kfw

The spring 2005 issue of The American Scholar has an article by William Deresiewicz entitled "The Salome Factor: How the sexualization of concert dance helped end a golden age." Deresiewicz likens ballet and modern dance from "roughly the mid-30's to the mid-80's" with "without hyperbole, the heyday of Florentine painting or Viennese music." He cites the usual reasons for the passage of this golden age -- the death of genius choreographers, aging institutions and the attendant dimming of "revolutionary impulses,” and the mid-80's real-estate boom that made NYC tough for dancers to afford -- but adds one more, a widespread "degradation of the way dance represents the human body: a degradation, that is, of the very essence of the art itself. From a symbol of the uniqueness, dignity, and power of the individual, an image of the soul in muscle and bone, the body in dance -- especially the female body is being reduced, more and more, to a sexualized display.” For Deresiewicz this is “calamitous” because 20th century modern dance, dominated as it was until Taylor and Cunningham began choreographing by women, stood for “the liberation of the female body from sexual objectification.” Duncan and Graham, but also Balanchine and Robbins, “perpetuated (a) sense of the body as subject rather than object, creative agent rather than sexualized ornament.” Dance has now largely lost this core value, the author believes. Out of respect for Phi Beta Kappa Society and its hopes of actually selling copies of this journal, I shouldn’t write much more. But I will note that Deresiewicz cites Peter Martins as “the most visible offender.” This sort of charge has been made about Martins before, of course, and it came to mind as I watched Tala Gaisma a couple of weeks ago. I’d been thinking about Willem DeKooning, and watching what Martins gave Weese and Sylve in particular to do I thought, “I finally understand Woman I.” At one point late in the ballet, if memory serves Sylve and Weese strike a pose on the diagonal and one by one go flying at and past Soto. And then Korbes strikes the same pose and pauses, and as she did I thought, “and now, a woman!” By which I meant, feminine not fearsome. Not to gender stereotype and Graham had her fearsome females, but it was a refreshing moment, a moment when, for me, entertainment might have become something deeper. But what followed was more of what had come before.

This may be my pet peeve alone, but I really dislike the way they've defaced the cool modernism of the State Theatre lobby by hanging all those photographs, many of which I've seen so often I'm sick of them anyhow. I mostly avoided looking at them last weekend. It had been two and a half years since I'd been in the theater, but I remember photos the last time I was there too. I suppose they inspire some relatively new patrons to come back.

Thanks a lot, Mark. I don't think I've ever heard about Robbins wanting to take over the company, or about actual friction between Balanchine and Kirstein.

Lisa Hess Jones Greg Lawrence's Robbins biography lists her among the cast members for "Watermill."

How were the performances that day? Did the dancers let their emotions show during their bows?

PBS's Great Performances has a page devoted to this broadcast now, and it appears that Kevin McKenzie has surprises in store.

Yes it is, perky. I hesitated to give too much information, because I didn't want to play sales rep for Amazon, as they're apparently the only sellers. But as a ballet history enthusiast, I'll say I found it searching for Merrill Ashley's bio.

I just ran across a listing for this on Amazon. Apparently it's a downloadable one hour and 14 minute-long recording of a January 10, 2004 panel discussion with Peter Martins, Merrill Ashley, Jacques D'Amboise, and Arthur Mitchell that was moderated by Anna Kisselgoff. I'm guessing that this took place in the Rose Building in Lincoln Center. No doubt one or more very knowledgeable posters here attended. Did you learn much?

soubrette _fan, have you tried asking your local library to do an inter-library loan search for that book? Good luck! I was fortunate to find a copy in Harvard Square years ago.

I can't find the reference, but if I'm not mistaken Kirstein associated Mannerism with the stretched quality of ballet posture and movement.

