dirac

Shostakovich. I was afraid of this. Arrrggghh! Thanks, Manhattnik.

Shostakovich. I was afraid of this. Arrrggghh! Thanks, Manhattnik.

Well, I checked out Todd and Tim last night and I have to say although Eldredge was not at his best he still beat Goebel all around. Goebel's trying, he really is, but he just doesn't seem to know what to do with his upper body. It's not easy to watch him, and I suppose one shouldn't be prejudiced by this, but it may be unavoidable. (I read somewhere that he is taking some ballet lessons, but they don't seem to have sunk in yet.) The choreographer tried to work with this by giving him some shrugs and offhand what-can-you-do gestures, and he couldn't manage even those gracefully. And he still can't relate to the music. Maybe Tim should just skate to bells ringing and whistles going off. His jumps are beautiful once he's up in the air, but his telegraphed preparations seem to go on for about five minutes. Re: choice of music. While I agree that you can skate an exciting program to familiar music, I don't think that any skater who tries skating to something that requires a subtler relation between music and movement than we often see should be encouraged and rewarded for doing so. (In other words, all skaters currently doing a "Don Quixote" program will be allowed to continue, but anyone who creates a new one may be shot on sight. I'm also starting to feel the same way about "Meditation" from Thäis.)

I don't think even Balanchine would go so far as to cast von Aroldingen in the second movement -- or did he? (Also, I wonder if the amiable relations among his spouses and exes is really attributable to good nature, or the possibility that Balanchine just wasn't the kind of consort women were inclined to engage in fisticuffs over? Tallchief's memoir didn't make him sound like Mr. Romantic.) I second the Heavenly vote for the original cast of "Le Palais" in Paris. Just to see what it looked like.

I don't think even Balanchine would go so far as to cast von Aroldingen in the second movement -- or did he? (Also, I wonder if the amiable relations among his spouses and exes is really attributable to good nature, or the possibility that Balanchine just wasn't the kind of consort women were inclined to engage in fisticuffs over? Tallchief's memoir didn't make him sound like Mr. Romantic.) I second the Heavenly vote for the original cast of "Le Palais" in Paris. Just to see what it looked like.

Even in death he's better copy than most. Well, he was the first ballet star to become a mainstream celebrity, so it may be more appropriate than it appears at first glance. I suppose Baryshnikov became just as famous, but I wasn't around for Nureyev's peak years, so I can't offer eyewitness testimony. However, Baryshnikov has never gotten busted in the Haight, nor do I recall him appearing on talk shows in leopardskin outfits....

I think that when Kisselgoff used the phrase "came from operas" she intended simply to indicate that the music from the Balanchine and Robbins pieces wasn't derived from orchestral or instrumental works. It's a good idea to clarify the distinction as you do, however, since the music from "La Sonnambula," for example, is from the operas of Bellini, but the music was adapted by Rieti from various works and not composed by Bellini for the customary ballet-within-the-opera. I myself was struck more by the way Kisselgoff used the review as an occasion to reaffirm full-throated support of the Martins regime, not to mention a striking note of defensiveness, e.g., "Mr. Martins must be doing something right." (I'm not saying she's right or wrong -- it just seemed unexpected to find the remarks as prelude to a routine review. Maybe it's just me.) By Verdi's time, the ballet-within-an-opera custom seems to have degenerated from its respectable state in the Gluck era to an opportunity for male operagoers to ogle the ladies in their scanties. Wagner was practically run out of Paris for refusing to put a ballet into "Tannhäuser," I believe it was, but he stuck to his guns, even it meant no production. It would indeed be interesting to see someone have a crack at the music from "Otello" or "Macbeth." "Il Trovatore" is another possibility, and I think it's the only time Verdi used themes from the body of the opera for the ballet music.

In Croce's defense, her main complaint was not only Horiuchi's height per se as his height combined with his shape -- she was bothered by what she saw as a lack of a good line, which deprived his movements of impact. I don't know that she was actually "scathing" (although I do recall a reference to Mighty Mouse), but she was, well, forthright.

