Dale

Baryshnikov was on CNN's "Larry King Show" Sunday night. He was basically there to promote his new picture book. But the interview was interesting (despite King's habit of inturrupting) and there were lots of clips of him dancing, including many that have not been seen in a while (such as his performances of Harlinquinade and Rubies at the White House and a snatch of Who Cares? from a Liberty Day show). Here's a transcript of the interview: http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0205/05/lklw.00.html

Balanchine said he liked tall dancers because you can see more. I agree, although I do like smaller dancers as well (and from the work he did on dancers such as McBride, Kirkland, Schorer etc.., so did Balanchine). Melissa Hayden said in the Balanchine Muses documentary, that a dancer might not start looking like a "Balanchine dancer" (long legs, small head), by dancing his works the body (by use of the muscles) changes. And it was a quality of movement he was looking for. Re: McBride -- In old footage from the 60s, McBride was less muscular and etched than she would become. But then, this happens to most dancers (and most people). The body changes, espcially women (less fat). In addition, Balanchine's preference in body types was a label given to him by (I believe) British critics during a tour in the 50s. But when you look at some the top dancers, you see differences (Govrin, Schorer, Watts, Nichols).

Balanchine said he liked tall dancers because you can see more. I agree, although I do like smaller dancers as well (and from the work he did on dancers such as McBride, Kirkland, Schorer etc.., so did Balanchine). Melissa Hayden said in the Balanchine Muses documentary, that a dancer might not start looking like a "Balanchine dancer" (long legs, small head), by dancing his works the body (by use of the muscles) changes. And it was a quality of movement he was looking for. Re: McBride -- In old footage from the 60s, McBride was less muscular and etched than she would become. But then, this happens to most dancers (and most people). The body changes, espcially women (less fat). In addition, Balanchine's preference in body types was a label given to him by (I believe) British critics during a tour in the 50s. But when you look at some the top dancers, you see differences (Govrin, Schorer, Watts, Nichols).

De Basil's Ballets Russes by Kathrine Sorley Walker also devotes several pages to Balustrade. She pointed out that the critics (daily paper type) disliked the ballet, while dancers, other artists and learned observers admired it. I was also reminded that "Irina Zarova" was Yvonne Mounsey, who is still active running the Westside Ballet School in Los Angeles. I wonder if she remembers anything of the ballet?

Re: Ellen Bar -- I think she was out for a season and a half with an injury. It's interesting, she and Janie Taylor came out of SAB at the same time and both got solo-type of assignments. But either Bar missed a few weeks of time with an injury, or Taylor just captured the imagination of P. Martins, but Taylor was the one that vaulted ahead of the two. Bar, I guess, does not have as solid technique as Taylor, but I think she has a lot of personality and glamour, plus a beautiful line. She's done a few solo things (Courage in Sleeping Beauty, Diana Adams' role in Stars and Stripes, and Spanish in Swan Lake) and appears now to be grouped in that strong group of corps ladies, which includes Saskia Beskow and Mary Helen Bowers (another two I like).

I didn't know where to put it - here, or in recent performances. I'll try to write more later, but it was a wonderful all-Balanchine evening. I was most impressed by Symphony in C. We often gripe about the casting, but this was perfect. Somogyi/Neal in 1st mvt, Korowski/Askegart in 2nd, Bouder (in a debut)/Millepied in 3rd, and Van Kipnis/Ritter in the 4th. What a pleasure it was to see a Balanchine work performed in the Balanchine style -- nothing was static, everything was danced through with the utmost musicality, the beginning steps that form the basis for most of the ballet were performed by the entire group by delight and clarity. Each movement had something that recommended it Somogyi had great beauty in her legs and feet. Korowski was lovely in the adagio, very regal. It was the first time I saw her do the move where the head goes to the knee in arabesque, but it was done easily and she was totally within herself. She did not call attention to it. The same goes for the 3rd movement. We all know that Bouder and Millepied can jump through the roof, but they were as one, moving together one in the many unison passages in the movement. BM also made some amusing flourishes with his head that accented the music. It also was nice to see Ellen Bar back (as one of the demi-soloists in the 3rd movement and in the corps in the Stravinsky Violin concerto). Van Kipnis showed great style 4th movement. The finale was wonderful as usual, with the dancers filling the stage. And it was great to see the ending in which everybody was able to keep the pace. Everybody was cheered at the end, with three curtain calls. Serenade and Stravinsky Violin concerto were especially notable for some debuts, and looked good with the new additions (Janie Taylor/Kathleen Tracy in Serenade and Ansanelli in Kim Mazzo's part in the Stravinsky) and both ballets will look even better when the dancers become more comfortable.

