dirac

Yes, we'll have to agree to disagree. I already explained what I meant by lack of context, and I never said that he was obligated to be flattering, only that I was surprised by the lack of balance in the portrayal by a friend and partner. Your mileage varies, obviously.

I don’t know what to tell you, Helene. That’s what I read somewhere, so what he said wasn’t really a surprise to me. I don’t take quite the same view of it you do, although I understand Martins’ position, at least what I know of it, but that ‘s going beyond the bounds of this thread. Again, I was referring to Villella’s comment in his book about the d’Amboise’s partnership with Farrell and that he felt d’Amboise’s stock was rising in the company as a result. I am aware of d’Amboise’s CV. I never brought up “Elusive Muse,” someone else did. No, I’d not expect him to dish on Farrell in a documentary devoted to her story. Farrell did indeed break the mold. As I noted earlier, d’Amboise praises her dancing in his book. Yes, he came back from Brussels and told Balanchine she was in great shape (Farrell reported this herself in her book, also). He also notes that Bejart “caters” to Farrell, notes that her poster is all over Brussels, etc.... All I said was that d’Amboise was consistently unflattering in his portrayal of Farrell personally, which will be plain to any reader, that it was lacking in some context, and that I was surprised some of it was coming from an ex-partner for whom she’s had nothing but good things to say for public consumption. And by me it’s a little tacky, even though as I also said earlier, candor is one of the things we read these books for. Sorry to have to repeat myself, but it all seems to have got lost in the shuffle. One tidbit I hadn't heard before was that John Taras promoted Farrell as Adams' understudy for Movements. Not surprising, since she'd danced for him in Arcade, but that was news to me.

I believe Haggin was the great Verdy admirer, although Garis was also a fan and friend. Both men were in the Farrell camp.

Oh, he gives her attention, all right. It's just unfriendlier than I expected. Yes, I'm well aware that Farrell was/is a controversial dancer.

Sometimes a Number Two is just that, I guess, especially when the competition is so fierce. It speaks well for Hayden's devotion and determination that she stayed loyal and I think in the end Balanchine did reward her for it. Reading about her is one of the most enjoyable aspects of d'Amboise's book.

I never said his critical comments were necessarily inaccurate, but one-sided and often without context. It may well have seemed that Farrell was "playing" Balanchine and no doubt on occasion she was but he placed a very young woman in a very isolated and difficult position and brought great pressure to bear upon her. Even Farrell's final disastrous ultimatum can also be seen not only as the act of one who has overestimated her power but also as one who has been under fearful tension. (He was also quite capable of dropping Farrell abruptly when he had other business to attend to.) That's what I meant by no context. D'Amboise also has a way of saying that Farrell did or said something "dramatically" in a way that implies that her emotion is somehow overdone or insincere. He has one anecdote of them working together, and it involves the two of them disagreeing over something and Balanchine settling the question by putting Farrell down. Even if it's all gospel true I think it's a bit on the tacky side. That's what I meant when I said that perhaps he saw their relationship differently from Farrell. His position in the company rose as Farrell's regular partner, which Villella mentions. I think it's already known that Farrell wanted some kind of power sharing arrangement. Also, and I don't want to take the thread off topic, but while I can think of reasons why Farrell might not be right to run NYCB solo, "he didn't leave her that many ballets" isn't one of them. [Edited to add: I'm leaving this in but didn't intend my tone to be this flippant.) (Also, d'Amboise writes that Farrell "left" NYCB when as is common knowledge she was fired. That's misleading, although it could just have been carelessness.)

He speaks well of her dancing, of course, and says something pro forma about her work with Suzanne Farrell Ballet, but that's about it. Most other references are either subtly or not so subtly disparaging. Again, there's nothing wrong about being frank in a book like this, but the lack of generosity, as Quiggin says, was striking. Farrell talked at some length about their work together in performance and off. Perhaps it was like that for her and not for d'Amboise? - he was just catering to Balanchine's muse du jour and it was all in a day's work for him. Made me wonder if Villella didn't have a point.

Carpe diem, indeed. I'm very sorry to hear this. The Rilke cycle is lovely. Thanks for posting the news, Kathleen.

