cargill

My number one by a long long shot is the Kirov 1999 reconstruction, and after that it gets difficult. I would say the Messell, though I only have seen pictures of it, and then the somewhat disappointing ABT revival. I haven't seen the new/old RB version, but it sounds somewhat problematic. The De Valois 1975 version was a bit bland but was certainly an honorable production. After that, it goes from tolerable to unbearable. My no. 1 tolerable is the NYCB version, just for Peter Martins' really, truly lovely magical vision scene. I would add the 1952 Kirov version in the tolerable category, because of the messing around with the prologue, and because when I saw it, Lilac appeared in the vision scene in droopy chiffon. My almost tolerable is the previous ABT version, just because of its textually accurate Prologue, but boy were the sets heavy and the vision scene ugly. For the unbearable, ABT's new version comes first, then the Dowell version with the tilting sets, and then the very short-lived MacMillan 1973 Royal Ballet version.

Elmer Fudd is wonderful! Actually, that description of Petipa against a blue cyclorama pretty much describes a lot of Balanchine, and yes, I would go!

My point is that the fairy tale of Sleeping Beauty was the starting point, and that the very simplified libretto and the staggering music make it something much more profound. It is not a Disney tale, it is much more of an allegory or a myth of regeneration. It is just so much richer than any story could be.

Or what about the Wiz, from the old NY TV adds? Mary

I do have to disagree that the ballet of The Sleeping Beauty is a fairy tale, in the traditional sence. It is an allegory, and a mythic one at that, with a very simple but profound message, that the letter (i.e. a narrowly defined justice as exemplified by Carabosse) kills but the spirit (in the form of the radiant Lilac, and in the original version, in Aurora's forgiveness of Carabosse) lives. It is an homage to reason and order, which is so miraculously exemplified in Petipa's glorious corps formations. It is a very different ballet than Swan Lake, which is a fairy tale (from Grimm, not the awful ABT version). Nature, in the Lilac Fairy, is a force for good, whereas in ballets like Giselle and especially Swan Lake, the natural world is a place of mysterious danger--Medieval rather than Enlightenment. One of the many reasons why ABT's setting of both Sleeping Beauty and Swan Lake are so counter productive. Mary

I am a huge Part fan, but I do agree with Macauley about her in this case. She just doesn't have the footwork for Aurora, and she didn't really vary the interprepation from act to act. After thinking about it, I have much more respect for Wiles' Lilac, since she must have spent the whole evening realizing that she was going to end up floundering around like a big fish at the end of a line. That would make it very hard to be expansively gracious, and I can't believe she carried it off as well as she did. Mary

My main disappointment is that Part isn't dancing the Lilac Fairy. She was so spectacular in it when the Kirov did the old version, I was really looking forward to seeing her again. Talk about being born to dance a role!

The colors don't quite match up--for instance green (Seymour in the British version) danced more than green in NY (she did some of what the mauve US woman does), Dowell (gold) danced with Sibley (mauve in the British version, roughly equivalent to pink in the US) in the long pas de deux, which is danced by purple in NY. The boy in brick (salmon) danced more in the British version, there wasn't really a "run-on" girl in the British version, since she danced more. And when Nureyev left, Dowell took some of his parts, so even the British version wasn't consistent. I think the British version had more distinct personalities (that is, the dancers had more consistency throughout the ballet) than the current NY version, though I certainly didn't see the original NY cast. The current NY version does have a few gleams, but nothing like the magic I remember--and the audience is so disruptive, because once the final sublime piece starts at least half of them dive for the exit, so the final walk is totally ruined. Mary

I saw the original Royal Ballet cast, too, many times and it is one of my most wonderful ballet memories--so wonderful that it has eclipsed the many many NYCB performances I have seen over the years. The colors and roles in both versions differed quite a bit, so I wonder if the Royal Ballet will do its version, or the version that NYCB does. Mary

Last night was, for me, one of the best nights I have seen in a very long time. The corps looked great, in both Square Dance and especially Stars. The men's regiment was just incredible, so precise. and Bouder looked like she was having a great time. Veyette has wonderful footwork, and it was so good to see the little steps done so cleanly. I was wondering about Stars as "Essential" Balanchine, but it certainly was last night. Mary

Well, the first Bluebird was Cechetti, so I don't think handsome young king was what the choreography was supposed to represent!

Well, I guess they have to say something! But introducing something isn't actually the same as keeping them around and enriching what is already there. But I guess they couldn't say 150 disposable, forgettable pieces, could they.

I am so pleased that she is doing well. I was just blown away last year when the Bolshoi was here, by every step she made. I don't think I have been so struck since Ashley Bouder made her debut in La Source. She reminds me of Bouder, fearless and just bounding on top of the music. She is, as Crisp says, simply irrestistable.