In the book, "The Ballets Russes; Colonel de Basil's Ballets Russes de Monte Carlo 1932-1952" by the late Vincente Garcia -Marquez, there is a whole section devoted to Balustrade. The structure appears to be totally different than the later version. The the cast list is as follows: Toccata -- Tatiana Leskova, Roman Jasinski and corps de ballet; Aria I -- Galina Razoumova, Paul Petroff, Sonia Orlova, Irina Zarova, and corps; Aria II -- Tamara Toumanova, Jasinski, Petroff; Capriccio -- entire cast. According to Taper's book, there was only three performances. A few notes from the book: Balanchine told the New York Times that the ballet "has no story but is a contrast of moods in movement and color. It is not an illustration but a reflection of Mr. Stravinsky's music." There is no scenario, but there were suggested atmosphere and characters... The scenery and costumes (by Tchelitchev) "suggested a fantasy garden, and the costumes, fabulous garden creatures. The decure consistd of a low, white balustrade in persepctive two (in Lillian Moore's words) `pale, macabre, skeleton trees of which the artist is so fond' lite in red against a black background." Corps -- grey tights, tops with batlike wings and bandeau-like headpieces with two circles suggesting owl-like eyes. Leskova --- blue dress with painted veins and a tree branch headpiece; Razoumova -- chiffon dress in shades of pink and grey; men in both -- jackets with veins painted on puffed sleeves, small headpieces with leaf motifs and tights. TT -- black sleeveless dress with a georgett skirt fringed down the center and long black gloves (all with rhinestones) her partners were all black. The choreography evidently had groups that broke off in trios or other larger groups and would move quickly into patterns. The second trio is described as "a trio in which the female dancer's legs hooked in various positions around her partners' waits." Because of the black costumes and dark lightning, the audience could make out only heads or other parts of the body when the light hit the stones. The end bult to a large finale. TT said, "it was like an ocean, a crecendo of waves composed by dancers in motion, but always with a strong sense of symmetry." There is quite a bit more in the section, but it is hard to tell from the words what the ballet looked like or how much the 2nd version copied or differed. Some of the reviews said that Toumanova's role was an extension somewhat of her ealier part in Cotillion -- the strange mysticism.

There's an eight-minute silent film of Balustrade in the NY Performing Arts Library. I've never seen it but I plan on getting to it one day In an interview with Toumanova in "I Remember Balanchine," TT said something (I don't have my books and journals with me now) about Balanchine telling her that he was going to give her a gift, a lovely necklace of a ballet. And that was what she always thought of the ballet as a piece of jewlery that Balanchine gave her. She did wear a black onyx necklace, as well as long jeweled gloves with black beads on them. The reviews said the ballet was very sexy. I read about the ballet in a couple of books about the Ballet Russe as it was done for a group that was called, "The Original Ballet Russe." I'll try to go through my books and come up with actual quotes, if somebody doesn't get to it before me

I chose Paris, 1910s. There's several reasons, most of which have been mentioned. One is to see what all the fuss is about Nijinsky and Pavlova have been so hyped, that there is a feeling from my generation that it just can't be, at least not the rumors. So I'd like to see for myself. Plus, what spawned in this era was what I know of as modern ballet. I think that if I choose an earlier time, as much as I'd love to see ballet at its beginning or St. Petersburg, I'd probably have too much resistance within myself to the body types and style to really enjoy myself. And as Paquita mentioned, all those artists and composers contributing as well, it would be (as it was) very exciting. Now, if I could chose another option, it would either the 1930s or 1940s. For the 30s, I could see the baby ballerinas, De Basil's Ballet Russe, Massine's best work, Nijinska's things and be at the premieres of Balanchine's Serenade, Cottilion, and the original Mozartiana. I could still see Danilova and Markova. Or teh 40s, I see the early perfomances of 4ts, Concerto Barocco, Ballet Imperial -- basically the birth of the NYCB, plus see the Ballet Russe and all those ballets, the beginning of ABT.

