hard to develop loyal audiences; at those prices, they want to see superstars and the next Balanchine.

I just wanted to assure Andrei that I did know when The Sleeping Beauty was done--I was trying to stress its continuing importance!

For the ballet figure of the century, I would have to choose Diaghilev, for the staggering influence he had on NYCB, ABT, the Royal Ballet, the Paris Opera Ballet (via Lifar), and all of their offshoots. Without him, there would probably have been no serious ballet, just music hall entertainment. And for my ballet of the 20th century, I would have to vote for the Sleeping Beauty, for without that, there would have been no Diaghilev, and thus no etc., etc.

I have to come down firmly in the middle in the Weese question. Sometimes she can be a bit inexpressive and technical, as in T&V. I didn't see her Sleeping Beauty, but a friend, who usually likes her very much, said it was a real disappointment as a performance. But I loved her in Rubies and in Who Cares, in both parts she has danced. I think it is especially disappointing that she has not taken control of the major classical parts, because she looks as though she should be able to, but maybe depth will come in time. And about Balanchine and arms--I have interviewed several Balanchine dancers who said he did care very much about arms and the upper body, that sometimes details were lost on stage, but that epaulement was very important to him. To me the proof is in the watching, and there is nothing worse that seeing the flailing, sloppy arms and grasping hands that are becoming more common.

As another librarian, I would say that one of the duties is preservation, and maintaining things of value, unless you are a very small branch library basically stocking bestsellers. There is a wonderful story (I suppose it is true) about the Bodlian discarding the First Folio because it had been replaced.

I must say, the "entertainment"issue crossed my mind when the little girls in bloomers and character shoes came in after the Rose Adagio. I bet the men in 1890 loved them. It was very interesting to realize how varied the dances for Aurora's friends were, with three groups in different costumes. As I was watching, I realized the music did change mood a little bit for each group. What a genius Petipa was, to work in variety and interest in a little throw away number to give the ballerina a rest.

I think what people are saying is that the old Royal ballet mime was richer and more detailed. There are certainly more mime scenes in this, with the addition of the King's scene with the knitting ladies. I would have to agree. Mime isn't the current Kirov's natural language, like it used to be with the Royal ballet, but the outlines were certainly there. The Lilac Fairy, even Part, who I adored, could have had more power when she dispells darkness, and Carabosse could have been more clear when he was making fun of the fairys. But at least it was a start.

Ballet Shoes is by Noel Streatfield, and it is a very good book. I remember reading that Streatfield got interested in children performers and dancers when she saw Ninette de Valois when she was a child performer dance Dying Swan at some music hall.

About Saratoga, no, it is going to be at the New York Historical Society until sometime in August, and then everything goes back as I understand it. I am glad people enjoyed the interview with Lynn. I know talking to her really increased my understanding of the exhibit, not to mention my admiration for all of her work!

Lauren, did you know that supposedly Pavlova decided to become a ballet dancer when her mother took her to see the Sleeping Beauty? As I recall, her mother asked her if she would like to be like one of the dancers in the group (the corps), and she said, no, she wanted to be like Aurora. Who did you see do Aurora? Mary

I so agree with you about van Hamel. She was one of the most beautiful dancers I ever saw. I don't think she ever did Lilac Fairy, but talk about being born to grace a role! I am so glad to read what you said about McKerrow and Malakhov's Giselle. I saw it last year and thought it was one of the most complete and believable Giselles I have ever seen, so many wonderful details. It was like watching a brilliant silent film (and I love silent films, so this is meant as the highest compliment.) Did you see Carreno in Giselle this year? Last year I was a bit disappointed in him--I thought he could have done the heartless cad so well, but didn't seem to have much characterization (and I usually like him very much). When I saw it last year, he managed to bow to the audience during the second act while lying on the floor exhausted--all I could think of was Denby's description of Lifar's Albrecht. I was hoping he would rethink it this year, because he could be so wonderful. But I was very disappointed that McKerrow and Malakhov only got one Wednesday matinee of Giselle. So many people will miss a wonderful performance.

I would hate to see Nichols retire (of course I love her dancing.) There is a lot more to ballet than just steps, even Balanchine ballets, and to me no one has as much grandeur and majesty, and intelligence in her dancing. There is so much to see in watching experienced dancers, and so many details that come with maturity. I do think that getting rid of so many older corps dancers at NYCB (I have read that the average age is 20) has flattened out some of the ballets, and for what its worth, I hope to learn a lot more from Nichols.