I just wish I could see Carla Korbes as Aurora, but that won't happen now. I would be interested to see Megan Fairchild--the last act might be a stretch, but she would probably be lovely in the first act, and I would love to see her in Martins' vision scene--which I think is one of the loveliest I have ever seen.

Where to begin! Segal was presumably trying to be deliberately provocative, and some of what he said I certainly agree with--so many classical productions seem DOA (like every production of Swan Lake in the last 20 years!). But that isn't the art form's fault, because there are plenty that are simply wonderful. The idea that ballet dancers are brainwashed little automatons is just absurd, as he must know. I do agree that there is too much of an emphasis on youth and technique, but that isn't ballets' fault--just do more Bournonville with all those wonderful grown up mime roles! And the juvenile insults (flatulence indeed) of the ballet audience reminds me of the old lawyer joke--if you have the facts, argue the facts, if you have the law, argue the law, and if you have neither, pound the table. For arts critics, it seems that if you have neither, insult the audience. It certainly smacks of a reverse sort of elitism--"you and I aren't like those geriatric hidebound old fogeys, we are much better than that." As for art having to be relevant, well, just think of the great works that he will have to live without. "Excuse me, Mr. Shakespeare, Queen Elizabeth is violating civil rights all over the place, and you want us to watch a play about a woman in love with a donkey!" As for Fred and Ginger, well, I don't see how anyone can bare to watch, knowing about the bread lines and the Hoovervilles and the Depression. All I can say is that next time Swing Time is on TV, Mr. Segal had better be reading the collected works of Clifford Odets.

In addition to all of the above--who can choose a favorite!--I would add the corps in Ashton's Scenes de Ballet. Those little nods and turns of the head are just so perfectly timed to the music, they make me tear up. And I want to mention the Kirov corps in Diamonds; I just wanted it to go on forever.

Didn't Smuin already do a ballet about the evil sheriff in the West? Sorry, I forget the title, but of course it wasn't full length. Actually Ashton already choreographed a dance for a ballerina wearing one point shoe, in Illuminations. And speaking of updating, why not start with Stars and Stripes? Obviously the present verision is for too supportive of the male hegemonic military-industrial, imperialist outlook and is a Bad Thing. The poor women with the trumpets and the batons (obviously a pathetic and ineffectual substitute for guns) are clearly victims of the worst type of stereotype, and the flag is obviously just so yesterday.

Like "Girls' Night Out"? I never thought of ballet as chic lit, but obviously I am not in marketing.

Hans, I was going to say the final pose of the new/old Sleeping Beauty too. Unfortunately, we will probably never see it again, but there is a sort of a transformation scene, as the ceiling rotates to a classical vista (perfectly timed to the glorious music), and Apollo (ie, Louis XIV, I suppose) poses on the top of some steps with the dancers posed symetrically around him. Carabosse is there too, in a corner, with guards around her, so evil isn't vanquised eternally, reminding us, I guess, that we have to be careful. There are lots of other endings that I like, but this is unbeatable. Mary

I wonder too what this type of programming will do to casting. It seems like it might limit the options--if dancer A does Dance B, then dancer A probably won't get a chance to do Dance A on the same program, and since Dance A and Dance B are always on the same program, it seems to reduce the chance for new roles.

Oh dear! I had missed the article, and I think it smacks of desperation. Why they think this is the only way to attract a new audience is beyond me. I think it might make for some boring programming--all black and white ballets, all chiffon ballets (Robbins!), etc. Though I would probably be up for an Old Fogey evening. Mary

Dear Beck--Did I really say that? I am glad if I did, because I think it is true. Mary

I must say, I was surprized to read that ABT's version of Swan Lake is so tradtional! Unless they have changed the setting, the story, and the choreography markedly since last year, it is, for me at least, an absolute travesty, and anyone with the least knowledge of its history should know that. A traditional Swan Lake has a lot more than just the Ivanov white swan pas de deux and the Petipa Black Swan, and ABT's version is wrongheaded in so many ways, theatrically and choreographically.

And Fancy Free! As American as it gets. It may be minor, but I don't really think Stars and Stripes is an American ballet--it is a strictly classical work dressed in American costumes. There are the formal 4 symphonic movements, and the corps work wouldn't look out of place in Raymonda. Just substitute tamborines for the baton and trumpet, and it could be a Petipa ballet.

Michael, that is brilliant! Yes, I thought of both of them while I was watching, and boy did I wish I was looking at either of them, rather than what I saw. I'm afraid that I didn't see any real characterization, just a lot of energy, and I couldn't tell one season from another. I think the songs, which were beautiful, are complete on their own, and the dancing was just a distration.