I chose Paris, 1910s. There's several reasons, most of which have been mentioned. One is to see what all the fuss is about Nijinsky and Pavlova have been so hyped, that there is a feeling from my generation that it just can't be, at least not the rumors. So I'd like to see for myself. Plus, what spawned in this era was what I know of as modern ballet. I think that if I choose an earlier time, as much as I'd love to see ballet at its beginning or St. Petersburg, I'd probably have too much resistance within myself to the body types and style to really enjoy myself. And as Paquita mentioned, all those artists and composers contributing as well, it would be (as it was) very exciting. Now, if I could chose another option, it would either the 1930s or 1940s. For the 30s, I could see the baby ballerinas, De Basil's Ballet Russe, Massine's best work, Nijinska's things and be at the premieres of Balanchine's Serenade, Cottilion, and the original Mozartiana. I could still see Danilova and Markova. Or teh 40s, I see the early perfomances of 4ts, Concerto Barocco, Ballet Imperial -- basically the birth of the NYCB, plus see the Ballet Russe and all those ballets, the beginning of ABT.

One reason PBS stations are using not to show ballet or other arts programs is the cost. They could work with other stations, such as the CBC and BBC to share the expenditure for the productions. Or at least purchase the American broadcast rights, which would most likely be less money than producing a show of its own. I'm hoping that the Christmas broadcast of the (London) Royal's production of the Nutcracker (although I didn't like it) will be a sign of things to come. The BBC broadcasted a Coppelia and put it out on DVD, and last Christmas showed a newly taped Don Q from the fall season. Two other ballets are expected to be broadcast on the BBC, so maybe they will eventually make it to our shores. I would love to know how things are going for Dance in America -- whether the show got its funding cut or whether the producers still like ballet. DIA used to show not only a lot of ABT and NYCB, but also Pennsylviania Ballet, SFB and DTH. PNB had both Midsummer Night's Dream (which was later shown on Bravo) and a Kent Stowell ballet shown on a Washington state area PBS. And I would think Miami City Ballet (with its excellent reviews and cross-cultural appeal) should make it to the airwaves. Considering the drought, we possibly should consider outselves lucky that we (at least in some areas of the country) will get NYCB's Diamond Project on Live at Lincoln Center and the ABT men's dancer feature sometime later in the year.

On the pro side, the project promotes new works and new choreographers. On the whole, I think Peter Martins has always been generous in supporting people doing the thing he most loves -- choreographing. New works of music also have been commissioned, so that is good too. I don't know if no scenery and costumes is a must. I read Martins say that, due to money, scenery and costumes have to be done on a limited budget. But poverty has, in the past, produced some interesting, creative results. He also said, in the NYTimes magazine article a few years ago, that he preferred that the works be done with the classical vocaublary. And I think that's great. On the other hand, I agree with those people who complain that many of these ballets don't have an afterlife. Even the successful ones are discarded after a season. That's why I'm happy that Concerto in Five Movements is coming back this season. It only had two performances the season it premiered because of injuries and has not been seen since, despite good reviews. I believe it was given a good review in Dance View (by Ms. Cargill), as was Slavonic Dances by Wheeldon -- another much-admired Diamond Project ballet from the same season that has never been programed again. These two ballets were made by company people who showed us an interesting aspect of the dancers. (If I were listing them, recent Diamond Project ballets that I liked would include Prism, Mahdaviani's ballets, Herman Schmerman, La Stravaganza). The company is not given much time to grow into the new ballets before they are replaced by the next new ballet (Diamond Project or otherwise). There are a quite a few NYCB ballets I'd like to see revived from past projects just to see what they'd look like with different casts. Which brings me up to agreeing with Cargill that the choreographers tend to cast the same dancers over and over again. I believe Whelan is the lead in at least three of them this season, as is Millepied. And so many of them are in the same style -- dark postmodern. Two ballets from the last Diamond Project looked practically alike. And I agree that in its current format, the project does take a lot of time away from rehearsing the core reperatory -- the Balanchine ballets. I would rather have a small seperate season, maybe in part with the Lincoln Center Festival later in the summer to devote to so many new ballets. Or just debut three of them.

