kfw

It’s so good to have Farrell and company back in town! Of course “town” for me is over 2 hours away, but with a program this juicy I float into town on expectations and float back on memories and adrenaline. The evening opened with La Source, Shannon Parsley in the Verdy role, Runqiao Du partnering and Bonnie Pickard in the 2nd ballerina role. Parsley, not unexpectedly didn’t have all the musicality and sophistication one associates with Verdy -- not that I ever saw Verdy or had seen this ballet -- but she does have charm, and both in afternoon rehearsal and evening performance she seemed to gain in confidence and fluency as the ballet went on. So what we saw wasn’t a finished performance, but for my money it was a beautifully touching one nonetheless. Du was a revelation, more noble and elegant than I’ve ever seen him in years with Farrell, and Pickard, not unexpectedly, out danced every other woman onstage. She takes the lead role tonight and later in the run. During the rehearsal Farrell had the ensemble run though parts of this again two and three times, working particularly on spacing, asking for more energy, and adjusting the tempo of the music. The pas de deux from Clarinade, with Momchil Mladenov (the company’s Don Quixote here this spring) and Erin Mahoney-Du looking Farrell-ish in her pony tail, received a couple of run throughs as well. According the Repertory in Review the ballet wasn’t terribly well received when it premiered to open the State Theater in 1964. The excerpt here came alive to me the 2nd time around and looked like more than a bit of Agon here and a bit of leotard that there with a bit of flopping to boot. Both dancers wear deep yellow tops. He’s in black tights; she’s in a black skirt with overlapping polka dots. In one of the more intriguing and amusing moments he holds her off the floor as she straddles him, and turns her head and limbs rhythmically back and forth. In another he does cartwheels behind her. Farrell has the band behind a scrim onstage and the Gould piece they play, originally written for Benny Goodman’s group, not-so-swinging and not-so-sweet, is a treat. Natalia Magnicaballi should be very interesting in Clarinade in subsequent performances. Last night in Duo Concertant she was marvelous – fleet and gorgeous, with quick limbs and flashing eyes; in the afternoon one longtime observer remarked that he’d never seen her dance at that level before. If only her partner Matthew Prescott, interesting on his own, hadn’t looked at least 10 years her junior. He could use a haircut as well. One of the high school kids at the rehearsal compared him to “Dylan,” and I do think she meant Bob. One other small quibble: in the opening movement, from close up, both dancers looked to be self-consciously, statically, pretending an interest in the musicians rather than listening with real attention. Who knows, they may have only been trying to act out what they truly felt. The program closed with La Valse. Because I’d only seen this in 1991, and because I find this plot, choreography and music so ravishing and so moving, I feel even less able to truly judge this performance than I do the others. I will say that that the entire cast, each dancer and couple more beautiful than the next, as if that were possible, took my breath away, so well did they inhabit their roles. When the ensemble rushed forward horror in to see the stricken young innocent girl, and when they threw themselves back into the waltz as if to forget what they’d just seen, I believed. Ansanelli will be dancing the Girl in White all week, with Ritter her ardent and elegant partner. As the innocent ballgoer during rehearsal, she expressed shock when presented with the black bouquet. I liked that. She expressed no such surprise in the evening. The orchestra, especially, in that little theater, were a delight all evening.

I wonder why Amazon has trouble stocking this. I just found a copy at my local record store!

Drew, of course you make a valid point about Cage. I’m aware of his reputation in some circles and I enjoy his work when it’s accompanied by Cunningham choreography, but surely he and the composers he influenced are important to relatively few music lovers. To my mind the designation is of a piece with the rest of the dumbed down, patronizing sales pitch – cool dancers, incomparable choreographer, star American composer! (As applied to Robbins, that bland, vague, off-the-rack “incomparable” is the worst). At the risk of sounding patronizing myself, it’s hard to imagine that many people who don’t wince at language like that would respond attentively to Cage’s music as opposed to finding it, at best, entertainingly weird. In any case, I think the blurb’s tone trivializes Cage, whatever his true worth, and trivializes ballet, as if the program is just one more ‘exciting!’ entertainment option. In any case again, I’ll be watching Suzanne Farrell Ballet.

