Anthony_NYC

I didn't get to see it, but tonight at ABT somebody told me that the Sutton Foster character is based on Heather Watts?

They're available only to libraries, so pass this information on to your librarian! Full press release here.

Toward the latter part of his life, Balanchine talked about creating a "dictionary" of his technique, a visual reference for students of the ballet. The George Balanchine Foundation has helped to fulfill his wish by producing The Balanchine Essays. TheseEssays provide over nine hours of visual discussion of Balanchine's ideas on technique that are not only educational but also protect the high standards Balanchine himself set for his dancers.

Former New York City Ballet principal dancers Merrill Ashley and Suki Schorer are the co-creators of the Essays, in which they demonstrate crucial aspects of Balanchine Style® and Balanchine Technique® and illustrate how the choreographer applied them in his ballets. The Essays are directed by veteran television arts director Merrill Brockway, who collaborated with Balanchine in creating several programs in the award-winning television series Dance in America. Catherine Tatge, who earlier produced the CBS Cable version of Balanchine's ballet Davidsbündlertänze, is the producer. The executive producer is Barbara Horgan.

Three titles of the acclaimed series were previously issued in VHS format by Nonesuch Records, a division of Time Warner, under the Balanchine Library label. Today the entire ten-part set is being offered by The Foundation in DVD format. Titles include: Port de Bras & Épaulement, The Barre – Part 1, The Barre – Part 2, Arabesque, Jumps – Part 1, Jumps – Part 2, Pirouettes & Other Turns, Passé & Attitude, Transfer of Weight, and Pointe Technique & Pas de Bourrée.

For information regarding the purchase of these videos, which are available only to not for profit academic, research and library organizations please contact:information@balanchine.org.

(Sorry everybody! I realize now that the article by Croce, which I wasn't able to get to at the time dirac posted the link and so only just now read, actually addressed the very subject of the songs introduced by Astaire.)

While it's true that his dancing was what made Astaire a star, I think Gershwin must have recognized him as possibly the ideal vessel for his songs. Astaire could sing presentably (certainly better than Rogers) and moreover was one of those rare performers who could deliver a song straight up and as naturally as if he were speaking--a definitive statement, as it were; but then he could elaborate on that, highlight the jazzy sophistication of the music alone, by dancing it and turning it into everybody's fantasy of glamour and wit and romance. Given that kind of treatment, is it any wonder that so many of the songs Astaire introduced did go on to become standards? And could be that given the unadorned way Astaire sang the songs, it left the door open for more cultivated singers to re-record them in their own unique style.

Part of the problem are the lack finding guides to get to the interesting stuff. Nicholson Baker poined out that when card catalogues were tossed, valuable informal notes fields - years of pencilled in comments - disappeared too. If new notes fields could be added to electonic catalogues where librarians and serious readers, such as those who contribute to Wikipedia - could leave comments about the particular value of an edition or variant or translation, this would be a great help in calling books out of storage.

Actually, those comments are even easier to incorporate into computerized catalogs, though they weren't always in the early days of conversion. And many library catalogs nowadays also give users the ability to write comments and reviews of items in the Library. (They never were supposed to write on the old catalog cards!) As somebody who has spent thousands of hours over many years at NYPL and other research libraries, I'd say that both the quantity and the quality of information available in WorldCat and individual library catalogs as compared to the old card catalogs is fantastically high, and in the last ten years or so has only gotten better and better.

However--and this is a big qualification--the web interface for most libraries' catalogs is just terrible, and they all seem getting worse (as at NYPL, where they seem to be catering to the children in preference to the adults). People in love with technology for technology's sake seem to want to treat catalogs as toys rather than tools. The librarians themselves complain bitterly about this, so I have no idea why it's happening. If you're doing a lot of research, I recommend asking the librarian for information about getting telnet access to the catalog. It gives you exactly the same information, but this now old-fashioned format actually makes searching the catalog a lot easier.

I'm a student at a N.Y university, I study classical voice performance and personally feel that the Performing Arts Library has drastically declined in quality. The staff is generally inept and rude, there's a man who apparently is in charge of the music scores in the reserve floor who looks like a bum, I can't believe they have someone like that working there.