When I write officially about sports or ballet, I use full names first and then last names. But in speech or on an informal board such as this, I might go back and forth, probably out of carelessness. I might say "Farrell" the first few times when refering to Suzanne Farrell and then throw in a "Suzanne." I would never say, "Suzy" as I heard Jacjques D'Amboise call her in interviews. And I would never say to somebody, "Jenny Ringer," "Chuck Askegard," or "Ben Millepied." But some people might because A) they know them or B) it's faster to write on a board "Ben" rather than "Benjamin." And it might be easier to type Maria K. than Miss Kowroski. Usually, when I'm speaking about these dancers it is in a casual way with a close friend. However, I think most people in this thread put convincing arguments that it should not be done and I most likely will now only refer to dancers by their last names. A bit off the ballet part of this topic, but in Russia, it considered rude even to refer to a close friend, to whom you would call by a nickname, by that nickname in front of somebody who does not have the same relationship. And people will get upset and find you rude. And I agree with Dirac who brought up female athletes. As a sportswriter, I have noticed that journalist (and fans) will say "Steffi, Monica and Anna...etc..." But use "Sampras" not Pete, Agassi not Andre, Hewitt, not Lleyton. Sometimes I'll hear both sexes called by their first names, mostly on TV. And in our newsroom, most of us are called by our last names -- the men always, the women (which is basically me) sometimes.

When I write officially about sports or ballet, I use full names first and then last names. But in speech or on an informal board such as this, I might go back and forth, probably out of carelessness. I might say "Farrell" the first few times when refering to Suzanne Farrell and then throw in a "Suzanne." I would never say, "Suzy" as I heard Jacjques D'Amboise call her in interviews. And I would never say to somebody, "Jenny Ringer," "Chuck Askegard," or "Ben Millepied." But some people might because A) they know them or B) it's faster to write on a board "Ben" rather than "Benjamin." And it might be easier to type Maria K. than Miss Kowroski. Usually, when I'm speaking about these dancers it is in a casual way with a close friend. However, I think most people in this thread put convincing arguments that it should not be done and I most likely will now only refer to dancers by their last names. A bit off the ballet part of this topic, but in Russia, it considered rude even to refer to a close friend, to whom you would call by a nickname, by that nickname in front of somebody who does not have the same relationship. And people will get upset and find you rude. And I agree with Dirac who brought up female athletes. As a sportswriter, I have noticed that journalist (and fans) will say "Steffi, Monica and Anna...etc..." But use "Sampras" not Pete, Agassi not Andre, Hewitt, not Lleyton. Sometimes I'll hear both sexes called by their first names, mostly on TV. And in our newsroom, most of us are called by our last names -- the men always, the women (which is basically me) sometimes.

Irina Dvorovenko is featured in a photo spread in the new Gotham magazine and ABT has a blurb in the arts section.

Barnes' reviews are quite short and, although Gold does do some reviews for Newsday, I don't believe the NY Daily News has had many ballet reviews since Terry Teachout left. Maybe if the NYTimes subscribers here wrote in, they might (though probably not) re-think this decision. It's sad.

Barnes' reviews are quite short and, although Gold does do some reviews for Newsday, I don't believe the NY Daily News has had many ballet reviews since Terry Teachout left. Maybe if the NYTimes subscribers here wrote in, they might (though probably not) re-think this decision. It's sad.

Boy, Onegin and La Fille seem to be the ballets of the moment -- they're being done at a few places this season and the next. Good, better than "Barbie; the ballet." or "Frankenstein."

