FauxPas

Now that I know that you are able to do this, I will post a Youtube link to a clip from this performance: This is not from the same source as the VAI release, as I would know since MarloManners66 and I are on such intimate terms that well, we are often thinking the same thing at the same time and have the same taste in everything... (How could such thing be...it's almost like we are the same person...) You will find more selections from this performance if you click on various links on the right.

This was put out on a weird Russian label with a section missing from the end of Act III. I actually prefer Plisetskaya here to the 1958 where she looks heavy and dances without poetry. I think this filming has her very best Odette. Alexander Bogatyrev is Siegfried and Boris Efimov is Von Rothbart.

This whole idea of Part staying in New York and working out her problems or McKenzie having a Scrooge in the last scene of "A Christmas Carol" total change of heart and making Veronika a principal is quixotic. That would be wonderful, but it ain't gonna happen. It is also likely that neither party wants it to happen. Remember Christine Dunham who was a principal with ABT in the eighties? She had a baby in the nineties and never got her full strength back as a dancer. She was kept on season after season still listed as a principal dancing not her great classical roles but the Czardas Lead Dancer and Bathilde and an occasional Hanna in "The Merry Widow". That could be Part's fate as well. Having the title but no performances. Really she faces a difficult path either way - either stay at ABT and know you are going nowhere or face the unknown with the requisite potential difficulties and failures. She has chosen the latter route. Better pursue other opportunities in a less compromised environment, a fresh start. However, Veronika could take the problems she had at ABT with her wherever she goes - technical issues, etc.

One thing I don't think was a good idea was announcing in the interview the fact that she wanted to dance with the Royal Ballet. Yes, I think it would be a plus for both parties but usually ballet companies like to be the ones who take the initiative. Part is not such a Makarova/Ananiashvili/Vishneva prima ballerina superstar that she can tell a company "I want to join your company" and they will immediately comply with her wishes. Makarova when she defected wanted to join the Royal Ballet but I believe Sibley or Merle Park said "over my dead body" and Makarova had to settle for ABT. Makarova said that she understood their attitude since all these ladies had danced for years in the shadow of Fonteyn and weren't going to be displaced by a foreign import. I also wonder if Part is considered "damaged goods" inside the ballet world. Many ballerinas have left their home companies and just disappeared into nothingness, occasional reports of guesting but then zip. Meunier is one sad example. Giuseppe Picone gave an interview where he announced that he was going to be made principal at ABT except that he got injured and that he was going to be Kevin McKenzie's successor as a dancer. Then his contract was not renewed at the end of that season. I haven't heard much of him since. A happy counter-example is the fortunate career of Alexandra Ansanelli at the Royal Ballet. The fate of Ansanelli would be the best of all possible outcomes for Veronika, the fate of Meunier, the worst. I think the Het Ballet in Amsterdam would take Veronika and Marcelo Gomes guests there frequently. That seems the most practical move.

All I can say is that Veronika made ABT a more interesting and diverse company. But she needs to be a prima, not a soloist because she is so different, so unique. This uniqueness also makes her not an ideal "team player" which is what McKenzie clearly wants. I am not sure that given the way her career has been shaped that she is so "adored" by McKenzie but that is just informed speculation. Clearly last season was supposed to be the turnaround where she was featured in the opening night gala with the other principals, given the opening night of a new production and danced a new role in a full-length classic, "La Bayadere". Well, it didn't happen quite so smoothly. Her performance in the opening night gala was a dud. I must disagree with Natalia, I found her lovely but miscast as Aurora but she didn't disgrace herself or the company or Petipa. Much of it was lovely and her serenity and grace helped anchor that messy production. She brought class to the evening. Unfortunately perhaps the failure of the production rubbed off on her, conveniently for the real malefactors. The "Bayadere" was a total success, especially the second evening. Then she got injured yet again and missed the yearly event of her Odette/Odile in "Swan Lake" with Marcelo. I am very sad to see the splitting up of the Marcelo/Veronika partnership. That had magic that consoled one for losing Ferri/Bocca. This has been coming for some time. I am afraid but when the casting for the Fall City Center season went up, I knew that Veronika's moment had come and passed. Good things were not going to happen for her at ABT. I think Veronika can take some of the blame, her dancing and physical conditioning have been uneven - especially in her first seasons when she was new to the company. Rehearsing and classes may not have been as smooth and stress-free as possible due to some language barriers and insecurities. Despite not dancing all that often, she has had a full share of injuries over the last six years. It seems she also plateaued at the Kirov-Mariinsky before she left Russia. I wish her the best and hope she finds a wonderful new home somewhere where she can fulfill all her potential in an understanding and supportive environment that also challenges her, supports her talent and uniqueness and imposes the discipline that will make her talent fully manifest itself. You take our love with you, Veronika.

