Dale

I don't think I wrote that they shouldn't. Balanchine changed steps to suit dancers many times. My arguement is that just because a dancer is comfortable with a slow tempo, markings and the intent of the choreographer (especially one whose creations are wedded so to the music) should not be ignored. In the "Balanchine Lives" documentary, the dancers learning Theme and Variations said they forced themselves to stay with the tempo and not slow things down. Not ever dancer or singer is suited to ever part. And a dancer doesn't have to change a ballet just because it was made on another. And while Opera does feature changes (high notes brought down etc..), instrumental music really does not (except for the odd case). Very rarely. I've listened to several different recordings of, for example, Beethoven's 9th, and, yes, different conductors do have different interpretations, but they don't change notes or turn a largo into an allegro (again, I add, not very often). You mentioned that changes are not usually made by the orchestra. Well, isn't the corp de ballet sort of like the players of the orchestra? The example I used had the corps complaining about a change Isabel Fokine wanted to make. In the past, I played Pictures at an Exhibition by Mussorsky but orchestrated by Ravel. This is the popular version. But Leonard Slatkin was researching all the other (over 70 he told us) orchestrations of the piano piece. So he had us play one by some Russian guy (sorry, I forgot his name). At no time did the tuba player stand up and complain that the bass clarinet now had his solo. Or the trumpet player go up to Slatkin and say, "Well, Maestro. I've always played the solo at the opening, and even though this guy gave it to the flute, we've always done it the other way." We might have thought it but we did as we were told. Bringing this back to the Kirov thread -- Andrei, you made a good point about the corps dancers. (And Eric, don't be so picky [This message has been edited by Dale (edited May 15, 2000).]

Intuviel, I abhor bad tempi in any company or performance. And I love museums too. Unfortunately, Petipa doesn't have an active foundation to preserve his works, but Balanchine, Tudor and Robbins do. And if a representative goes to a company to mount one of the trusts' ballets, then I think they have a right to ask or insist on the proper performance practice of those ballets, including the tempi. Having read articles, attended symposium, and seen documentaries with coaches for the Balanchine and Robbins trusts, I can say they sound sensitive to artists' needs without sacrificing the ballets. So when Francia Russell goes to St. Petersburg to teach Svetlana Zakahova Apollo and says that she was difficult, I'll take her word for it. And while we've touched on this topic, as a musician, I find it interesting that people in ballet think nothing of changing choreography or tempos to suit themselves ("Well, the choreographer would want me to look good, right?") while in music that just doesn't usually happen. I just couln't go up to the conductor and say, "You know that high B in the horn solo in Beethoven's 7th? We'll high notes aren't my specialty. I'm going to take it down an octave. And those trills in the Academic Overture? I don't do trills so well, so I'm doing arpeggios. I've got my own version of the solo in Tchiak 5 too." I'm sorry, I'd have been replaced. Now, I'm not saying changes are never made in the music world or ballet should be the same way, but could you imagine a La Boheme where Mimi doesn't die at the end but goes off with the doctor? [This message has been edited by Dale (edited May 15, 2000).]

I've also read interviews with coaches from the Balanchine Trust talk about the difficulties in mounting productions at the Kirov. Not just the ever-changing casts and politics but the dancers' stubbornness to do something a different way. In an interview in Ballet Review a few years ago, one the Kirov's own ballet coaches spoke about how difficult it was in trying to get the dancers to observe the proper tempos in Symphony in C, saying "Our ballerinas are ladies of leasure." And yes, I would at least try what Isabel Fokine was asking for. Just because you've done something for 100 years one way doesn't mean it is the right way. If I suddenly had a new Editor in Chief, who wanted copy to have a different style than the one we were using I'd have to go with the new style. I would have to respect his/her authority no matter if I was the second coming of Red Smith. If the Kirov's brass thought Fokine was worthy enough to come in and teach a different interpretation of a ballet, than as a dancer I might complain a little privately with my fellow dancers but I'd act professionally and listen to what she had to say. [This message has been edited by Dale (edited May 14, 2000).]