There does seem to be an expectation that modern audiences want All Dance All the Time and none of that silent-movie stuff, and it becomes a vicious circle because the more brief and perfunctory the mime, the less meaning and interest it carries, leading to the cutting of even more mime since it's so boring, and on and on.....

I don't have the tape but I recall the original broadcast -- it was very funny to see the tiny Kate Johnson leaping around a flummoxed Adam Luders.

Meaning Fanny's sexy, Marie is not?

This was fun to read. On the subject of costuming, I'd also like to take the opportunity to plug Toni Bentley's "Costumes by Karinska," a beautiful and instructive volume.

I thought that Tobias was not ignoring the international scence so much as using ABT and NYCB as exemplars of the argument to come; I don't think she intended to plow through each company of prominence one by one. I don't think Tobias is wishing for the good old days, she's just identifying and analyzing a current issue. The "ballerinas-are-gone-forever" aspect of her discussion may be overdone just a bit, but I see her point -- are we looking at a fundamental change in attitude and not just the recurrent reasons (no choreographers, no directorial guidance, etc.) responsible for past fallow periods? Peter Martins, of all people, may have put his finger on something when he remarked in his autobiography that Suzanne Farrell's perspective on her role as ballerina was crucially different from the younger dancers coming up behind her; "she has the grand style," he said, and the newer girls did not think of themselves in those terms. (He may simply have meant that Farrell could be a pain, but it's an instructive observation just the same.) I think also of what Maria Tallchief says in "Six Balanchine Ballerinas" about the responsibilities of a ballerina and how the first dancer must assume responsibility not just for herself but for the ballet; she must symbolize something larger than herself. Maybe this is what is missing? (As for actresses -- we still have the glamour, but it assumes different forms. Depends on what you prefer. I'm a big Grace Kelly fan, but I'm also grateful that we're past the era when movies were so fearful of reality that Claudette Colbert could do a touching deathbed scene in "Boom Town" with no other cosmetic alteration apart from some gray lipstick. It is true, however, that there were some things they did better way back when. Compare "The Women" dressed by Adrian and "The Women" dressed by Isaac Mizrahi. I rest my case.

Venturing off track, I can't quote chapter and verse offhand, but I also had the impression that Fonteyn was considered inferior to Markova in the beginning, even allowing for the age difference, specifically in terms of technique -- it wasn't just Ashton feeling that he wasn't sure he could work with her, but that she wasn't doing what he wanted technically in comparison to Markova.

This is an oversimplification, but life and my time are short. I think religious feeling in dance works if the work itself is good. If the work is aesthetically flawed, then its expression of feeling -- religious or otherwise -- will be harmed. I never saw Balanchine's "Don Quixote," but if what I've heard is correct, its religiosity felt a little too overt, perhaps because the work itself never cohered. "Mozartiana" is a fully realized work of art, and in it spiritual expression achieves the ineffable. (I should note I only saw it once, on television, long ago. But I definitely got the idea.)

I didn't mean to imply that I agreed with prohibiting government employees from saying "Merry Christmas," only that in these litigious times it seems to me reasonable (in that particular case) to err on the side of caution. I used the story of the Christmas tree as an example of someone taking that kind of offense to a holiday custom. It would be nice if these things didn't occur, but we live in odd times. However, this is wandering from the topic.....

Well, don't sugarcoat the bad news for us, Clement. Tell us what you really think. There is much to remark on here, and I do not have the expertise to comment on much of what he has to say, but it does seem plain that the Royal Ballet began with a great basis upon which to found an enduring national classical tradition and has pretty much muffed it. As for the "no personalities" thing -- with all due respect to Crisp, who's seen a lot more than I have, this does seem to be a perennial complaint, heard every couple of decades or so.

