kfw

My local theater has now announced the schedule, and in addition to what was posted earlier here, it includes John Adams' "Nixon In China" on February 12. I'm so glad.

Let me add my thanks! Much appreciated, volcanohunter.

Here is the opening of their version: Tchaikovsky Pas de deux

In general I feel the same way E Johnson does in his post today. But I must admit you have a point there.

Of course. Is there a reason in the world anyone would think Stiefel is a fascist? Would anyone believe Macaulay if he said he was? Of course not.

He raved about Cornejo as Puck three weeks ago. Not every review has to be written for readers who've never seen the ballet. I found the contrast he made between Stearns and Gomes instructive, sharpening my image of both.

Charlottesville, Virginia isn't the big city, but there is always a lot going on here culturally and artistically. This weekend Ash-Lawn Opera, named for its former home on President James Monroe's estate just up the road form Jefferson's Monticello, begins their season. Today, in a lovely mirrored room off the lobby of the old theater where they'll put on "Don Giovanni" and "Brigadoon," they held the first of five free lunchtime recitals. The 22-song cycle "In a Persian Garden" -- English translations from the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam set to music by Liza Lehmann -- was up first, and like the other pieces today it was for an ensemble, in this case for soprano, mezzo, tenor and bass. This is poetry I know only by reputation and I wasn't sure it would engage me, but it did very quickly did. It's a meditation on the passage of time and on the inevitability of death, lasts perhaps a half an hour, and was touching throughout. "Each morn a thousand Roses brings, you say; Yes, -- but where leaves the Rose of yesterday!-- And this first Summer month that brings the Rose, Shall take Jamshyd and Kaikobád away." I was happy to see that the second piece, for soprano, mezzo, tenor and bass-baritone, and sung by a new cast of singers, was Brahms' Neue Libeslieder, Op. 65, the music for the second half of Balanchine's "Liebeslieder Walzer." Here, as for the final piece, we were provided only the English translations plus the individual song titles. At least each song does begin with the words of the title. The final portion of the program consisted of six selections from Part-Songs, some translated form Greek sources, some from other poets, of Haydn. This featured yet another set of singers, with all eleven of today's singers (there were four different pianists) joining together for the final song, "Eloquence" by G.E. Lessing, about the loosening effect of wine on the tongue. "Eloquence" opens and closes with the words "Brothers, water makes us dumb," and the final "dumb," the final word of the final song of the recital today, was sung in a whisper. So we ended with a laugh. I'm not competent to evaluate the singers, so all I'll say is that I thought they all had strong and pleasing voices and sang with great nuance. And they were only the company's "Young Artists," i.e. its apprentices. All and all, I thought this was a wonderful program, and these recitals, whether or not they attract new patrons, are a great gift to the community.

Sorry, but this is personal: [. . .] What can I say, patrick? I just disagree. I would call an attack on a dancer's character or offstage personality personal. To observe that a dancer looked detached, or that this or that portion of his body moved in ungainly fashion, seems to me all in the line of duty. Of course observations like that are to some degree, perhaps in significant degree, subjective, and it's true that negative feelings towards a dancer can prejudice a critic's perceptions. But to say -- not that you do -- that the critic doesn't like and means to attack the person because the critic criticizes the dancer strikes me as presumption.

I don't remember the comments about Maxim B, but each of those other things, and each of the things Macaulay complains of in his Glover review, concern dance and what he perceives as defects in the dancing or the presentation. His point about Stiefel was that he didn't look Hispanic in Don Quixote. He made the point too harshly for my taste, but he also made it vividly.

I too wish reviewers would hold their fire when writing about retirement performances. But Kistler performed poorly in many ballets for years, so I'm not sure how much credit she deserves. People paid good money in return for those lousy performances. I paid for a few of them myself. Claudia La Rocca was critical of Yvonne Borree on the occasion of her retirement performance a few weeks ago. I don't think that as readers we have any way to know if Macaulay writes in a "petulant" spirit. We can't see his face or hear his voice. But he criticizes dancers for their dancing, which is part of his job -- his remarks don't get personal.

I hope so too! The book is a classic. Thanks, atm711.

Thanks for posting, cinnamonswirl, and thanks for that lovely image of Kistler boureeing off at sunrise. carbro, I remember that you decided long ago not to attend Kistler's final performance because you wanted to remember her better days. I'm sorry that you missed the celebration afterward, but thanks for that little glimpse. I've been marking the retirement here by rewatching recordings of her dancing.