I love reading all the different reactions to this program, which I had the great pleasure of seeing Saturday, Monday and Tuesday evenings. It was especially wonderful and instructive to watch these great works over and over again, and by so many different dancers. I’d only seen Ballet Imperial as Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No.2, and as expected I much prefer it this way with its “imperial” sets and costumes. Now I especially prefer an appropriately Russian beauty in the lead role! If Part had more “perfume” in the performances I saw, and a sort of dreaminess that suits the mood of the ballet, Vishneva had passion to spare to go along with her thrilling technique. Part has more mystery; she makes you come to her. Vishneva has a more forward and athletic presence, but both danced with visible ardor, and because the ballet alternates brilliant with more overtly soulful passages, to my eye the two women were equally effective and moving. Part danced with perhaps more confidence and daring Tuesday night, but nonetheless with more authority in her debut in the ballet on Saturday. I also thought she tired a bit towards the end Tuesday, and she and Gomes weren’t always in synch. For example, the lift offstage in the final movement that Vishneva’s arched back had made so moving Monday, and that Part and Gomes had also made memorable Saturday, barely happened Tuesday. But those are quibbles, and to see the two very different approaches the ballerinas took enhanced the pleasure of each. All three soloists dancing the second part were delightful, but Wiles just tore up the stage Tuesday with her brilliant attack and her obvious joy in what she was doing. For quality of performance, she was Part’s equal. Is it out of the question that ABT, with its emphasis on history and theatricality, would try this ballet with some version of the mime restored? I’m curious about Marie-Jeanne too. Clearly she was a technician; I wonder if she used her eyes and face with the same effectiveness as these two. I wonder what sort of onstage personality she had. The Swan Lake pps de deux were very satisfying as well, despite the lack of sets and swans and royals. As Odette, the character in McKerrow’s no longer young face is so very lovely, as lovely as her dancing. Tuesday night I thought Kent danced well too, but I’d expected a lot after seeing her Giselle in Washington, and I didn’t feel as much from her emotionally until, surprisingly, she reached out and stroked Malakhov’s face during their final bow. (On the other hand, the pluck-a-rose-from-the-bouquet, kiss-it-and-present-it-to-your-partner routine became annoying when it started looking like standard ABT procedure). In the Act III pas, Wiles thrilled with both technique and a triumphant and menacing edge to her seduction. She cracked me up. Poor high-flying Carlos Acosta. The company billed Monday night as the 10th anniversary as principals for Malakhov, Herrera and Carreno, and Herrera and Carreno received a huge hand before they’d even danced. He’s always been a favorite of mine – like James Fayette across the plaza, he just radiates nobility. I liked her better than before, but there’s something detached about her dancing that leaves me cold even in a showcase like this. I’d been looking forward to same fleet footed leaps and batterie (?) from Cornejo and Reyes that they’d had a chance to display in the peasant pas de deux in Giselle, and halfway through their Nutcracker adagio Tuesday I found myself thinking that if they wanted to actually break into the peasant pas, or if he wanted to pretend he was a rose and jump out of an imaginary window, it would be fine with me. They didn’t, but they did make me happy in the variations. As for the preceding slow stuff, I thought they danced it touchingly but without much grandeur. I’m surprised to read that in fact Reyes had toned down her cutesiness. In any case, given that they’re not only relatively short but relatively young, for the time being I wonder if they aren’t better suited to demi-caractere roles. Theme and Variations I knew mainly from the Balanchine Celebration video of the 3rd movement. I love Kistler in that, but watching Murphy power her way through it forthrightly instead of skimming and floating and was pure joy as well. Herrera again left me unmoved, but the ballet never did.

The latest issue of Ballet Review looks just wonderful. The contents: Daniel Jacobson -- Sylvia: "Can These Bones Live? Debra Jowitt -- Working with Robbins: Helene Alexopoulos and Jean-Pierr Frolich Joeb Lobenthal -- Gillian Murphy David Vaughan -- Further Annals of the Sleeping Beauty Marc Haegeman -- The Bolshoi at Covent Garden Don Daniels -- The Bolshoi in Transit Catherine Kerr -- Pilobolus Barbara Newman -- Birthday Parties, London and New York Catherine Pawlick -- Classical vs. Modern at the Maryinsky Oleg Levenkov -- Apollon Musagete: Sculpture, Painting, Geste Clement Crisp -- London Reporter Music on Disc Among the eight regional reviews are reports from Boston and Nova Scotia by Leigh Witchel.

I plan on seeing Veronika Part in Ballet Imperial this Saturday evening, and I'm thinking about just getting a standing room ticket. Could someone tell me at what time standing room tickets for Saturday evening ABT performances at the Met go on sale? Also, I know this will be her debut in the ballet; is it likely that a line for those tickets will form early? Thanks in advance.

