dirac

Thanks for posting, innopac. I have never read a biography of Pushkin and I too would be interested in recommendations.

I think also of the Marschallin, who in today’s terms hardly qualifies as an older woman. As to how that should affect casting, it’s an interesting question. Do you cast a woman of thirty, who will not necessarily seem “older” to today’s audiences (and I think Natalia Petrovna should seem “older”), or cast a mature ballerina? In past eras, generally women who had reached 25 without marrying were regarded as hopeless old maids and a woman over thirty, married or not, was just playing out the hand. Beautiful clip, Simon. Thank you.

Thanks, carbro.

Thank you for posting this, leonid. Harnoncourt is not the most consistent of conductors, perhaps, but he’s always interesting, even when he ventures into uncongenial territory (Aida??) Long may he wave.

I forgot to add that, like 4mrdncr, I also remember seeing the "Eleanor and Franklin" miniseries with Herrmann and Alexander and although it's been years I recall it as excellent - I wonder if it's on DVD somewhere.

Thank you, Simon, that's worth repeating. Like most people posting to this thread, I haven't seen the de Frutos but don't have any problem with daring or potentially offensive material shown on appropriate channels at appropriate times. If parents aren't minding the kiddies' bedtimes there's only so much broadcasters can be expected to do about that. I couldn't find it again, but cubanmiamiboy's comment about art works and video game content is a good one.

Thanks for posting, 4mrdncr. I think there have already been long PBS shows, good ones, on TR, FDR, and Eleanor, so apart from Mrs. Longworth I should have thought the bases were covered. But then public television, at least in my area, never seems to lose its fascination with Kennedys, Roosevelts, and Windsors. They're the PBS equivalent of the Colbys and the Carringtons.

You're quite right, The Dalkey Archive is indeed a very weak effort, although O'Nolan /O'Brien borrowed heavily from the unpublished The Third Policeman to write it, so -- depending, of course, on what it was that put you off -- I wouldn't judge him by that particular book.

Have you visited the mild insanity of Fforde's website? Don't miss The Wonderful World of Toast. Great link, PeggyR.

Bumping this up - MakarovaFan, if you did get to any of the books, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts!

Thank you for posting, Ed. O'Brien, or Brian O'Nolan, his real name as you know, got a bit of a boost from the television show Lost, which I have never seen but I understand his novel The Third Policeman was mentioned regularly on it. Policeman is my favorite of his books, not as spectacular as At-Swim-Two-Birds but deeper, I think, and less insular and reliant on knowledge of Irish culture and myth for its effects. ASTB is definitely the place to start, though. Unfortunately ASTB painted him into a corner aesthetically - he could never follow it up. His is a story of talent wasted in some respects, although two classic novels are nothing to sneeze at. ASTB also received James Joyce's only blurb.

Should be interesting reading.

That's nice to know, thanks. I'm not sure I'm up to sitting through the entire running time in a theater - Wiseman's documentaries now tend to run about as long as Braveheart - but at least I have the option.

Thanks for the reviews, everyone. Enjoyable reading.

Thanks for the recap, Mashinka, but that was not quite to my point, which was that biographers don't always agree on these things and it's possible for dramatic license to be taken one way or the other. I wasn't comparing Nureyev to Byron. The article leonid links to is indeed interesting.

Glad you got some help.

Hello, iczerman, and let me take this opportunity to welcome you to the board. The high extension question is a perennial one on the board (just do a search on "Sylvie Guillem" ) and there are a variety of opinions, but in general it's fair to say that there is choreography where such extensions are necessary and desirable and choreography where they aren't. But that still leaves a lot of room for argument and discussion. Thoughts, anyone?

The problem was that it the BBC billed it as both a DRAMA and a BIOGRAPHY and the biographical content need not have been an invention when the real story is interesting enough. The makers of the film were up front about what was speculation, allowing that not everyone thinks Fonteyn and Nureyev had a physical affair. This is fair enough. A movie about Lord Byron's love life, for example, would have to make such decisions. Some biopics have gone a lot further than that. It is certainly true that some movies supply fiction when they don't have to. No movie could ever duplicate that, but it's not impossible that a film with a bigger budget than this one, with dancers cast, could do better justice to the story. (I can also imagine a fictional variation on the relationship, in the way The Red Shoes takes off from Nijinsky and Diaghilev.)

I don't think we're disagreeing, leonid. Nureyev's primary attraction seems to have been to men, which is what I meant when I said, in agreement with Mashinka, that he was gay. He did occasionally have affairs with women as I also pointed out (although later in life he seems to have stuck with the guys), but I don't really consider Nureyev bisexual, although as you say there is room for discussion. Nureyev's occasional misogynist outbursts are well known. And he did have many female friends.

Several biographers of both F&N have said that it's just about impossible to sort out the differing stories, and people who knew F&N equally well can have completely opposing opinions in this matter. I wish there wasn't so much fuss about it, but there it is. Nureyev was gay but it's acknowledged that he did have a few affairs with women. He was often openly misogynist but airing such views about women doesn't necessarily preclude a willingness to sleep with them, alas.

Daneman was apparently an advisor for the movie and some of it seems to be based on her book, so it's understandable that there was a bit of gush. I don't think the general audience will find the differences as jarring as dancers and regular balletgoers, if the filmmakers have been canny enough. Unfortunately, there's no getting around the fact that you can't have truly effective dance sequences with body doubles. I didn't care for Daneman's tone, but she is the author of what will probably stand as the standard biography and it's natural for her to be sought out as an authority. Whatever you think of the book overall, Daneman's research was considerable.

Important points, I think. No, you don't have to go to the Sahara to know what it's like, and it's possible to decide on the basis of reports that such-and-such a piece is something you won't care for or might find offensive, and choose not to see it. But you can't pass an informed judgment on something you haven't seen - an educated guess is not the same.

Too bad; look at this cast: Those three are worth watching in anything, no matter how bad it is. Yes - within reason, and if they're committed to the material. I agree with you about that Daily Mail article, Mashinka. I defended Daneman's book when it first came out, but the tone she takes here is borderline offensive: Yes indeed, some barren old woman without a fat bank account. What was the point?

Thank you for posting the update, Pamela. I'm so sorry to hear that.

Thanks, stinger784. Interesting points.