I saw Nina as Odette/Odile last summer with ABT (with a superb Corella in his best Prince Siegfried ever!). I didn't think she looked physically or technically over the hill at all. She is scheduled to dance Kitri this coming June 14th. Now "Don Quixote" is on a level of technical difficulty where an over-the-hill dancer can't hide. "Swan Lake" has lyrical sections that can flatter an older dancer with strong emotional projection and musical phrasing.

I suspect that this may have been the 1978 telecast on "Dance in America" of the Michael Smuin choreography from the San Francisco Ballet. This is some more information about that telecast: Romeo and Juliet 1978. 147 min. : sd. color Notes:Telecast on WNET-TV's Dance in America series on June 7, 1978. Producers: Emile Ardolino and Judy Kinberg. Director: Merrill Brockway. Writer: Tobi Tobias. Introduction: Richard Thomas. Lighting designer: Ralph Holmes. Choreography (reconceived for television): Michael Smuin. Music: Serge Prokofiev. Sets and costumes: William Pitkin. Performed by members of The San Francisco Ballet: Diana Weber (Juliet), Jim Sohm (Romeo), Attila Ficzere (Mercutio), Gary Wahl (Tybalt), John McFall (Benvolio), Dennis Marshall (Paris), Michael Dwyer (Lord Capulet), Anita Paciotti (Lady Capulet), Tina Santos (Juliet's nurse), Lew Christensen (Friar Lawrence), Allyson Deane (Juliet's reflection), with Vane Vest, Betsy Erickson, Robert Sund, Val Caniparoli, Gina Ness, and others. This is lifted from this discussion on SFB videos: http://ballettalk.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=9389 This has never been released commercially. However, the research collection of the New Public Library for the Performing Arts may have it, as may the Museum of Television and Radio.

Okay, so I saw this last night, Friday in all that slush. I didn't have a terrible time at all. The least effective piece for me was the Ratmansky "Pierrot Lunaire". This was Diana dressed like a Pierrette with three Pierrots. She had more step-heavy academic choreography than the men did. I didn't find the three men sufficiently differentiated though Igor Kolb stands out for his superb virtuosity. As Schoenberg's song cycle played on (superbly performed), Diana seemed to be involved in various flirtations with the three men, various duets and pas de trois in different combinations. Though her part was well-crafted, any pretty talented ballerina could do it, it wasn't a star turn. I found that the piece became repetitive and there was little correlation between the choice of music and the action - the two did not seem to support each other effectively. Finally at the end, the men lifted Diana up and she stared at what probably was the moon, the only indication of the lunar fixation of the title. I wouldn't want to see it again and think it is not one of Ratmansky's best pieces. The Moses Pendleton F.L.O.W. is not good ballet or bad ballet, it is good Pilobolus circa 1978 which is also good and entertaining Pilobolus circa 2008. Anyone who has seen and enjoyed Pilobolus and also Momix more recently know how inventive Pendleton can be in using the human body as a surreal kaleidoscope with the aid of lights, props and mirrors. You don't need Kirov trained dancers to do this but it was fun and fascinating to see them take to it with such elan. It was a fun and light diversion and probably gave Diana a little rest and the audience a great deal of enjoyment. The last piece by Rhoden was the best of the evening. Here was real contemporary ballet and it was fascinating to see these classically trained Russian dancers throw themselves into it though Desmond Richardson (looking mighty fine) had some extra little nuances and stylistic gambits to offer. He also was an excellent partner. Finally, Diana had some challenging and inventive modern ballet choreography to perform and she delivered. This is one of the pieces that seems to be all about men and women and sex and everyone gets more naked as it goes on (just to dancing in their scanties of course, no Full Monty here). Of course, I am no fan of electronic music and that was a downer but I think the piece did work. Diana was remarkably hard-working here and this was a great opportunity not just for her but for the choreographers and the supporting dancers. Not a total triumph, she hasn't found her Fokine or Balanchine to make her an important muse of modern ballet yet but an enjoyable diversion, if you aren't expecting genius. Very nicely produced too with classy costumes, live music and lighting.