What is a "tourist friendly" area? Carnegie Hall is a 5-10 minute walk, there are hotels close by, other theaters such as the Beacon and the smaller Merkin Concert hall. While there is not a department store, you have the Gap, Tower Records, Barnes and Noble, Bannana Republic, VS, Anne Taylor, Gracious Homes etc.. as well as smaller boutiques. It's not far from Columbus Circle and Central Park. The west side has more than one subway, not like the east side, which only has one. It's easy to take the shuttle or 7 from 42nd street on the east side over to Times Square to pick up the 1 or 9. From downtown, either take the 1 or 9 or one the trains to 59th and walk the 4 blocks. Lincoln Center really starts at 63rd street (State Theater). 66th street is the far side of Julliard. The Metropolitain Museum is in essentially a residential area -- an extremely upscale one, but residential just the same. There aren't any restaurants across the street. MOMA is in midtown among highrises and business, but the area tends to close down shortly after those office buildings clear out. In a residential area, the restaurants are open longer. In addition, Lincoln Center has parking (too expensive, true, I suggest one of the garages on 8th avenue around 57th street), but that's a feature not afforded to customers at Carnegie Hall. If anything, by having all the arts organizations at one center, it is tourist friendly because they allow people to decide what they want to see, ask about tickets etc... without having to crisscross Manhattan. Other than copy the styles of smaller European halls, I don't know how you can make Lincoln Center look more like a theater. Does the Kennedy Center look like a theater or a big box on a hill by the water? One point Ross brought up was interesting -- the prospect of an arts center in lower Manhattan. Evidently a major transportation hub is part of the plans. Without debating what should be built on this land (a combustable topic not really suited to this board, if an arts center were to be built, what should it be like? What way could it avoid the problems of Lincoln Center?

More Tudor, Fokine, Massine and Ashton. And, yes, a new, classic Sleeping Beauty to replace that monstrosity by McMillian. I'd love them to reclaim the one-act demi-character ballets that were once a staple of their rep. Or a rivival of some of the tippet and tharp ballets made more recently.

Going through some old magazines to throw them out, I came across an article on Alexopoulos. It said that while receiving her early training in Chicago, Maria Tallchief taught her all her old roles. That must have been special. And Helene was even as a corps dancer, just from watching her in Raymonda Variations or even as one of the demi-soloist girls in Who Cares? she stands out. One of her first featured roles was the Mimi Paul part in Emeralds -- a part she still does beautifully. Indeed, she has great flexibility. In addition to the roles already mentioned, I liked her in Red Angels (the part was created on her, but an injury kept her out of the premeire and Darci Kistler did the part the first season). Hopefully, she'll be doing it when the ballet is performed in May on Live from Lincoln Center. And Ecstatic Orange also featured this aspect of her talent. Alexopoulos also has taken some roles that I didn't originally care for and made me see them in a different light, such as the Mazzo part in Davidsbundlertanz and Watts' role in Jazz. My estimation of Alexopoulos rose after she participated in Suzanne Farrell's first staging of Balanchine at Kennedy Center in which she performed Slaughter and Tzigane. I remember she only got one chance at Tzigane during the week, so Farrell had her dance it during a corps talk. And dance it she did. Once all the way through the difficult opening solo and then Farrell came up on stage and said, "Well, I like to see how people deal with a different tempo" and had the pianist play it really slow. HA did it slower, bringing out different accents. Then Farrell said, "Ok, faster." The tempo was fiendish but HA held on and afterwards practically plopped on stage in exhaustion. When she performed with City Ballet afterwards, she took on the opening movement of Vienna Waltzes and showed off a romantic side to her, one that was also featured in the Schumman. She also does the fouttee part in Goldberg Variations, proving she's still got some technique left in her. Her glamour, stage manners and lovely line are a wonderful part of NYCB.