I agree with you Marc that the Kirov should not chuck all of its heritage to turn into NYCB-East but I don't agree about Apollo. Do the Kirov dancers get tired of dancing Giselle until they drop? Or Swan Lake? No, they always say the more they perform a part, the greater their understanding becomes etc... Well, Zelensky has said that dancing Apollo is one of his greatest joys, and never fails to renew his love of ballet. I'm sure other artists feel the same way. Of course, with your knowledge of the troupe I will usually defer to you, but after watching the Kirov dancers' reaction to I. Fokine, I have come to the conclusion that they are extremely set in their ways and loath to try anything new that might push them to extend themselves. And while it is true, NYCB does not perform Jacobson or Zakhovov, they do put on at least two new ballets a season (around four a year), and without debating the merits of said choreography, they do try. ABT has tried Duato and Graham. I'm definitely not for a homogenizing of ballet companies and the jack-of-all-trades-master-none style rep, I do think companies can expand their base of ballets without betraying their style. I mean, the Kirov is being asked to perform Jewels, not Variations pour une Porte et un Soupir! Marc wrote: "As shocking as it may sound to you, but it does occur that dancers consider a ballet like "Apollo" an unbearable, dated bore." Maybe what they don't like is being told that they can't change steps to suit themselves and perform at whatever tempo they like (usually a dirge) no matter what the composers' markings are. [This message has been edited by Dale (edited May 14, 2000).]

Marc, is there any validity to the Vishneva rumor? It would be interesting to get to see her so often at ABT (but maybe not so good for her growth as a dancer).

I don't usually give Kiselgoff her due but she wrote in her review that McKerrow and Malakhov performed the Tschiak Pas as if it were Giselle. I was thinking Coppelia! At one point McKerrow put her hands behind her back, skipped into position and then simpered to Malakhov, who simpered back. I thought I was going to be sick it was so cloying.

Leigh, did you see Weese in the Wheeldon ballet? Because if you hadn't, she and Ringer dance the part, in my opionion, different from each other. Weese was much more mysterious in the pas de deux, and chic in the last section. The pas de deux looked like a man trying to hold on to an elusive vision. Whereas, Ringer was much warmer and womanly. The duet was a woman telling a man how she loved him. At the end, she wasn't as crisp as Weese but jazzy.

Oh Ari, I was at that performance too. She was in row A and really thought the dancers were just being coy. A few nights later two women next to me (who, by their talk, sounded as if they go to the ballet pretty regularly) didn't understand about the pause, and were happy when I told them it comes in two parts. I think the problem is that the "order" is in very small print, and after looking at the dancers' names in the program, few people read on. When the ballet is performed last in the program, almost an eighth or more of the audience gets up and leaves (and misses the best part IMO). Some nights are different than others at NYCB. There was a performance of Episodes this past season with a really experienced crowd -- they got everything and really appreciated what, in my opinion, was an excellent performance. Then there are the audiences who will only clap for Whelan or Woetzel as if to say, "Oh, I know them so they must be good." But the ABT audience is out of control, whistling and clapping every element sometimes, especially those slow turns of Carreno's. I was at a mixed bill when his fans were going wild, then some SAB kids decided that it was fun just to scream at any pause. It was too weird, like being at the circus. However, I read a couple of dancers that felt that American audiences were too reserved and preferred those in the UK.

Oh, Jeannie I'm so happy that you've asked about Monique Meunier! I know that you usually don't prefer her. I have a feeling that PM holds your views on Aurora and Monique (hope that she is back soon) will most likely continue being the essence of calm and serenity as the Lilac Fairy. But how about this on emploi, would Maria Kowroski be out of the question as Aurora. She is tall but has a youthful, fresh manner -- a little bit like Zakharova. I saw Whelan do Aurora the last time the ballet as on at NYCB and she did well but was still better as the Lilac. I haven't entered into this discussion because I just don't feel I know "classical" ballet that well. But I do sort of classify according to me own little system. Sometimes I think of Symphony in C -- each movement has a different type of ballerina (bravura/classical, adagio, allegro/soubrette, classical/demi-soloist). Does that sound strange?

A peek at Jaffe's bio shows she went to both schools. But what I was wondering is whether she had to chose beween NYCB and ABT?