Since I know them, I can tell you this: The staff is very demoralized. Their numbers have been reduced probably by at least half in the last ten years, thus each one's work load has increased proportionally, and they are paid shockingly badly; yet they care deeply about what they do but must watch as the NYPL system is dismantled to the point where it can barely function as the great research institution it once was. I don't mean to defend the unhelpfulness or rudeness one sometimes has to put up with. But a little understanding and pity is in order. Also, remember, if they fired these people nobody at all will replace them.

The scores that are on reserve cannot be photocopied, what is the point of having these scores then? To take up space? They have scores that nobody can use. Personally, I never go there, I prefer buying the scores either on the internet or the Juilliard Bookstore.

Yes, and buying them is exactly what you are supposed to do, right? Or, if a score is in the public domain, nine times out of ten you can find it free on the web.

The Music Division is a research collection. The materials are meant to be used on the premises, for study, for writing your dissertation, for learning, for exploring. It is one of the world's premiere music collections, vast and deep: no matter what your subject is, you will never come to the end of it using that collection. How did they get such a collection? It is their mission to obtain one--one!--copy of every score and book they can get their hands on. They then must preserve that one copy in perpetuity--forever and ever, until the world ends. Now, imagine if they just let everybody come in and slap any old thing on the copy machines.

In fact, they do allow a certain amount of this, but the item must in good condition and able to survive the process. It must also be in the public domain. If NYPL let everybody photocopy copyrighted materials, publishers would not be so generous in donating their materials to them. And NYPL would be sued into oblivion. (ASCAP's offices are right across the street.) Criticisms of rudeness and ineptness are fair (believe me, I know all about it), but please don't also criticize the librarians when they do exactly what they need to do.

As Croce points out in the article, Astaire was highly regarded as a singer, and had more songs written expressly for him than any other musical comedy star save Merman.

Maybe somebody here with more knowledge of this subject can set me straight, but I've sometimes wondered if Astaire isn't possibly the all-time champ in terms of the number of songs he introduced that went on to become standards. What other singers first brought us so many great songs? (I don't mean that rhetorically, but as a real question.)

Apparently the project is still on. Playbill is reporting that Julian Fellowes will adapt the screenplay. Not an obvious choice, I'd say, but I admire some of his work.

Will Streep ever be able to equal Hepburn or even surpass her on winning times...? (Hepburn=4 vs. Streep=3)

I've heard Streep, with her self-deprecating humor, point out--accurately, I believe!--in interviews that she's lost the Oscar for Best Actress more times than anybody history.

I enjoyed it very much, found it very charming and funny, and I'll happily watch it again when it comes out on DVD or Netflix. Bérénice Bejo and Jean Dujardin are excellent. She reminds me of Ruby Keeler, while he really plays up his remarkable resemblance to Gene Kelly, to good effect since it makes possible some literally unspoken movie-love jokes (a reference to the plot of Singin' in the Rain; Kelly was an American in Paris, Dujardin is a Parisian in America; and no doubt others I either missed or don't remember right now.)

And yet: It seems to me to be pretty lightweight to have been chosen picture of the year.

The piece is a great favorite of mine, too. The Klemperer remains a great classic, and certainly you can't beat those soloists. I still love it, but I've come to find it a little stodgy and lacking in contrast compared to some others. (Excessive slowness is the one problem that dogs this work.) I agree that Rattle's recording is beautiful, with a phenomenal chorus, and he takes good tempos that seem natural for the proper expression of the words. I find Quasthoff sounds a little less than his usual great self, and I'm a big fan so this bothers me probably more than it should.

There are at least four Karajan recordings I've heard, and each is great in its way, the 1947 one most of all, but if you want modern sound I guess I'd suggest the last one, with Hendricks and Van Dam.

But maybe my favorite recording of all is a sometimes hard-to-find one by Haitink. He gets tempos exactly right, not too slow and not too light. The chorus is superb, and the penultimate movement is just wonderfully dramatic and moving. Gundula Janowitz might have been born to sing the soprano solo, and I find Tom Krause tremendously eloquent in "Herr, lehre doch mich." It's one of those recordings I put on when I need balm for my soul. Worth seeking out!

I forgot.....one guy at the Nutcracker I attended last Friday had a loud Hawaiian shirt and shorts. He was probably about 55 years old, old enough to know better (I am 44, by the way). What was strange is that his wife made an attempt to look semi-dressy. If I were his wife I would have made him change clothes. But everyone thinks differently about these things.

