dirac

I couldn't agree more, Drew. I'm sure there are some things NYCB management could have done better, and money that could have been better spent (as is doubtless true of Miami City Ballet and other companies that are having to cut back) as well. It is also a characteristic of contemporary American capitalism to turn to layoffs as a first rather than a last resort. But based on the information we have I don't see any evidence of dastardly behavior on the part of Martins.

I would add Toumanova to the list, also.

Great topic. From all reports, Danilova certainly had it. But glamor (I'll plump for the American spelling) has a special meaning and not all dancers who are beautiful, sexy, and/or charismatic are also glamorous. (bart describes the special nature of glamor very well.)

I didn't phrase this very well. I meant to say that layoffs of this size generally include of perfectly good employees who've done nothing to 'deserve' it. I think more than one news report had the story about the Miami dancers hearing by regular mail, and having to wait until the letter arrived to find out. It's quite true that there is no good way to fire a bunch of people. Some are better than others, though.

I never heard of a mass layoff of totally undeserving employees, unfortunately, although some businesses like to do what they call ‘performance-based layoffs.’ Miami City Ballet also elected to chop away at the corps. Very sad all around.

No, you got it it just right. I too was impressed with Martins – his remarks weren’t just amusing but pinpointed key differences between the two men and their approach to their work. (The recent “Ballet Russes” documentary was, to my mind, more like what you’re describing – the dance segments were very, very brief and the talking heads were omnipresent. Really spoiled my pleasure in the film.) It's always best to work in as much primary source material as possible, I agree.

Can’t be worse than the San Francisco Ballet “Othello,” and as a west coaster I am eager to see the young folks at NYCB – you generally don’t see younger dances in big roles for televised performances. Looking forward to it.

Balanchine, too, I think. He might not have understood some of the nuances of the domestic politics involved, and I imagine he thought the blacklistees were getting their just desserts. I still think the ballet excerpts were mostly well handled and chosen, and as EricMontreal22 says they come off better than some of the Broadway clips, which were somewhat disappointing. Probably they figured that only buffs would be interested in the more obscure shows. That clip from High Button Shoes was marvelous, though, and I hadn’t seen it before. I take your point about talking heads, Quiggin, but in the case of someone like Robbins where a few of those talking heads may not be around for too much longer – Ruthanna Boris, who was interviewed, is already gone, and I’m glad she was included -- I appreciate seeing them and hearing from them firsthand, even if not all of them are saying much that’s new.

Well, it's certainly got somebody purring. That woman's totally fried. Mashinka is quite right, but you should read the whole article (it's not that long) to get the full flavor. I think I could get through Dutchman with no intermission, but not in the cheaper sections. Good luck. Please tell us about it.

Thanks for linking, Patrick, it's appreciated!

Communism was linked to a lot of things in those days, heaven knows. And, as I said, I’m sure Robbins felt vulnerable where his sexuality was concerned. But I doubt those fears were the final motivation behind his testimony. His career in the theatre would have continued to flourish as an unfriendly witness, but any immediate future in Hollywood would have been kaput, and he had every expectation at that time of a fine career there. Of course, as it turned out he didn’t, but Robbins had no way of knowing that at the time. To say that is not to minimize the stigma of being gay in that era. (Arthur Laurents is gay and he’s made it pretty clear what he thinks. But he was less conflicted in his sexuality than Robbins, too.) Nope, not in my area, but I don’t recall hearing the ‘stay tuned’ part either, although I might simply have missed it. I really enjoyed that Martins anecdote about Balanchine flipping his lid. Sounds like Robbins had it coming, though.