I was reading an article by Octavio Roca on ABT's new Swan Lake and it, to me, brought up some interesting thoughts about evening length ballets vs. one act works. Roca wrote: "In the parochial dance world that plays down the role of narrative ballet, this may be the occasion to reconsider the role of George Balancine's so-called abstract dances in today's repertory and perhaps to rediscover the work of the other genius of the Balanchine generation, Antony Tudor, together with the entire enterprise of dramatic ballet. Everyone except critics seems to love story ballets, even as many American critics betray an inordinate fondness for ballets devoid of dramatic content. Are such favorites as Giselle, the Nutcracker, and Swan Lake the highest achievements of an art form or simply guilty pleasure in which an audience must be indulged? ...." And he quotes several ABT people: "Frankly, even the idea of abstract ballet never made sense to me," said (Kevin) McKenzie. "When I was a dancer, I never really wanted just a meaty dancing part. I always wanted a role. I have been very lucky." "What keeps us interested is not the steps," (Susan) Jaffe said. "It is not just technique. It's funny, when I started out I had scholarships to both the School of American Ballet and ABT. I chose ABT, because I always wanted to dance Swan Lake and Giselle. The Balanchine repertory is beautiful, but it didn't call for my soul." How many people out there agree with these sentiments? Personally, I believe great one-act ballets can contain just as much story and emotion as longer works. The works of Balanchine and Robbins are even more immeadiate for me and emotionally touching because they don't contain "roles" but feelings. They're more universal, for me, because they are about men and women, not a prince and a swan, or a fairy tale. That's not to say I don't appreciate the classics but there is room for both forms, without placing one over the other. And I was puzzled by Jaffe's statement. 1) when she said she chose between SAB and ABT did she mean NYCB and ABT. Because one is a school and the other a company. 2) I disagree with her assessment of the Balanchine repertoire -- I guess she never saw Serenade or Liebesleider. There is a lot of "soul" in those ballets.

Manhattnik, one of the reasons Zelensky left New York (among a few others) was to dance in London with Bussell. Before he left in 1997, he guested with her and danced Tschaikovsky pas de deux together in England, and he partnered her at NYCB in Swan Lake a few times that she guested. At the Royal, they've danced La Bayadare, Manon, Romeo and Juliet, Swan Lake, Ramonda, and a few other things. They were supposed to do Apollo together but the Balanchine Foundation stopped the production due to the 2nd cast. She danced with him, at his request, at the Kirov in La Bayadare. Plus in Galas. So they've danced quite a bit. But I thought his attention kept coming in and out (maybe due to jet lag because he enjoys dancing with Bussell, who he calls "the most beautiful dancer in the world"). I'm glad you miss Monique Meunier too (she was at the gala though). And great review.

Both sides have a case. My feeling is that if you decide to leave during the curtain calls, get out fast. Don't get up (blocking someone else's view), slowly put on your coat, then realize there is a curtain call and just stand there. If your leaving do it and get out of everybody else's way.

Manhattnik, you put my sentiments about Wendey's Swan Lake perfectly. Having seen her fabulous Balanchine rendition, I was expecting something special but was disappointed to see the herky-jerky performance. She did not dance with her usual fluidity -- her attack was just so strong and she looked very hard. The tempos did not help. Her "fourth act" was much better than her "Act II." Her Black Swan was marred by the 32 fouttes that traveled from the back to the front of the stage within the first 10 and it looked like the bailed on them when she figured she might finish in the orchestra pit. In addition, she took the characterization way too far. Sigfried is still supposed to think that she is Odette. As far as I'm concerned, Ringer stole the show, both in the Act I Pas de trois and the Act II pas de quatre -- her diagonal at the end of the pas de quatre never fails to give my the chills in its brilliance. Wouldn't it be interesting to see her as the Swan (with Millepied or Boal)?

I knew I should have gone tonight Did Maria K. manage to make her debut in In G Major? I tried to catch that on Tuesday but she was replaced by Wendy Whelen. I guess now I know she was sick.

Danilova also writes about Pavlova in her autobiography, and said that technique was never an issue with Pavlova, but that she had some special magic when she performed. I don't have the book in front of me but she goes into a little bit more detail. Dale

I'm glad you liked it. I hope I did her justice in your eyes.

Yes, Leigh you're right and I've enjoyed watching videos there myself. What I meant to say is that the tapes are not for sale.

No, the videos aren't for sale. At least the ones that are on view during the exhitit are (at least about 98 percent) from non-available archives. However, if you go give yourself plenty of time for the exhibit. The two video stops take about 20 minutes or more to watch. The first one is early stuff to about the 50s to late 60s. The second is mostly Live from Lincoln Center stuff, and a few things Balanchine had tapped in Germany during the early 70s. What struck me was the beautiful programs that Balanchine and Kirstein had made up -- most by important artists of the time. It's a shame that economics make these almost a thing of the past. I also found the costumes and personal photos from dancers' colections to be of most interest. There were also framed clippings that really showed how much more pr ballet got during the ballet boom of the 60s and 70s. Peter Martins was on the cover of Esquire and (I think) either Time or Newsweek. A ballet dancers or director would have to take a plane hostage in order to have a slim chance to get on the cover of a national news weekly. Dale