It seems to me that government money for the arts is simply a country saying, yes, this is an important part of our national life and deserving of public support and recognition. I don't think we need to get into higher philosophical discussions about whether the art in question is redeeming or exalting -- in fact, I think it's dangerous to do so. Obviously, from time to time some rather egregrious examples of the aesthetically undeserving will arise, but that comes with the territory. There will be a certain amount of "waste" in the same way public funds are "wasted" on scientific experimentation that doesn't pan out. cargill, I agree with much of what you say, but would point out that many private organizations, at least in this country, often take their cue from what the Feds and states will fund. It's a Good Housekeeping seal of approval, if you will. Often the private sector is as much if not more conservative than the public sector, and the lack of government money and recognition can indeed hinder efforts to obtain funding from other sources. Mel, I think the article notes that the prime reason the nomination went through so smoothly was simply that the NEA has pulled in its horns so sharply that it's no longer controversial. I doubt that a sudden love for the arts inspired by Sept. 11 had much to do with it, alas. As for "Merry Christmas" -- Post Office management is not being rendered paranoid by political correctness. I know of a firm where a Christmas tree was placed in the lobby every year. A company honcho of a faith I shall not name here so as not to start religious warfare objected to the tree as an ostentatious Christian display. The tree disappeared.

The critic B.H. Haggin was also a strong Verdy man. Peter Martins had some striking compliments for her in his autobiography. I am very sorry I never saw her, especially in "Emeralds," in which no one ever seems to have really replaced her.

I eventually stopped answering my phone at dinner time because of such calls -- San Francisco Ballet and Opera, I'm looking at you -- but I confess to having bought tickets from such calls, which only encourages them. I also once got a really good deal on the NY Times from such a call. However, it's still my practice not to leap for the phone in the early evening unless I'm expecting a call. Some people get annoyed at being "screened" but after a certain point there's no other option, because even if you pick up the phone and say "no," it will be noted for the record that a) you were at home and B) you answered the phone.......

Couldn't agree more, Mme. Hermine.

Ah, the unique joys of Western culture, whether we speak of indulging in the excesses of ballet groupieism or bombing the stuffing out of impoverished Third World nations with third-rate peasant armies! (Of course, with ballet one does get that frightful "homosexual propaganda," but then what can you expect with all those pretty boys swanking about in tights?) I see what the writer thinks he means by "nothingness," but it's sloppy writing not to refine his meaning further. And....well, you've probably gotten my drift. I will go so far as to say that, as a fan of Western culture and one who's happy to see the Taliban get the gate, anything I might even consider agreeing with in this piece is vitiated by the, uh, other stuff. With all due respect, Alexandra, I do not think the two can be separated in this instance. And I agree with Leigh that ballet or any art should not be used for purposes of culture-bashing, and agree with him also when he suggests that such bashing is the article's main point. We shouldn't dump on the National Review, however. This kind of thing is popping up everywhere these days. And anyone reading this who wishes to come to the article's defense should feel free. There's no good discussion without opposing views expressed freely and vigorously (and civilly). Cliff and Alexandra raise some interesting points about dance and its place in our culture, but I can't deal with anything that complex until my nasal passages clear up. Thanks, Tancos, for the link!

Not to be pedantic, but wasn't Markova Lilian Alicia Marks?

Calliope, while I don't wish to suggest that men are responsible for everything bad that happens to women or that women have no autonomy, it is a fact that these images of women we're discussing result from women conforming to men's visions of how they should look and be and act and not vice versa. Alas. In the same vein, Robert Gottlieb turns from ballet to the brassiere, in his review of a new book on the history of the bra, for the Observer: http://www.observer.com/pages/book2.asp

There's a distinguished history of critics advocating the work of artists they believe in. I don't see how you can avoid it, if you are writing for a long period of time about a subject in which you're immersed. I'm afraid a lot does depend, for me anyway, on whether or not I agree with the critic, or can at least see where he's coming from. I can, however, respect a critic's views and read them with profit even if I don't agree, if I agree elsewhere. It seems to me that much also depends on how powerful the critic is, and how big is his forum? Obviously the daily cultural critics at the New York Times wield a bigger stick than some others. If they take a line on someone or something and hold it, that's going to be very influential, for good and ill. (I could cite some examples from ballet, but don't want to start a food fight.) Conflicts of interest can certainly arise. It would have been obviously unacceptable, for example, if the late Kenneth Tynan had continued writing drama criticism when he went to work for Olivier as National Theatre dramaturge. (And there was a clear connection between that appointment and Tynan's passionate appreciation of Olivier's acting. I do not mean to suggest that he was angling for a job, I should note.)