Martins' ballet makes "the mind race"? Come to opening night and be part of the ""in crowd""? "Get hip" to a ballet by the "incomparable" Jerome Robbins danced by the "coolest young dancers around"? Is this tripe supposed to be tongue in cheek? Oh, and John Cage is one of the most important American composers. To whom?

Trouble at the La Times..

Those changes we're experiencing, that availability of instant, up to date news and, a moment later, more up to up date news -- and 1400 sources for it to boot -- clearly work against thoughtful, reflective reading, and just maybe this is contributing to the current cultural and political red state/blue state polarization, rife with unexamined stereotypes/prejudices as it is. As for me, I grew up loving the feel and smell of paper and of newsprint, and the convenience and stimulation of the 'net can't displace them.

Which reminds me in turn of the opening lines of Garrison Keillor's doggerel tribute. If memory serves -- There once was a dancer named Merce Who loved, just loved to rehearse All of his sections in different directions And then do them all in reverse Thanks for the review, Jack. It's remarkable that Robert Swinston is still dancing and dancing well. I watched the video of Merce's Beach Birds this week and couldn't help but wonder how Merce is doing. I hope the company comes back to The Kennedy Center soon!

I'm wondering if anyone has seen this DVD and how well it's filmed and how good the performance is. In particular I'm wondering how big of a part Maria Alexandrova has, and how well the role shows her to her advantage. For example, does she have a lot of jumps? Thanks in advance.

redbookish, I understand your suspicion, but similarity does not misogyny make. There is nothing peculiarly feminine about the qualities – violently pornographic and unstructured -- that Ahnlund finds offensive in Jelinek's work. As for taking issue with celebrating women's art, that would be misogynist of course, but I’m afraid you are the one talking about women’s writing. Ahnlund only declined to celebrate one particular woman’s writing, and one particular, popular, but by no means universal or essentially feminine, ideology. My wife and my female friends identify with feminist concerns. None would celebrate, or even continue reading, violently pornography literature. As for Ahnlund's waiting till now to resign, what's unprincipled etc. about waiting to make a point untill maximum notice of that point will be taken?

On a lighter note, my copy of The Homecoming is signed and I can't imagine by whom except the man himself, but the signature looks like "Meuul." "Meull"? That "M" could with some license become an "H." The "e" could become an "a." The apparent 'l" is a squared off "L" with no half circle to become a "D," but there is no no hint of an "r" or "o" in sight. The signature is dated 4/16/86, at which time I was living in Chicago. If memory serves, that's where I read the play. Clues anyone? Do any Chicagoans here remember Pinter reading on the North Side?

Ahnlund contends that Jelinek was chosen for reasons more ideological than literary. Regardless of whether or not he's correct, if he's honestly concerned, expressing that concern is principled. And caring in the first place, caring about what is and isn't considered great literature, about whether what a culture values is worth valuing, is humane. And Ahnlund's willingness to resign his position suggests that he is truly and deeply concerned.

Either that or principled and humane. I haven't read Pinter in 20+ years, but I've just pulled The Homecoming off the shelf.

I've been rereading Walker Percy's "The Last Gentleman" and reading for the first time Sherwood Anderson's "Winesburg, Ohio." Just tonight I bought "Without End: New and Selected Poems" by Polish poet Adam Zagajewski, and I'm about to begin "de Kooning: An American Master." I've recently finished Julian Bell's "What is Painting: Representation and Modern Art."

drb, here's most of what I know. The George Balanchine Foundation I have to run, but there are people here who can tell you a lot more. If you download the Foundation's pdf newsletter, you'll find a form with which to mail in a contribution. Also, the quarterly print magazine DanceView, edited by this site's founder Alexandra Tomalonis, has published articles on several coaching sessions. To subscribe, look for the link DanceView on the top right of this page. the danceviewtimes

With Martins not inviting -- not allowing, it comes to the same thing-- the input of a goodly number of Balanchine's own dancers who would gladly teach, invaluable memories are not being tapped, invaluable instructions are being lost. The inspiration in its particulars and specifics is not being passed down. Martins is known as a good fundraiser. A good and wise fundraiser might have touched Irene Diamond or some such patron to fund work along the lines The Balanchine Foundation is doing with The Interpreters Archive, i.e. taping Balanchine veterans as they coach contemporary dancers.