The first time Kyra Nichols knocked me off my feet was a number of years ago during the American Music Festival, when she was doing Liberty Belle from Stars and Stripes, which is a role usually guaranteed to set my teeth on edge. In her solo she has a series of three turns into a sideways jump (I don't know the technical name, but her legs extend to the side). Most dancers go full out on all three, like they are in a broad jump competition and get to keep the highest score. Nichols took them from low to high, so when it was over and she was at the side of the stage, you felt she could have kept going into infinity. I'm sure the final jump was no higher than any one else's but because of the phrasing and the change of level, it was so much more exciting than anyone else I have seen. After that I watched her intently, and I guess I can see why people might think she isn't exciting, but to me it is just effortless perfection. She is so centered and so stable, and so present in every role she does, but there are subtle variations of mood and timing without any pushiness that make her seem so much more grownup than almost anyone else at City Ballet nowadays, exciting though some of the younger dancers are. I just wish everyone could feel the pleasure I get from watching her.

Alexandra, I haven't seen it in a long time, but did enjoy it when I saw it about 20 years ago, without thinking it was a great ballet. I think it is one that is cast-dependant, and one of the most powerful nights in the theater was seeing Marakova dance it. But like most ballets which are also operas, I find the opera infinitely more subtle and passionate. Of course I haven't read the original poem, and I suppose Russian literature people would consider the opera a dilution. But if I had to choose I would take the opera any time, which to me means the ballet is somewhat of a failure as a theater piece. (And Manon is about a thousand times better in the opera). I don't think Onegin is as bad as some of Cranko's other pieces, but Croce was reacting (overreacting?) to the unbelievable hype coming from the NYTimes that summer.

I went to the exhibit at the New York Historical Society today, and wanted to add to the items already discussed in the new Ballet Alert. I think I enjoyed the first room the most (except of course for the videos). It had the actual telegram Balanchine sent Kirstein telling him he was coming to America, which just gave me chills. There are lots of photographs from private collections. These are the photographs themselves, not enlarged, so they take a lot of careful looking. The videos were wonderful. There are two sets, each about a half hour long, and each exerpt runs about 2-3 minutes (some longer), so you do get a fair chunk. The earlier video loop is the most interesting, because there are things that haven't been seen for years. (Most of the 2nd loop is from Dances in America and Live from Lincoln Center). There were a couple of grainy films from Jacob's Pillow of Maria Tallchief in Firebird and Sylvia Pas de Deux, and even with the black and white, poor quality, she looks just dominating. I think my absolute favorite is Verdy in the solo from Agon. It was just so incredibly musical and subtle and elegant. But the pas de deux from Agon with Adams and Mitchell was also very interesting. She was elegant! There is also a clip of Tanaquil Le Clerc in Western Symphony filmed in Germany (I think) about 2 days before the company went to Copenhagen, which someone said may be the last thing she actually danced. One think I noticed with I thought was interesting was even in the mid fifties, the company flyers were illustrated with a picture of Tallchief in the Seligmann costume from the 4 Temperaments, even though everyone hated them, and they were no longer used. But it made a great picture! And there is a schedule from the 1960's advertising an all Stravinsky night and an all Tchaikovksy night--just like now--but generally they did 4 ballets a night. I hope people get a chance to see it, and would love to know what I missed. Mary

I suppose this is a typical conservative, knee-jerk reaction reaction, but I do not think art has anything to do with winning and losing competitions. Sometimes, of course, competiton winners are great artists--van Hamel, for instance, but in some cases (like Bujones) it seems that winning can hurt a dancer by making him (or her) feel like they should be a star. Once a dancer is on stage in a real ballet, it is utterly immaterial what sort of medals they have won, unless, like some seem to try to do, they keep wearing them throughout the ballet.

Paul, When Petipa decided to choreography Swan Lake (after Tschaikovsky had died), he had Drigo redo the fourth act. As I recall he reorchestrated some of it, and (I haven't looked this up), may have added some of his own plinky-plinky music. The ABT version uses it. There is the drama of the Tchaikovsky storm, and then a brief lighter pas de deux (the plinky-plinky bit), and then the Tchaikovsky suicide and apotheosis. I have come to really like the soft contrast between all the drama. Most redone last acts are so frantic. Another thing I like are a few black swans in the last act, to give a bit of contrast to the second.