Carla Fracci danced Giselle with ABT in 1991 at the age of 55 and this is when I saw it. I wouldn't be surprised if it was not her last Giselle. This was during Jane Hermann's brief period as artistic director. Anyway, supposedly Hermann went on and on saying how poetic and wonderful Fracci was in the role and did you see how she did this piece of business?, etc. Susan Jaffe told her "Listen, when I start to look like that, shoot me!". I wonder if Jaffe would have been as brutal when she was facing her own farewell in her early forties in the role of Giselle. I was of two minds about the performance, I got a lot out of her acting and she improved dance-wise as the evening went on. There were several places where you could see exactly why Fracci was a huge star and famous in the role. I wasn't seeing her in 1967 but what I saw gave me a clear idea of what her prime was like. There were many moments where no mental adjustments and projections had to be made. Many people in the audience, her fans, had seen her in 1967 with Bruhn and they were able to superimpose over the current reality an image of what they remembered. The 1991 Fracci would jog these memories and sometimes compete with them. Others, like me, had to use their imagination to fill in the gaps. The compromises and cheating were fairly obvious and Julio Bocca's youth emphasized her maturity but she nonetheless owned the role in her way. Somehow I don't think we have the kind of unique superstar ballerinas today who people will want to see stumble through their roles in their sixties and seventies as we have done with Fracci, Alonso, Fonteyn and Plisetskaya. Once the technique falters, most of today's ballerinas will hang up their toe shoes in their forties. I think Darci Kistler hangs on not only because she is Peter Martins' wife but because she was Balanchine's last muse, the last link to the company's founding genius and choreographer. With Nichols already gone, when Darci finally retires a last link with the past will be broken.

Alicia Alonso like many a prima ballerina assoluta is a law unto herself and a monstre sacré. Weirdly, the role of Giselle like the role of Hamlet attracts performers who are very young and also very old. This is maybe because the part is of a very young person who in a short life experiences a full emotional development similar what most people develop over a lifetime. Ballerinas start in the part young and are touching because of the freshness and vulnerability their youth gives them. As they mature they have more emotional insight into the role and carry the dramatic arc better. Hopefully, technically they can continue to handle the choreography which despite not being flashy is actually very demanding. I saw Carla Fracci dance it in her fifties and Ekaterina Maximova dance it at 49. The recently departed Natalia Bessmertnova danced the part into her fifties as I'm sure Fonteyn did as well. I saw Bessmertnova dance Act II in her late forties. I have also seen 19 year old dancers in it. In some cases I am now experiencing seeing those young dancers mature in the role. Recently, "Giselle" was chosen by ABT as the farewell vehicle for Susan Jaffe and Amanda McKerrow. I will probably end up seeing Nina Ananiashvili who is in her mid-forties dance it this Spring. Among my older Giselles, Fracci was walking through a lot of the choreography in the early nineties saving herself up for the entrechats in Act II. However, her stage presence and mime told me a lot about why her Giselle was special. No apologies had to be made for Ekaterina Maximova who glowed with youth and vitality and still could do justice to the choreography (her husband Vasiliev was past it sadly). Word of warning: seeing a performer live and from a distance is more forgiving than the objective and cruel close-up scrutiny of a video camera. Probably those close-ups where you see Alonso covered in Kabuki make-up looking like Vasiliev's mother with every tremor magnified must be a painful sight to see. In the theater, the performer oddly has more control over your perceptions and can telegraph an image to the audience of what they want them to see. If the performer has a connection with the audience they can kind of create an emotional rapport that will convince them of things their eyes contradict. That takes a very special performer, and Alonso very likely is that kind of performer. However, you can only go so many times to the well and this might be it. I also seem to remember that Alonso around 1984 televised a "Giselle" Act II on a TV gala with Jorge Esquivel, I think. I remember two things - lightning quick entrechats that drove the audience wild and the blind Alonso colliding her arm on the cross as she bourreed quickly offstage as the ghostly spirit of Giselle.