Perhaps so. But the only thing that might have burnt was Martin's ego -- certainly not the Robbins reportory while Martins found a way to salve his own ego and still give Robbins what he asked for. That partnership worked for the company and the ballets. What's suffered is the Balanchine repertory Martins always says he cares so much about.

But it's impossible to solve them by only giving lip service to one half of the problem. Paintings can go into storage and still look themselves. Ballets, of course, require active maintenance, and any former Balanchine dancer in the world with the possible exception of Diana Adams would have been at Martins' disposal. Why does Farrell teach all over the world but not at NYCB? In my opinion a better analogy to MoMA would be Lowry putting seminal masterpieces in storage rooms without climate control and taking a relative few out for display without first letting a conservator have a look.

On the "No Balanchine on Opening Night" thread, Oberon asked and answered Canbelto wondered rhetorically There are a number of interlocking questions here and I'd love to hear more people offer opinions. Are the all-Balanchine bills not selling as well as the new works bills? Is the audience for the all-Balanchine bills older than for other bills? Does the glamour of a premiere seem to be a bigger draw for younger NYCB ticketbuyers than a work advertised as a masterpiece by a genius? Even more, I'm wondering why Balanchine isn't a bigger draw nowadays. Are the ballets too familiar? Are the newer works better danced? Is (my pet theory) Balanchine too much the romantic in an unromantic age? Is the audience on the whole less educated about the arts and correspondingly less serious and thus less discriminating? In other words, is the audience too dumbed down to note a difference in quality between the latest Martins leotard ballet and Agon?

Agreed.

Laura Jacobs' writing about ballet is as beautiful as it gets. The first four paragraphs of her latest piece for The New Criterion are online here. Registration required.

Thanks for the laugh. But you know, a woman acting out a graphic sex scene is still acting, not showing us her true self. I'm going to guess that when you wrote "prudery" all you really meant was something like "old-fashioned reticence." It seems to me that a woman who chooses not to bare her body to strangers isn't a prude, but is simply doing what's right for her. Nowadays we're told to accept edgy depictions of sexuality without judgment. Modesty deserves the same respect.

Solor, I understand your urge to defend the tradition, and I've never seen the Trocks, but from what I've read about them I gather that what drives them to spoof the tradition is their love for it. It's a family thing, an expression of love -- don't we all we tease the ones we love precisely because we love them? In the Trocks' case, the fact that they're males imitating women must add an extra layer of irony and bemusement ('are we beautiful like the ones we love? -- no we're ridiculous, and we know it'). Sharing their love and catching their self-deprecating irony (and their jokes), their audience loves them too. If I'm mistaken, I welcome correction for Trock's fans.

I love the photo ads for the collection -- the handsome black leather-bound volumes you can almost smell. If only they could put that smell on DVD!

More on crossing over, or trying to: the New York Times today has an article entitled When Rockers Show Classsical Chops, ocassioned by an opera from Roger Waters of Pink Floyd fame.

I haven't read that it was. But if I knew nothing of opera and loved "Rent" that's where it would lead me. It was popular with young people, after all, with people who tend to be curious and relatively openminded. I loved your Blue Oyster Cult reference. Once upon a time in a galaxy far, far away I had one of their records, and once I saw them play, opening for another band I can't remember now. It was probably some vulgar blues rock band, the type that eventually led me (to simplify a not quite so straightforward story) to straight Chicago blues, which led to jazz, which made me think I could learn to love classical music, which eventually made me curious about opera.