Looked like Other Dances to me, but I’m not sure. I thought the emphasis was on Broadway, but I also thought that was appropriate and not an intentional or unintentional snub to ballet. Robbins’ influence on Broadway as director, choreographer, and show doctor has few parallels, and by all accounts it was there that his genius in its best aspects really shone. I don’t think that’s always true of his work in ballet, distinguished as it is and unusual as Robbins was among Broadway dancemakers in his ability to make the transition successfully. The balance was also redressed in a visual sense, because there are very few surviving films of Robbins’ work in the theatre but his ballet career is better documented. I liked that many of the dance clips were extended, as with the Balanchine documentary from awhile ago, so you could get a real sense of the work you were watching even if you hadn’t seen it before. The gay thing is mostly a red herring in Robbins’ case, IMO. I don’t doubt he was anxious about it, but talk of homosexuality, however widespread, wouldn’t have kept him off the Sullivan show and out of movie work. His Communist affiliations would and did, however, and that was the key. Yes, back then I thought of him as Palmer Courtland and as the choreographer he played in The Turning Point. HUAC trained its guns on Hollywood and television because that’s where the publicity was. Robbins and the other friendly witnesses weren’t turning in spies. They were offering up fellow show folk who’d once had the poor judgment to regard them as trusted colleagues and friends. It wasn’t the crime of the century by any means, of course, but however you shade the matter it was not a nice thing to do. I'll say. Very few generations have to confront one of those do-or-die dilemmas that follow you around for the rest of your life no matter what you do. Peter Martins had some good things to say about the differences between rehearsing for Balanchine and rehearsing for Robbins. Wonderful show, all around. Write PBS and tell them you want more, everybody.

FYI:

This item appeared in the 'Arts, Briefly' column. It's not meant to be up-to-the-minute, but mostly summarizes news that's already out there.

Thanks for the link, PeggyR. A quote: Fine by me. I'm sort of Austened out for the moment (although "Becoming Jane" was better than I expected).

I’d recommend reading McEwan’s novel, Ed. I must say, regretfully, that the movie seemed to me an extended exercise in Armani product placement – didn’t scare me at all. It could be me, though. (My nominee for scariest Venice ever is “Don’t Look Now” with Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie, a movie which I think came up earlier in this thread.) There are a lot of really spooky effects in "Repulsion." I especially remember those repeated shots of the meal Deneuve's sister prepares for her. Thanks for reporting back, miliosr.

Ed Waffle writes: There is a thrill about discovering writers and writing when you're young that it's hard to capture later on. Not that you still don't love to read or find a new work exciting, but it's not the same.

Good question, canbelto. It is kind of like stuffing Kleenex into your bra, isn't it? As long as they don't hurt the dancer or cause discomfort there's no harm in them, but I wouldn't like to see dancers taking any chances just to attain Banana Feet. As vipa notes, it's not the look that's most important. Not everyone can be Alessandra Ferri or Lynn Seymour, and would that even be desirable? I, too, would be interested to know if this is a trend.

Looks as if the arts funding made it out of committee. A little good news.

Thanks for the description, Hans.

Yes, do tell. I saw a neat little British shocker called Severance on DVD recently. It came out a couple of years ago and can be summarized as the office teambuilding weekend from hell. Good cast, too. Hostel I didn't get at all, although it started off well enough. Didn't bother with the second one.

Thank you for reporting on Zoe Anderson's book, katklaris. There are many good Royal Ballet-related books out there, and if your curiosity has been piqued you might want to search out some of the older ones. The Royal has always attracted good writers. EricMontreal 22, the 'arty intellectualism' was a lot of fun in Swimming-Pool Library -- Ronald Firbank meets the Eighties, so to speak. Currently I'm reading less exalted fare - "Blood and Money," the late Thomas Thompson's nifty true-crime book about a Houston high society murder and possible murder circa late sixties-early seventies.

I'm sure the paper's current owner, Rupert Murdoch, is fine with it too..... It's an encouraging sign that the Post is continuing its dance coverage, especially with Leigh . I feared they would let it slip after the death of Clive Barnes.

Leigh Witchel makes his debut in The New York Post reviewing Ronald K. Brown’s Evidence, a Dance Company.

Thanks for posting, abatt. He'll come up with something professional and skilled, we know that much.