dirac

Oh! I didn't realize that, of course. I will definitely check it out.

Foxman did not speak as an individual: he was the spokesman for his organization, which, as an organization, made the decision to choose this as an issue on which to spend its money and energy and to decide which underlying issue was the rationale for their actions. Very little difference, it seems to me, but a convenient distinction behind which Foxman can take shelter. Alex Ross, again (thanks for the link, kfw): Agreed. Maybe their research does show that, but has anyone seen it? As you say, California, anecdotal evidence seems to suggest otherwise.

Ansel Elgort has signed on to play Cliburn in a feature film bio.

Tom Phillips reviews the production for danceviewtimes. Has anyone else seen it?

I also saw this on PBS the other night. Pretty good. I enjoyed the dance segments, but not, as Jack Reed has already noted, the voiceovers that often continued all the way through them, so much so that regardless of their value as observations I began to wish I could just hiss “Shut up!” It is interesting that the footage shows a dancer with softer outlines (save for those awesome cheekbones) and a fuller form than one would think – yesterday’s “angular” isn’t today’s “angular.” Like canbelto, I was struck by the fact that Robbins’ homosexuality is nowhere mentioned, since that would obviously put the romantic “triangle” and the correspondence between Le Clercq and Robbins in a different light. Possibly Buirski just assumed anyone watching already knows it – her approach did sometimes seem geared to viewers already familiar with the outlines of Le Clercq’s story – but that seems doubtful. In any case, it’s rather a big omission. I also wish that Le Clercq was not defined quite so emphatically by her relationship with the two men; it’s true that such is the fate of all muses to an extent, but Buirski seems to accept fairly unquestioningly that the way to view Le Clercq’s life and work is through the lens of “the male gaze.” (It did make this viewer wonder on the additional trauma to Le Clercq when that gaze turned away as a result of her illness; Balanchine’s eventual defection, the on-again, off-again attentions of Robbins.) It is unfortunate that there is so little footage of Le Clercq speaking directly. We do hear a recording of what sounded like excerpts from Barbara Morgan’s Newman's interview for “Striking a Balance,” but it’s too bad there wasn’t more footage of Le Clercq being interviewed while she was still dancing – perhaps there’s nothing out there, but still, a shame. There was too much foreshadowing for me – it’s as if Le Clercq’s career was danced in the shadow of what was to come. I think it was fair to devote a significant portion of the program to Le Clercq’s life post-polio; while Le Clercq interests us because she was a dancer, in biographical terms the woman who survived the dancer for forty-plus years is also of considerable interest, to this viewer anyway. These days not everyone is familiar with polio’s reign of terror, of which the footage of patients in iron lungs and at Warm Springs are painful reminders. I agree, but I can also understand that Buirski’s task was made trickier by the fact that neither of the principals seem to have talked much about it. Again, one respects Le Clercq’s wish for privacy, but the rare interviews she did grant remind us of what unshared knowledge and perceptions she took with her to the grave. But surely we could have learned more about the major roles Le Clercq originated for Balanchine – we see her as Dewdrop, for example, but we don’t hear anything about how that role illuminated her particular qualities. We see her dancing the 2nd movement of “Symphony in C,” but no mention of the importance of that role in the Balanchine canon. Indeed. The movie showed us a bit of Balanchine’s harder side, when we’re told that he didn’t want Le Clercq at SAB, which would have been the obvious place for her – I guess having a crippled wife hanging around would have cramped his style, or perhaps he thought the wheelchair would spook the students......

Not having seen something is indeed a nice way of evading an issue.

I think that if the leader of such an organization is going to speak publicly in this fashion about a work of art he has an obligation to see it. As the opera has already been seen on television and exposed to millions of viewers,in addition to being available for viewing in other formats, he surely has had ample opportunity. And Foxman and the ADL weren't just pushing for the opera not to be broadcast in cinemas or radio; they wanted it canceled altogether. In any case, Adams' point holds. Gelb isn't going to lose his job for this, it's just a black mark on his record. If he wasn't prepared to stand by his programming, he ought never to have chosen the opera in the first place. And given that this isn't the first time the opera has aroused controversy, he has little excuse for having been caught flatfooted by the backlash. Worst of both worlds, etc.

Gelb's very public betrayal of the artists whose work he is presenting is worse than craven. He's not going to be able to shake this off for awhile. Obviously the ADL cannot say that the opera is anti-Semitic, since as kfw notes above, Foxman hasn't got around to seeing it. Nonetheless, the damage is done. This, too

She sure did. I'd like to read a memoir of hers, although by me she could skimp on the food stuff, frankly. I know Balanchine was fond of cooking analogies but enough already. (Also, some of the recipes were annoyingly vague. What kind of spices, Karin? How much? Inexpert cooks need to know.) Ashton was devoted to his garden, but I don't imagine BR ever thought of having Alexander Grant write "Trimming the Topiaries for Fred," as potentially enlightening as such a piece might have been...... Thanks for pulling up this old thread, Neryssa. I would love to read a book from Verdy.