Have cultural critics lost the respect of the public? “Besides the Internet and its rash of blogs,” writes Scott Timberg in yesterday’s L.A. Times (Critical condition), “suspected culprits include the culture of celebrity, anti-intellectual populism, stingy newspaper owners and what some critics say is a loss of vitality or visibility in their art forms.” Among other possible factors in the supposed weakening of the critic’s role in cultural taste making supposed (Timberg notes that newspapers are offering critics less space, but doesn’t actually substantiate his implied claim that fewer people are paying attention), Timberg points to the tarnishing of the press’s reputation in general, and to sites like Amazon.com with their searchable databases. Is this phenomenon real? Are there other causes as well? Did the falling off begin before the advent of blogs, with the proliferation of niche print publications? Relatively speaking, do today’s critics lack the clarity and style that conveys authority? Relatively speaking do they lack actual authoritative judgment – exceptional taste? Is less high new quality work being produced? Fewer masterpieces? Is the work by and large simple and/or shallower or less groundbreaking, so that the average fan has less need of astute, penetrating analysis to either make sense of it or plumb its depth? Are any of these developments or, rather, lack of developments, exacerbated by the cultural fragmentation that’s one side effect of celebrating cultural diversity? Or is this trend an outgrowth of the larger cultural trend in which supposedly took off in the 1960’s in which Authority itself became unfashionable and politically forbidden? I like a Petipa/Ivanov-style Swan Lakes, you like Matthew Bourne’s version, and it’s gauche and elitist to insist on quality distinctions? I feel like I’m probably channeling forgotten past BA discussions and Alexandra’s thoughts in particular with my thinking our loud here, but I won’t go hunt for prior threads. There are many new posters here. If anyone is interested, we might discuss the subject in regards to ballet alone, or we could branch out into other arts, at which point an administrator could move the thread to a more appropriate forum. As for me, I'm always eager to read and learn from and compare notes with critics.

It seems to be the near consensus among those who saw the company in Balanchine's day that NYCB's level of performance of his ballets has dropped dramatically since. Time may have burnished some of their memories, but at least these people have memories to judge by. It seems to me that for this reason they're the only ones qualified to judge.

This subject will be discussed on the National Public Radio program “The Connection” tomorrow at 10 a.m. Eastern Standard Time here in the U.S. It will also be streamed and then archived for streaming at The Connection's website . I didn’t hear the name of the guest, but presumably that will be Stephen Johnson.

Gottlieb's impressive literary credentials and the fact that Kirstein asked him to be on the board are clear evidence of his high intelligence. And if Martins asked him to resign because The New Yorker was critical on Gottlieb's watch, he surely would have forced him off the board if Gottlieb had made similar criticism in board meetings. Public criticism, embarrassing as it can be, is likely to be more effective than private complaints anyhow.

so much, carbro! Let's see, am I more grateful that you went to all that trouble than I am jealous that you could see those clips, or is it the other way around? I'm not telling!

Yes and no. She's going to save me a couple hundred bucks at least.

I guess this is another variant of the what-kind-of-shape-is-the-Balanchine-rep-at-NYCB-? question, but I don't remember that issue being addresed from quite this angle. In this week’s New York Observer, Robert Gottlieb writes that today at City Ballet So I'm wondering . . . I don’t know how we’d truly ascertain this short of a poll, but is there any evidence for what Gottlieb claims? On the professional side, a SAB where students get to see NYCB often, don’t most students covet invitations from the company, where they know they’ll dance a lot of Balanchine? And within the company, isn’t Balanchine’s leotard ballet vocabulary the root vocabulary for new works by company members, and often by Christopher Wheeldon? If the Balanchine there is still inspiring choreographers, it must be inspiring other dancers. Or when NCYB dancers make breakthroughs and begin dancing better, does this tend to show first in the non-Balanchine rep? On the audience side, are City Ballet’s all-Balanchine programs attracting fewer young people than other programs, or fewer than they used to attract? Do the ballets get less applause than other ballets?

I remember an Apollo at the Met with Jaffe as Terpsichore, plus Kent and Herrera, and Kathleen Moore as Leto. 1995?

When San Francisco Ballet was at the Kennedy Center a few years back, a woman a couple of seats away from us snored her way through much of Dances at a Gathering. If she hadn't been elderly I would have reached across her partner if need be to wake her. I didn't have the heart to do that to an old lady.

Thanks, Tiffany. Does Vanity Fair identify the dancers or the ballet? In any case, welcome to the Ballet Talk! Please tell us more about yourself, if you like, in the Welcome Forum.

Edward Rothstein remembers studying under Saul Bellow at the University of Chicago.

Great question, bart, but I'm not sure the three arguments you rule out wouldn't fly. I don't hear ballet attacked nowadays on grounds that it's too erotic (although if more social conservatives saw leotard ballets they might use that line. :rolleyes: ) I think the Great Tradition argument would appeal to a lot of conservatives, i.e. most of the people opposed to arts funding. (And isn't it ironic that people would oppose funding to make something more accessible on grounds that it's elitist!). And I think the they-already-have-cable-TV counter-argument is flawed, because the most under-privileged members of society can't afford premium cable.