I had a similar reaction -- I suppose Balanchine's attitude could have been partly envy of Robbins' success, but there are plenty of other reasons why Balanchine wouldn't regard "The Cage" very highly. D'Amboise is also interesting on the subject of Ashton's unhappy stint at NYCB and the making of 'Picnic at Tintagel.' In that instance yes, you can see that Balanchine's behavior is jealous and petty but you can also see why he wouldn't have thought much of Ashton's approach.

I agree. As Eileen also noted earlier in the thread, the book is disorganized and an editor should have come to his aid. The chapter headings can be distinctly misleading. There are many footnotes, also a bad sign, and not all of them are terribly helpful (although there are nuggets, like the bit about the dying Nora Kaye banning Robbins from the sickroom because he had named names). It also leads to repetition - d'Amboise tells us more than once why he cared for Kirstein more than Balanchine. There's good stuff, but you have to root around for it. Pages spent on recounting the history of Balanchine and Kirstein might have been cut back a bit so d'Amboise could spend more time on the ballets -if, as Quiggin notes, he'd wanted to do so. I was struck by his treatment of Farrell. She had nothing but glowing things to report of their partnership in her book, and I thought his interpretations of her actions and motives were often uncharitable and without context. Candor is always welcome in autobiographies, of course, but gee whiz. Yes. I was reminded of an old crack about the oeuvre of Willa Cather, "Death comes for the archbishop and everybody else." I almost thought Balanchine died twice. I think he did - rather more than he lets on, although I'm sure that when he says he has no regrets it's perfectly true. Much more to say about this book, of course.

Hello, elena, and welcome to the board. Thank you for contributing to the discussion. I tend to think as you do on the matter.

I. Magnin was a great store. And of course every year my parents would take us up to the city to see the City of Paris Christmas tree.

Hi Dirac. In this particular case, that is probably the hinge.... Yes, indeed.

I'd say if there was one thing the 20/20 segment made clear, it's that this is mostly about the Oscar, one way or another.

Nordstrom has always had a foot in both camps - pricier than Macy's but also with sales and cheaper options that distinguished it from Saks and Bloomingdale's. I had the same sticker shock looking for jeans with my niece. I questioned, mildly, the pricing of jeans at $200 up and she said, "They last so much longer."

Nordstrom decides to dispense with the services of its pianists. Too bad. I remember one occasion where I was taking a break from shopping not far from a Nordstrom pianist. A little girl and her mother sat down and it was evident the child was absolutely enraptured by the piano music. The pianist caught on and started playing directly to and for her, choosing music he thought she would like. It was a nice moment.

Thanks for the heads up, cantdance. This movie has done very well for itself - the little ballet movie that could!

Following this to go a bit off topic, I would say we don't know what they would have tried in 1977 with the technology they have today, and even the pros in The Turning Point received some help from film techniques. I liked Bancroft but because she couldn't be shown dancing or doing much of anything, much less than was asked of Portman, the film gave a misleading account of what a ballerina in late maturity can do - one could easily take away that all they're capable of is a walk around the stage in ankle length dresses waving their arms, that is until management brings out the hook. And The Turning Point is a ballet film in a way that Black Swan isn't. I noticed that, too. Also noticed that at the very end of the segment Elizabeth Vargas took the time to plug the DVD, and she also promoted Lane to "prima ballerina." Well, maybe someday.

Thank you, rg. Nice picture of a lovely girl.

Thanks, vipa. Learn something new every day, etc.

That's right. And the soaps often tried unusual and daring storylines before the networks got to them. I know nothing lasts forever, but it's depressing all the same.

I heard that they would be canceled but am sorry to hear that it's definite. I do not expect the four remaining shows to last much longer. Apart from all the other well-rehearsed reasons, Soapnet isn't working out as hoped. Even sadder is the type of programming that's replacing them:

Thank you for posting, vipa, and please tell us about any other productions you see!

Yes, those are the three credits I had seen. All the dance doubles were listed as stunt doubles, I think.

He did a fine job, along with a superb ensemble cast, with "Long Day's Journey Into Night."