Makhalina dances the Dryaid queen in the Don Q. with the Kirov (I know I won't spell these names right) with Terekhova and Ruzimatov. Pretty good except the camera work is too far away. Dale

I think some find Nichols bland because she is very subtle musically. I don't think it's time to put her out to pasture. Last season, she was a joy to watch in In G Major, Liebeslieder Walzer, Dances at a Gathering, Glazounov Pas de Deux, Diamonds, and Goldberg Variations. I had liked her in the final movement of Vienna Waltzes but last season I thought Kistler gave the superior performance in that ballet. However, I was pleased to see she "retired" from Brahms-Schoenberg Quartet and Symphony in C. She still has a lot to give, and like Mary said, to show us. Dale

Barb and Alexandra brought up a point that I take into consideration when reading a critic -- where that critic is coming from, or their preferences. For instance, if Critic A prefers dramatic ballet, then I take that into account in a review of an abstract ballet. I think this point was brought up in a Tobi Tobias review of Eiffman. She said that that type of ballet wasn't her cup of tea but that the audience, which did appreciate that form, was very moved by the performance. I think that was very fair of her. She allowed the reader to know where she was coming from. She could have just ripped it apart. I'd also like to add something about objectivity. Because I've been thinking whether getting free tickets would alter a critics review of a ballet. Journalists have codes of ethics, just like other professions. It's up to each writer to govern themselves. If anything, I'm more careful when writing about people I admire or like. Also, I don't like the idea of papers only covering events for which they pay. Let's say I'm Rich Critic and I can afford to go to everything. Then there is Poor Critic, who can only cover a few things. Or a large paper vs. a smaller paper. That would only allow for one econimic viewpoint on a certain event (in this case a ballet). I don't think we'd be better off. Dale

The thought crossed my mind that with a full-length version of Swan Lake at NYCB, that Balanchine's would not be performed. It's a shame. However, maybe not. As with Martins' Sleeping Beauty, the production requires permanent sets - meaning usually a one or two week string of performances. The company could schedule the one-act version anytime during the season without worrying about the sets. I was told that they company always has strong turnover when the ballet is scheduled (although that could be due to the Swan Lake factor). It certainly would allow them to jazz up a weeknight performance and make a little money.

Comp tickets and other freebees often comes up in my job in sports. My professor at Columbia told us not to take anything, don't eat in the media room, and don't take any of the little gifts (even those under $50 which is generally considered the water mark for accepting gifts). Unfortunately, I've never covered any of the big "pay day" events, like the Super Bowl , that give out lots and lots of stuff. And now most of the press rooms in sports charge for food -- $5 at Madison Square Garden, $7 at Shea Stadium. I think the food is just a matter of convience, so a writer can interview the team before the game, eat, then watch the game. Well, a co-worker once pointed out that if I could be bought off with a $35 sweatshirt or $45 canvas bag, then I'm a sorry excuse as a journalist. In addition, the seats are often worse than you can buy. However, over the last few months I've noticed the arts are very different. Tobi Tobias wrote in her review of NYCB Fall opening night that when she tried to get an invitation to the 50th Reunion dinner, she was told only "Anna" and "Clive" were invited. Well, anybody who reads the New York Times or New York Post know that Kisselgoff and Barnes generally write positive reviews of the company. For these one could surmise that in "exchange" they received better access than other writers (especially those who are more negative such as Tobias). The question is, which way serves the readers more. Does that access allow the readers to learn more about the company? It could. Although I have to admit that deprevation could be the mother of invention as it was for Tobias, who wrote a very interesting article about the anniversary without going to the dinner.

Robert La Fosse's autobiography had an interesting chapter about working with Kirland. They danced La Sonnambula together and he noted that every little nuance had to planned before hand and rehersed 100 times. But that on stage, she performed it as if she was doing it for the first time. She had a strange genius. I imagine that she was one of those dancers Balanchine probably told, "Don't think. Do." She was absolutely beautiful in many things but when she got so thin, it was hard to watch her. I read her biography and like others, I found it distasteful that she blamed others for her own actions. Allegra Kent's book was much better in this regard than Kirland's -- looking at her life unapologetically but with humor and without excuses. I'm afraid that when I think of Kirkland, I think of a person who destroyed a gift they had and then blamed everybody else when it was broken. Dale Dale [This message has been edited by Dale (edited 03-10-99).]