kfw

It's by Joeb Lobenthal, a longtime dance writer who collaborated with Elena Tchernichova on her memoir, and who is dance associate editor of Ballet Review. He blogs as well. The Kindle sample is available now. Thanks, Margareta!

Did anyone see Lauren King's debut in the first movement of Western Symphony last night?

Having danced for so many years, Corella surely understands that dancers get tired, and surely he can read their body language. I feel for the dancers who are being let go, and for the audience who loves them, and I hate to think of Balanchine being de-emphasized. But do we know that the manner of the firing was harsh? As the Times put it, he's made no secret of his goal to revamp the company. It's not like this should come as a total shock.

The underwater/by-the-water theme remains true to the idea of a magical alternate world where everyday laws don't apply. It's not like Shakespeare's forest makes sense, though it is meant to conjure a certain image of England--Lopez presumably is translating that to the world of her Florida audience however playfully.

I’m sure she is, but I think it’s sad she has to, or thinks she has to. Floridians are water lovers and a forest is too far a stretch for their interests – really?? It would be one thing if the area already knew a more or less original production and declining attendance suggested people were tired of it. Then this new setting might be inspired. But to have to take a work as accessible as Midsummer already is and sell it in such an obvious manner . . . if that isn’t dumbed down marketing, I don’t know what is. I mean no insult to Floridians, because it’s hard to believe they needed this.

I apologize for not making it clear that I was referring to the SFB not being an important part of the Kennedy Center's programming. I'm skeptical that the limiting factor on the SFB's performances is money. The Kennedy Center seems to have so much cash that they have to look for ways to spend it, so I would think that they could subsidize more performances if they wanted them.

No apology necessary of course. You may be right about the Center.

Imspear, I think there is no doubt that Farrell's goal is to serve Balanchine's work. Whether or not she'd be willing to lead a full-time company as a way of doing it appears, sadly in my opinion, to be a moot point.

This is one Balanchine ballet where it's not all "dancing to music" - although that's still a strong element. The movement establishes and develops the character of each of them (in Act I, what we're mainly talking about here), develops the situation, and carries the story.

Not to disagree - because I don't - but it's interesting that in his introduction to A Midsummer Night's Dream Night's Dream: The Story of the New York City Ballet's Production, Kirstein writes that "Balanchine made it clear from the start that this ballet was based far more on Mendelssohn's music than on Shakespeare's play." It seems that even when Balanchine was telling a story he was "see[ing] the music."

The Suzanne Farrell Ballet only does 1 program a year at the Kennedy Center, so it hardly is an important part.

It's important to me , but I take your point. But I assume the reason they only have one season a year (it's actually two programs) is because they lack money for more. So I'd think SFB would still be the Center's first priority, both because it's established there and because for all Kent's fame and D.C.-area roots, Farrell is still the bigger star. But I guess a big donor or two could make all the difference.

It would be nice if they could become an affiliate of the Kennedy Center, which seems to have more money than it knows what to do with (e.g., they are paying well over $2 million/year to the not particularly talented music director of the National Symphony). But would the Kennedy Center have an interest in that? They presumably rake in lots of money from the annual visits by ABT, NYCB, and (especially) Mariinsky, so would they want to turn around and hand some of that money over to another ballet company? And then have to worry about scheduling conflicts?

I don't see any official designation on the website, but Suzanne Farrell Ballet is more or less the Kennedy Center's ballet company.

Winding down my rant, now - any other purists here?

Oh yeah. Especially when it comes a choreographer's home company. I'm the kind of purist who wonders why in the world Martins couldn't just have had the costume shop copy Karinska's original designs for Symphony in C, instead of paying for the blingy ones Marc Happel replaced them with. I'm the kind of purist who wonders what would would have been wrong with recreating Peter Harvey's original sets for Jewels. If they were good enough for Balanchine . . .

Yes, I know - marketing wants something new to sell. Ugh.

Tschai #2 is coming to DC on the more contemporary (Justin Peck, Wheeldon, etc) bill! Anyways, in the spring I much preferred the Bournonville Divert. to La Sylphinde -- it was so sunny and full of life. I thought they should have flipped the order of the program and played Sylphide first and end on a happy note.

That's the order listed for the Kennedy Center performances. La Syphide, then Bournonville Divertissements.

Wow, congratulations to Mr. Moose. Here he is in Afternoon of a Faun at Washington's National Gallery in 2013.

Another female athlete one Jerry Ward would be unwise to compare unfavorably to the Eagles: The Wall Dancer.

Drew, not to minimize your concerns, but they're in "discussing the discussion" territory. I have sent you a private response.

sandik, the humor in blackface, such as it was, derived from the belief that blacks were inferior, and was a way of expressing that belief. Now that we know the poster likes ballet, there is no parallel. You're right that not sharing someone's humor doesn't make you humorless. That's a good point. But insisting on misinterpretation, or just insisting on political correctness, is humorless.