Carla Laemmle, niece of Hollywood producer Carl Laemmle, has died at age 104. A Ballet Alerter alerted me to the death of Martha Hyer at age 89. RIP.

Interesting, flipsy. I hadn't heard of Doris Payne or this movie. Have you seen it?

I'm sure the success of Wicked was a direct inspiration. Jolie is kind of short for the part, but it's a movie, so no worries. Thanks for the review, cubanmiamiboy.

Just chiming in with sandik. I think that sounds like a solid plan, and do let us know how things develop. I also liked Varley O'Connor's recent novel about Tanaquil Le Clercq, "The Master's Muse" - however, as the link here indicates, mine was a minority opinion. A link to the Ballet Alert thread on the Meredith Daneman book here.

Forgot to mention the Peter Watson bio, perhaps because I have read about it but not read it. Would be interested to hear from those who have. I also neglected to add that because Nureyev was such an astonishing camera subject, he inspired a great many coffee-table volumes. I don't know if those would be to the taste of your club, but I think they would help in understanding the Nureyev phenomenon. NIgel Gosling aka Alexander Bland, who knew the subject, also produced some worthwhile material about Nureyev.

Hi, Barbara. Thanks for your question, it's a good one. It depends on your needs, I would think. If you're looking to read One Big Book, I'd recommend Diane Solway, but it's a lot of material to take in. For book group purposes the Kavanagh book is actually not a bad place to start IMO. The Percival book is invaluable, but it's a very early biography and your club might be looking for something a little more current. But if they don't mind the age of the book, it has fine stuff in it, particularly on Nureyev's Soviet background and training. Otis Stuart's Nureyev bio is amusing, but not sure if it's right for the group to start with. Nureyev's memoir was a great ballet book that never happened, alas. Although I'm not sure if Rudi would ever have slowed down enough to write anything. Your club might also enjoy Meredith Daneman's "Margot Fonteyn." A long book but it rolls right along. Karen Kain isn't one of ballet's most famous names, but she wrote an entertaining memoir, "Movement Never Lies," which also happens to have some good stories about Nureyev, a frequent partner of Kain's and also a mentor for her. It also has many photographs, which is great for a dance bio.

Very tough for Hilaire. As meunier_fan notes above, it's not unusual, in any major institution, for there to be a rash of departures once someone is named to a much-sought after leadership job. It doesn't necessarily reflect on any of the personalities involved. Hilaire might want to leave even if he had lost the job to a colleague.

Thank you for providing this link. Let's look at the defense: I Well, Guy, or guys, let's try this for starters: "Tara Erraught, the fine singer cast as Octavian, was gravely hampered not only by a misguided re-conception of Octavian as a gauche teenager, but equally misguided and unflattering costume choices, which made Octavian's alleged irresistibility very much a matter of willing suspension of disbelief." And that's just off the top of my head. I'm sure actual professional critics could come up with better. Or maybe not. I guess it's also a good thing these writers weren't let loose on Melchior and Flagstad in "Tristan und Isolde." ("The sight of these elephantine singers lumbering about the stage made it quite impossible to accept them as Wagner's great lovers. Who could be attracted to this fat cow? A wasted evening for this critic.")

I agree with Kathleen that the costume could have been more flattering, but otherwise I'm rather dumbfounded by this. Astonishingly harsh. The modern taste is for (relatively) skinny singers, skinny female ones at any rate, and it seems to me these reviews are just more evidence on the pile. God knows how some of these writers would react to Marilyn Horne in a suit of armor vowing eteral love to Joan Sutherland. Thank you, Mashinka, for pulling up this old thread.

A thoughtful review by Ilona Landgraf in her blog, "Landgraf on Dance."

Shipstead has said that she based the story loosely on the defection of Baryshnikov and his subsequent career in the West. It seems reasonable for a work of fiction that takes off from actual ballet events and is aimed at a general readership to refer to widely known stories or figures – the Soviet defectors, Nijinsky – and the title of the book is of course a nod to Diaghilev. It’s nice to know that it’s well written. If so, that would make two good recent novels derived from real-life ballet events, along with Varley O’Connor’s “The Master’s Muse.” Thank you for telling us your reactions to the book, Swanilda8. I was a bit dubious based on a couple of excerpts I'd seen, but I do intend to read it.

Jon Lee Anderson's 1999 profile for The New Yorker (summary only; full article available online only to subscribers).

An interview with his translator.

I thought you must have done, but I was curious, since you didn't mention any of his writings. I envy you the ability to read him in the original. So much must be lost in translation.

And for those Ballet Alerters who do not celebrate Easter, have a nice Sunday anyway and enjoy the bunny rabbits.

Have you read any of his books, BTW?