I basically agree with Steve, especially NO JESTER. But when I saw Makarova, she used to leave out the 2nd act mime, which to me is essential. Without it, the ballet become more abstract and less tragic. I also really like the Drigoesque last act that ABT does. I think it has a nice flow and variety. And I think Rothbart should be a vaguely menacing evil, not run around the stage in red tights and shadow box. And it should be set in Medieval Germany, because that is the period of the myth. Basically, it shouldn't look anything like the current Royal Ballet production.

Caity, I was so interested to read that you had Anna Liceica in to do Sugar Plum. I have seen her in the corps at ABT and really liked her. I saw her to Moyna (or Zulma, I forget), one of Myrta's sidekicks, and thought she was wonderful, such a lovely expressive face, and soft dancing. Lucky you to be able to see her as Sugar Plum.

This is for Atm711. If you don't mind, would you please say more about your first performance. I would love to hear anything you can say about Fancy Free, especially. I have read that the first night the audience went wild--did they when you saw it? And any details you remember about the performance, about Markova and Dolin. Thanks in advance. Mary

For my Royal Ballet performances, I kept a complicated notebook of performances and performers keyed to the programs,so I could look up performances and performers. When I started to go to City Ballet, that became impossible, and I just keep the casting (not the whole program, which is all advertisements anyway) in manilla folders arranged by years. Each year I keep a company roster, so I can see who was dancing, but it is not very convenient to find out who danced what when. And I find it sort of discouraging to look back over the years and realize I often have no memory of what I have seen. I remember comming across a number of performances I obviously attended of The Dream and the Shades Scene of La Bayadere and really having no memory of them, but assumed I enjoyed them very much! Actually, I remember a few years ago seeing a City Ballet program with a friend (one of several programs we had seen that week) and talking at the end of the evening and realizing we couldn't remember the first ballet of the program, though we had enjoyed it a lot.

Certainly I agree that reading Denby and Croce are great ways to learn (I haven't read a lot of Kirstein), but every so often, when reading some of the more over the top analytical things (not necessarily by those authors), I do feel like saying "oh come off it". I remember reading some deep philsophical discussion of the meaning of the the solos in the shades scene of Bayadere which almost put me off criticism for ever. I think it is important for criticism to focus on what is going on on stage, and not go drifting off into imaginary meanings.

This is in response to the interesting discussion on the previous thread. what recent derivations of Fokine and Ashton have been done? Here in the US we get almost no new single-act ballets with characterization or Cechetti-like steps. (I would say we get none, but there might be one somewhere--if so it hasn't come to New York.) I certianly agree with Leigh's point that most of our post-Balanchine choreography seems to confuse plotless with pointless. Balanchine leared much wandering through Petipa's forests, and surely current choreogrpahers, audiences, and dancers could learn from great 20th-century ballets, but where are Fokine, Nijinska, Tudor, and Ashton? The supposed fact that more people like Macmillan than Ashton is beside the point. It is as if a statement about the dangerous fat content of fast food hambergers is answered by quoting statistics on how many were sold. That is an observation, not an evaluation. I really haven't seen enough Forsythe to make any judgements, but what I have seen uses only a very limited vocabulary. And why do so many pro-Forsythians seem so desperately hostile to other styles?

In the topic Ballet/modern #3, Alexandra asked me to say something about the Diamond Project dances. For all those not hanging on NYCB's every move, it is a series of ballets sponsored by someone whose last name is Diamond, to try to bring in new choreography. There have been, I think three series so far, about one every two years. There are usually minimal costumes and small casts, and not much rehearsal time. There are a few rules--ballet vocabulary, point shoes, and live music, though some choreographers bend things. So far, I don't think any of the ballets (there must be about 20 of them so far) have made much of a mark other than the novelty of a new title. One of the reasons, I think, is that the choreographers don't know the dancers, and by and large just set "their" ballets, rather than work through the dancers. I did enjoy Christopher Wheeldon's latest, where he did a wonderful soaring solo for Meunier, but other than that, I can't really think of a one that I want to see again. To get back to the question, some I would consider ballet, some (like Kevin O'Day) not, but mostly I think they were dull.