Helene, no, following PA Ballet on Facebook doesn’t prove the guy’s intentions weren't malign – you can’t prove a negative anyhow. dirac, what “current inequalities” is he responsible for? You folks “figured out” the guy’s assumptions before you knew any thing about him, and now that the one thing we know is evidence against what you claimed to know, are you really doubling down on your speculative claims? An irrationally negative opinion about someone based on the group he belongs to (male football fans, or just males) is a prejudice, obviously. In this case it’s also reverse McCarthyism - witch-hunting.

Balanchine's American folksiness was part of a charming mask.

You don't think he was really in love with American culture - musicals, Westerns, relative lack of pomposity?

OK. I'll rephrase that. What is it that the humorless person who has never "laughed at a difference between men and women" should be laughing at?

Really, I don't feel the need to answer that.

Helene, have you considered that you've insulted the Facebook poster? Kathleen, the differences aren't risible.

Like the stereotypes involving watermelon, hooked noses, and limp wrists? Yes, those are extreme examples, but where does one draw the line? I'd say that someone who relies on another person's race, creed, nationality, ethnicity, sexual preference, and gender to make jokes really doesn't evidence much of a sense of humor at all, but rather, genuine humorlessness.

The original Facebook post is quite clear and it was an insult. As I said previously, I’m perfectly willing to believe that the poster was being more thoughtless than not. But it is important for people to look at the subtext of what they may think is just a passing remark or throwaway humor, particularly in regard to people who have been subordinated or marginalized. (Although in this case it isn’t really subtext.) The point is to question stereotypes, not to accept them unquestioningly. The Pennsylvania Ballet riposte does that by pointing out that the stereotype implicit in the Facebook post is spectacularly off base.

Helene, I've never heard that insult you say is prevalent. Drew, no apology necessary, and thanks for the laugh. That would have been such a great retort. Maybe the Facebook poster should have known how some people would interpret his words – I’ll give you that. But I think that unless we want our own words policed, we have to give the widest latitude to others. Intent, in other words, should count. You say your reading of his language is within norms, but whose norms? I don’t hang around with guys who put down women or gays, even obliquely. In my circle, people who did that would be shunned. How do you know it’s not the same in his? Not because he's a football fan. That would be an unfair stereotype right there. Some guys are sexist and homophobic, yes. If he’s not, why should that be his problem?

It’s not like he used a racial or sexual slur that’s always had one and only one meaning. Men and women derive humor from the differences between the sexes, and sometimes that humor is sharp. Most of us recognize that masculinity and femininity are equally good, but in some situations, like when someone’s wearing a tutu or a football helmet, one is called for rather than the other, and it’s no insult to the other to say so. So to insult a man for being stereotypically feminine where stereotypical masculinity is called for is not by definition to insult either women or un-stereotypically masculine men who don't play football. It’s just to say, be “a man” in the way masculinity is called for in that situation. That’s my opinion. Obviously you don’t agree, but I've enjoyed the discussion.

Drew, yes the tone of the Pennsylvania Ballet Facebook post was great. They didn’t question the motives of the Eagles fan – that's been done here. As I’ve said, I see no evidence, as opposed to suspicion, that the remark was either sexist or homophobic. Some of the links you posted no longer work, but do you really think it’s fair to judge someone you’ve never met and know nothing about by a few other people’s behavior?? Would you want to be judged by that standard?

As for “finger wagging,” my tone has ranged from incredulous in my first post to just plain conversational later. I explicitly said I’m not accusing people here. Other people are doing to accusing, and people making accusations should expect to be challenged.

The original Facebook post (that PB replied to) was not meant ironically, nor was it meant humorously. It was an insult, using a stereotype that I would, at this point in our history and in this particular community, think would be disdained.

sandik, if you’ll note, I didn’t say the poster meant it ironically. I said he referenced a stereotype which the Trocks also reference. They use it ironically, yes. He meant it as an insult, yes – to the football team. That much is clear. Apparently you also think that to say men are acting like women when the context is a sport where men are called for is an insult to gays. But you offer no evidence for that, and there is a simple and therefore more likely reason, which I have offered. I’m sure that in the history of homophobic insult-throwing someone somewhere has used the word “tutu,” but it’s not exactly a common stereotype, nor do we have any idea of the poster’s background, knowledge of or interest in ballet, or feelings about gays. Without all that, I think it's a mistake to presume the worst. I don’t see what that accomplishes, except to make straights walk on tenterhooks around gays. You don’t seem like the kind of person who would want that, and I believe the Facebook poster deserves the same benefit of the doubt.