kfw

Thanks, rg!

Many thanks to rg and the other historians here. I treasure the few 1940's and 1950's NYCB programs and souvenir booklets I own, and I'll treasure this scan. One small question: can anyone explain why this flyer is torn at the top like one of those plastic deals you hang on a hotel door to indicate whether or not you want your room cleaned? I'm not familiar with the term 'snake'/flyer. Betty Cage sent SAB students out to hang advertisement flyers after class?

I still tend to think that what's wrong with doing that is that it's really beside the point and distracts the neophyte. That could be, Jack, but focusing on the athletic side of the art also gives neophytes something they can relate to, something that could lead to further interest. In any case it gave Letterman openings for a few of his wisecracks. I rarely watch the show anymore, but jokes about pain seem typical of his humor. I did appreciate that, as he held up a photo of Part in action, he said "it certainly is lovely" and "look at how beautiful this is."

and say a prayer of thanks for Tony Mendez!

I don't remember much Balanchine by them here recently. If they feel they need to program conservatively, they could do a whole lot worse than bring one of their Balanchine Spectacular evenings. I'd drive in for that. I'd stay at home for that.

. . . when you reach for something on the highest shelf in the cupboard and you feel like you're in the opening tableau of Serenade. And you're not even female.

And GROTUS, which I guess is Grandmother of the United States. I love it.

I don't know about a sit down guest, but didn't some NYCB corps members take part in a skit or sight gag of some sort on Letterman's show? I read a vague reference to some such thing somewhere (how vague is that?), I think in DanceView Times. Deanna McBrearty's site lists among her film and TV appearances ""David Letterman Top Ten."

So . . . there is no commercially released footage of Part dancing, and what's on You Tube is either grainy (Swan Lake), or pretty old (Raymonda, Fairy Doll). Surely only a tiny fraction of Letterman's audience will have ever heard of her, so can we expect a few precious seconds of new, high quality video by way of introduction? Is it too early for a "yahoo!"? Well here's one anyhow: ?

I think they were working the same angle as a radio station that plays a certain kind of music. They mostly played rock. You didn't hear Michael Jackson on rock radio.

That might have softened the blow, but surely the nature of the situation is perfectly obvious.

I don't buy that at all. Did someone say that or is this just an interpretation of a different set of words that someone else said? Frankly, I doubt this rugby coach, and certainly most his players, would agree to "femininity = inferior". I agree with the sentiments expressed above that dismiss this rugby coach's remark as......my words now.......essentially ignorable,even somewhat humorous, common enough type of remark made in the male sports world that means little, and is certainly said in ignorance of ballet dancers, attenders, or anything else ballet. It's nuts to take seriously such off hand comments by rednecks, uber-liberals, or anyone else who clearly doesn't know what they are talking about. Thank you, Sandy. And the thing is that rednecks (who whatever the limits of their cultural education are as likely as the rest of us to be perfectly decent people) and uber-liberals (by which I take it you refer to people who object to ballet because its old world manners reflect pre-feminist attitudes) are hardly the only people with no idea of how physically demanding ballet is. I don't think it's so bad that a lot of people stereotype ballet as a girl's thing, a woman's thing. How many ballet dancers would know that, say, hunting, appeals to a lot of women as well as men? I don't think ignorance is always prejudice.

The interview is moving, and Flack clearly deserved straight talk about her chances of dancing soloist roles, not to mention a respectful, appreciative sendoff. But apprentices are presumably paid less than corps members, and the company needs to bring in new dancers in order to find future soloists and principals. I think it could be argued as well that the SAB students, after all their dedication, deserve a shot at entering the company, even in a lousy economy.

I think a lot of public figures have engaged in hyperbole, and that's not uncommon when someone famous dies. By the time MTV came along, the rise of niche marketing on FM radio had further fragmented the American music scene from what it had been when AM predominated. But by this time what "segregation" existed was voluntary according to individual taste -- anyone could buy any record or attend any concert -- and disco was popular among both blacks and whites. Donna Summer, for example, had a huge crossover hit that was played on MTV. Tina Turner was played there too. I've mentioned a number of entertainers in previous eras who had large black and white audiences. Thinking back to the 70's I remember the Staple Singers, Al Green, and Isaac Hayes, and I'm sure I'm forgetting others. And this is just mass market pop music, not the jazz and blues market, which was dominated by black artists with many white fans. MTV debuted in 1981. It was not then the enormously popular station it is today, just a small cable outfit directed primarily at young, straight whites, who mostly listened to hard rock and new wave. Thriller was released in 1982 and MTV began playing it the following year. The station had already been under pressure to play more black artists. Jackson broadened their base and their format, but it's not as if he broke some great color barrier. That is far too simplistic a way to put it.

Sharpton used to travel with James Brown. I spoke with him once at a Brown show with an almost entirely white audience. I appreciate the affection Sharpton must have for Jackson inasmuch, but not limited to the fact, that Jackson was the first black "superstar" after the word had been coined. But Sharpton is surely familiar with the careers of Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington, who were huge stars in the days when jazz was pop, not to mention the Motown stars who were already on white oldies stations by the time Jackson broke big.

The NY Times review of the broadcast is here.

Is she joking or is she nuts?

They never achieved stardom on Jackson’s scale. Like Michael Jordan in sports he appealed to whites and blacks in equal measure, achieving a mass audience reach not previously accomplished by an African American, as sidwich notes. I agree about the degree of stardom, as noted above. And in appealing to whites, Jackson no doubt benefitted from the conciousness-raising that occurred through the civil rights movement. That said, I disagree that Jackson's fame differed in kind. Motown, for example, had huge crossover appeal, and was played on stations that both blacks and whites listened to. I also think Jackson's appeal to whites, great as it was, is exaggerated. There was a significant portion of the pop audience that never cared for him.

The company's appearances, even in the New York area, are so infrequent that I'd think they could have gone on for quite a while just with revivals.

What about Sam Cooke, Smokey Robinson and James Brown, just to name a few off the top of my head? Not to mention Muddy Waters and other bluesmen to many educated whites in the late 50's and 60's. Jackson's crossover appeal as measured by the size and breadth of his audience probably exceeded them all, but he wasn't the first to cross over as both sex symbol and highly influential performer.

I'm bumping this up to note that there are photos here on NPR of Ansanelli in Balanchine's Coppelia with Benjamin Millepied, with the Royal in Ondine and A Month in the Country, and with the Royal as the Lilac Fairy and the Sugar Plum Fairy.

"Why is a superstar ballerina hanging up her toe shoes . . . ?" I just heard a promo for this story, to be broadcast on National Public Radio's All Things Considered today at 5 pm EST. They'll put the segment online at 7.

Thanks so much for all that detail, Bart. I look forward to seeing this on the 19th!

Beatrice, thanks for clarifying. Well, it is about her in a way. Balanchine’s last ballerina and a keystone of the company is taking her leave of the stage, and that’s a significant event in ballet as well as for Kistler personally. You have a point, of course. It's the degree that matters, and that's where people have differed.

Thrown to the wolves? Her farewell performance will obviously be an emotional affair for everyone, and she should dance whatever her heart desires. In the meantime, I'd like her to respect her art and her audience. In the meantime, in other words, it's not about her. It's about the ballet.