Such an age never existed, did it? As technique has advanced and dancers have become stronger, surely there has always been the temptation to evaluate technique and lose wider picture, lose the ballet. Fortunately the larger part of the art is the technique. The technique itself is beautiful, and part of learning to appreciate the art form, or appreciate it more fully, is learning to clearly see the steps -- to see the difficult feats, no pun intended, the artist is attempting, and to experience their successful accomplishment as beautiful and exhilarating. Pardon me if that's completely obvious, which is it, but it doesn't seem to be to the YT poster.

Amen. I heard her play John Adams' "The Dharma at Big Sur" a few weeks ago. I'm eager to read reviews of this program.

Disingenuous means insincere or less than candid. My point was that however much we love Part -- and seeing her in anything, especially Swan Lake, is an occasion for me -- there was nothing notable about that programming that mandated a review. The Times' decision may have been unprecedented, but it was their prerogative, not ABT's.

I adore Part, but is it really "opening night" when the ballet is performed year after year after year? Googling "vishneva swan lake ny times" I don't find a previous review.

I wonder what they meant by that: "we don't feel welcome at the ballet," or "it's not our thing." The former is a problem. In my opinion, the latter is not.

I found a short 1886 NY Times piece on the Vienna claque of the time.

Great questions, innopac. I'm also curious as to how large the present day claque is, and when one last existed in Paris. Why did it die out there?

"Martha Argerich -- Debut Recital" has two pieces not on this new release: Scherzo No. 39, Op. 3, and Barcarole, Op. 60.

What a great story. Since ABT regularly brings guest artists, so how about bringing over Nunez or Cojocaru for some of the performances? Nunez' 100-watt smile alone ought to sell some tickets to the uninitiated, although, perhaps not enough to offset the guest fees. (??) Fille is such a joyous ballet. There ought to be a way to sell joy.

If 1973 isn't too late and you have access to a good university library, you might look for a copy of the quarterly "Dance Perspectives 55, Autumn 1973." This issue is subtitled "Three Essays in Dance Perspectives." The authors are George Beiswanger (Doing and Viewing Dances: A Perspective for the Practice of Criticism), Wilfried A. Hoffman (Of Beauty and the Dance: Towards an Aesthetics of Ballet), and David Michael Levin (Balanchine's Formalism).

Patrick, I don't think humility makes for a better artist necessarily, but definitely for a better human being, which is why I admire those particular artists, especially since along with humility they might need courage. I also think it stands to reason that a young artist is bound to have a lot to learn from an older critic, not on the technical side of things, but about the art form in general, and for that reason I would hope that artists would be encouraged, in general, with understandable exceptions, to read them. What they would learn might not make a difference on stage for most dancers, but I'd think it would for some. Speculating wildly, I'd think it might help to produce some of the individuality and soul that many longtime observers find missing in many of today's dancers. But I like your paraphrased lesson from Boulez, which is perhaps what he really meant beneath the arrogant pronouncement.

Yes, and lots of artists don't read their reviews. These are probably the strongest of all. Who knows, Borree may have stopped reading hers long ago. I suppose if one has certain faults and limitations and just can't overcome and exceed them, criticism may be destructive, but I admire artists who overcome what must be a natural antipathy to critics and humbly take their views under consideration. milosr, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, but I think Croce's words endorse LaRocca's approach.

Arlene Croce put it best: A review is a conversation between the reviewer and the audience -- not a conversation between the reviewer and the artist/performer. The latter is free to intrude on the conversation by reading the review but he or she does so at their own peril. The journalists-have-a-responsibility-to-be-blunt argument obviously holds water in regards to regular performances, but I don't think it does here. Farewell performances are where audience and performer say goodbye, and goodbyes aren't the occasion to air old grievances. Critics can, or at least should be allowed to, write in the same, fitting spirit. Should the audience have sat on their hands if Borree had danced poorly? Then why should critics need to grumble? Even if one accepts the argument, which I don't, that Borree was viewed as a symbol of Peter Martin's failures, then, not to be sarcastic, but does anyone really imagine dance lovers 50 years from now poring over old reviews and getting the wrong impression of Borree and the Martins years because the Times, the very last time it mentioned her, didn't repeat past criticism?