This article annoyed me as well. Taking him on point-by-point: "Educated, younger people of my acquantance do not often make the trip to broadway and sixty-sixth street" -- 66th is not exactly Peru. Doesn't this guy's "young" friends travel further than the Joyce Theater? It's a 20-minute ride on the 1 or 9 local from the village to the upper west side. Ross' friend from the East Village couldn't find the complex? This is an "educated" person? Read a subway map. Lincoln Center is easier to get to than MOMA or the Bronx Zoo. There's a major subway line going straight to it, not to mention several buses and it's just a few blocks from the A, B, C, and D lines. And its 10-15 minutes away from Penn Station, as well. "Lincoln Center is an environment with little warmth" -- Not according to the replies here. It is a great public space. There's a park and a relecting pool to the left and right of the Met and a great landmark in the fountain to meet people. When the weather is warm and there's dancing and food available outside, it's a welcoming place where it's fun to hang out even if you're not going inside the theaters. "airport terminals offer better spots to sit and wait" Just not true. The State Theater has small tables with stools on the promenade, along with benches. There are benches on every level. Same goes for Avery Fisher Hall and Alice Tully Hall. Only Ross' valued Opera House has a lack of places to sit. "The State Theatre is not so much acoustically bad as acoustically null." -- This might be as the theater was designed for dance, yet, as Beverly Sills pointed out in the NYTimes article, nobody complained about the acoustics during the New York City Opera's heyday. When Lincoln Center was being designed the heads of the major organizations were invited to make stipulations to the plans. Balanchine and the head of the Met did, Berstein supposedsly was not interested. Therefore, it's not a surprise that the State Theater is great for ballet (speaking as a person who often sits in the cheap seats, the sightlines are great) and the Met is perfect for the big productions done by the opera company. And Avery Fisher has had more facelifts than Joan Rivers and it still has poor acoustics. Ross praises NJPAC. Well, I've got to agree that it's a lovely space and I wish Manhattan had another theater of its size for dance (there is one in New York City -- BAM in Brooklyn). One of the things I like about NJPAC is, like NYST, it has a very democratic public space. Which brings me to Ross' assertion that "you cannot move around and talk to other patrons; there is no sense of a shared experience..." Well, get off your a-- and go to the promande, walk around one of the rings. Something that's really wonderful about NYST is the promenade -- where patrons of all classes can mingle. During intermissions, there's ballet critics sitting alongside solitary people reading books, sitting on the benches, and socialites standing in line at the bar next to families with children. There is a green room, but many people hang out on the promenade and when it's warm, it's nice to go out on the terrace. That's something you don't get at Met (although it's a little warmer at Avery Fisher), where I think most people just mill on the same level as their seats. Two opera companies side-by-side. This is tricky. I think NYCO has tried different things to become unique -- the cheaper alternative to the Met, more experiemental than the Met, more historically correct than the Met. They might try scheduling things differently at Lincoln Center, by having both opera companies work out of the Met and both ballet companies at NYST. But of course, there would be fights over which company is the "home" company of the building. And it is fun to have NYCB and ABT going on at the same time during the summer. Dispelling Ross' claim that there's no excitement, ballet at Lincoln Center and the yearly Festival bring a lot of excitement to me. There's a time when NYCB, ABT and SAB all are giving shows and it seems like everybody is dancing and talking about ballet when you walk around the area. Ross mentions the gloom of "upper" broadway. Does he (is Ross a man? I'm not sure) ever venture higher than 66th street? Maybe because I went to school Manhattan School of Music on 122nd street and Colombia on 116th, but I don't think of Lincoln Center as so far uptown. Plus, there's tons of restuarants that stay open late and during the warmer months have ouside cafes. Ross adresses that people might be scared off attending shows at a big, intimidating venue such as Lincoln Center. This maybe true, but he doesn't offer any solutions.

Frankly, it bothers me when the choreography is changed in a musical -- to me, it's just as much a part of the overall "text" of the show as the music and book. A few years ago, On the Town was re-done by Lubovich. Oklahoma is so associated with the original choreography. I've seen this done with West Side Story as well (is there any other musical that is more connected with its choreographer?!). I believe it is changed just to be "new" not because the old choreography is outdated.

A link to photoes from the festival: http://www.ballet.com.ru/cgi-bin/list.cgi?...ry&day=〈=en

Ari, I beleive the article you mentioned came out a year after Balanchine died in Ballet News. Farrell was still dancing. That would put a little different perspective on her comments.