Actually, I approve of the wife for not saying anything because I don't believe in scolding or lecturing one's spouse. You just do what you need to do, hope they follow your example (to please you, if for no other reason), and if they don't, you heave a private sigh, then head out the door with all the dignity you can muster despite your mortification. That's love.

Not that I personally own any, but I confess to being rather fond of Hawaiian shirts, which I find can look quite smart if they're properly fitted, at least in a sunny state like Florida. Shorts, however--that goes over my personal line for an indoor performance. Does that make me arbitrary?

By they way, I notice that among men shoddy dressers go across all ages. Women as a whole dress much better overall, but what bad dressers there are are usually middle-aged or older; young women tend to dress very nicely indeed. I have no idea why this is.

I don't mean to offend anyone, but the perception of formality and tradition as stuffy and elitist strikes me as a failure of the imagination bordering on judgmental. If it just takes a few nice clothes for a newcomer to fit right in, I don't see how the dress code is elitist. Imagine the outcry if the hip-hop dress code was criticized as slovenly. And what sort of looks might a guy in a suit get at a hip-hop club? If one set of standards is stuffy, I don't see why another is.

I'm with you. Gone for good, I guess, are the days when children were raised with the idea that you dress for the occasion, not for yourself. Even when I was an impoverished college student, I had a jacket, a few ties and button-down shirts, and a pair of loafers. These things really don't have to cost any more than any other kind of clothing.

Well, times change, and I suppose I don't have a problem with "nice" casual, especially from young people. But the things people wear! Shorts and flip-flops for instance are common everywhere (even in December, which I find just bizarre). A friend of mine recently told me about being invited to dinner at Per Se, New York's swankiest restaurant, and her date showed up in jeans and a T-shirt. He's in his 60s--not a kid. I mean, come one, make an effort!

By the way, I do notice that ballet crowds tend to be better dressed than many others. I'm not sure why that is, but it's nice.

I hope the cows didn't moo the performance and the musicians didn't milk the applause.

Regarding applause in the movie theater, maybe it's a regional thing. Here in New York, it's very common for an audience to applaud at the end of a movie if they thought it especially good. There might even be additional applause for particular names while the credits roll by. For the HD broadcasts of opera and ballet, I think it's great when people applaud like it's a live performance--it adds to the communal experience of it and makes it more exciting. Again, here in New York that seems completely natural, but I can see how it might seem pretentious somewhere where it is not the usual thing (though I personally would miss it).

I don't think applause at movies is anything new, by the way. I've noticed in old musicals that the moviemakers sometimes have even programmed in "applause time." A good example is Fred Astaire's famous hat rack dance in "Royal Wedding." At the end, Astaire and his "partner" take a bow during several seconds of silence that seem awkward at home on TV, but in a movie theater are inevitably filled with the sound of clapping hands (as well as cheering the night I saw it at the old Biograph revival house on 57th Street years ago).

Anthony

I didn't remember how fast this performance is!

Years ago, I watched this in New York Public's Dance Collection. After Kirkland's variation before the pas de deux, there was a live ovation--seven or eight young dance students (I assume) had congregated behind me and were applauding. One of them couldn't restrain himself: "That was gorgeous!" he cried, prompting a shush from the librarian.

Lincoln Center has a New iPhone app. It seems to be extremely well designed and I'm sure I'll be using it all the time for browsing upcoming events. The two big features that are missing are a general search engine and the ability to order right from the phone (it does give you a button to call the box office), but I wouldnt be surprised if they're already at work on that.

I have to wonder if Lincoln Center is scrambling to fill the schedule left rather suddenly empty, and so offered Paul Taylor a reduced rent that he can finally afford. This way Taylor and the State Theater each benefits from the other's luster. Whatever, I'll just be happy to see Taylor there, even if I wonder whether the stage is too large for many of his works. City Center is an awkward theater, but I do like the intimacy of it--when you can get a good seat, which often isn't easy. i do hope Taylor can give us live music once again.

I believe reinvigorating its Tudor repertory should take top priority for ABT.

I'm totally with you on that one!

I quite agree about drawing too many conclusions from statements taken out of context. Nevertheless, "Nobody lives in New York for 15 years without trying cocaine," sounds suspiciously excuse-making.

For me as a New Yorker, that line was the great scandal of the story, so patently untrue it made me laugh. Perhaps it was just his misjudged way of admitting that he had "inhaled" at some point, perhaps only once, during his time in New York, in case that subject ever comes up in court one day.

But Peter Martins must be thrilled by what that statement implies about him and the dancers of New York City Ballet.

I've tried to sell a ticket in front of the Met (I always give a discount) and have been spirited away by police, even threatened to be arrested by some police. I usually then walk to Avery Fischer Hall to complete the transaction.

I wish somebody would clarify the rules about this. I tried to give away a ticket for the Met's Rheingold--it was completely sold out and I just wanted to place the ticket in the hands of some impoverished-looking student--and security told me I couldn't even do that unless I moved to the front of the plaza. Well, it was five minutes before curtain and I didn't have time, so the ticket went to waste. It's a public space. Does Lincoln Center security have the right to shoo away people who are not engaged in anything unlawful? Or maybe I'm wrong. Does anybody know for certain what the New York laws are about this nowadays? I tried but failed to find something online.

Peter Martins, the ballet company’s ballet’s master in chief, has long talked of making the theater a world destination for dance.

An appealing idea for dance lovers, but the last paragraph, devoted to possible future tenants, struck me as slightly weird:

Among the likely candidates to fill regular slots are the San Francisco Ballet, the Boston Ballet, Alvin Ailey Dance Theater and several international companies, like the Royal Danish Ballet, the Stuttgart Ballet and the Royal Ballet in London.

Surely some of those dance companies would need an umbrella organization to invite and "present" them.

You're probably right about that. But it is an appealing idea, having at Lincoln Center a sort of Carnegie Hall for dance. The Joyce is great but too small for large ballet productions. And City Center seems to have a pretty full season already.

I wonder what makes more economic sense, to bring in a company's already-rehearsed orchestra or to hold rehearsals with a house orchestra put at the disposal of visiting companies. If that latter, maybe Lincoln Center could help alleviate some of NYC Opera's union troubles as reported in today's paper. But then there's the complication of figuring out how many weeks of work you can promise the musicians since not all ballets require an orchestra.

They removed prime viewing seats in the orchestra at the request of the New York City Opera, who have now decamped, in order to make aisles. Judging from a picture of the auditorium in today's Times, it looks like some ninety seats could be reinstated, which would help with meeting demand for good seats under the new plan, if that's what we're forced to live with.

I've been avoiding their calls for several weeks now because I'm unsure what I want to do. I think I will not subscribe and take my chances with single tickets, but it's hard to know what availability will be like with the new structuring. What's sad is that it looks like no matter what I do, I won't be able to go nearly as often.

Does anybody know what's going to happen with standing room when the Fourth Ring is closed?

It'd be great if Streep would take a SCTV improvision approach and slip back and forth between Julia Child and Margaret Thatcher – also Karen Blixen.

Great idea. Maybe a scene in which Streep makes Broadbent breakfast, a la Woman of the Year:

The Iron Chef Lady

Paul/Denis: Darling, don't you think perhaps you're overdoing it with the chopped onions?

Julia/Margaret (continuing her merciless destruction of the bulbs with an enormous butcher's knife): Certainly not! I may be persuaded to forgo the beans; the haggis, however, is absolutely non-negotiable.

He is superb in Judgment at Nuremburg, but I disliked the way he and Judy Garland were in effect being exploited for their offscreen sufferings, and their stardom took you right out of the movie. Special Guest Victims, as Gavin Lambert said.

Interesting, I never thought of it that way, but then I confess I don't know much about the sufferings of either. None at all, in fact, about Clift aside from his accident. Garland does seem like unlikely casting at first, but she has that huge lovability and vulnerability that make her quite affecting despite the unconvincing German accent. It is an all-star movie, so I don't find that she or Clift stick out inappropriately. That would be hard anyway with Spencer Tracy in practically every scene (and as always a pleasure to watch, though as the judge I wish he didn't look at times so, well, judgmental, which to me is one of the flaws of the movie, perhaps more the director's fault than Tracy's). And then there's Burt Lancaster and his haunted blue eyes that are for me the most vivid memory I take away from the movie.