I posted an inquiry about this before but never got a response. I picked up a DVD of the Bessmertnova/Lavrovsky "Romeo and Juliet" (Lavrovsky choreography) as part of a Bolshoi Ballet Collection set. Adding to Canbelto's comment about the lack of playfulness in Bessmertnova's Juliet, this filming is missing the scene where Juliet bounds on hitting the Nurse with a pillow and jumping on her lap. Even the almost 50 year-old Ulanova pulls off this scene in the 1950's Lenfilm movie. In the DVD I have, Bessmertnova makes her entrance in the Capulet ball scene serenely seated and receiving admirers in a very ladylike and mature manner. She gets what seems to be entrance applause so my guess is that it is in fact her first appearance and the earlier scene of Juliet and her Nurse (with Lady Capulet entering later with Paris) was in fact cut. My guess is that Bessmertnova was in fact too mature, tall and elegant a presence to pull of the "playful child" scene and Grigorovich simply cut the scene. Can anyone from Russia (Marga, Natalia?) confirm that NB did cut this scene? Did she ever do it? BTW: VAI is slated to put out another filming of the Bolshoi "Romeo and Juliet" with Maximova and Vasiliev! I don't know when it was filmed but I bet Maximova still today has the playfulness and exuberance to pull off that first scene with the Nurse!

I was actually rather surprised to see that this made Yahoo's newsboard: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080219/en_af...letbessmertnova Lovely picture of Bessmertnova with Plisetskaya. I love Bessmertnova and saw her live close to the end of her career in Chicago in the late eighties on a "Stars of the Bolshoi" tour. I think she did the "Dying Swan" and "Giselle" Act II with Yuri Vasyuchenko. Anyway, I find her a perfect blend of feminine expressive lyricism with sterling classical strength underlying it. She is a perfect blend of technique and lyricism. Sometimes a little distant as a dramatic interpreter but a wonderful, wonderful dancer. Interesting note: there are some expatriate Russians who review ballet videos on Amazon.com who consistently belittle and trash her. They don't see what all the fuss was about and try to pass off her status as derived from her marriage to the detested Grigorovich who was the ballet Czar under the Communist regime. Gennady Smakov in "The Great Russian Dancers" delivers a whole chapter to her and despite the marriage and politics is very clearly favorably decided about her importance as a dancer and talent. He compares her interestingly with her near contemporary Makarova and finds Bessmertnova the better technician. Bessmertnova I think elevated everything she touched from her deeply expressive and moving Phrygia in "Spartacus" to that rather flat, cardboard role of Anastasia in "Ivan the Terrible".

No, but I hope it comes to ABT. Any casting suggestions for ABT? I am thinking that Diana Vishneva (in a long blonde wig) has the edgy desperation for the part and the dramatic range. How about Marcelo Gomes as her paparazzo boyfriend? Angel or Ethan Stiefel as K-Fed? Ethan could do the slacker/stoner thing very well. The mind boggles... Perhaps Kevin McKenzie could come back to the stage in the mime role of Dr. Phil?

I was there too and went home very happy. I haven't gone in a few years, so a few of the pieces were unfamiliar though they wouldn't be to those who have gone every year. I think Lunkina did the "Sylphide" PDD a few times before? Ditto the Lacarra/Pierre "Dame du Camellias"? Of course, Tchaik PDD, Le Corsaire PDD, Don Q PDD and Giselle PDD are staples in these gala evenings. However, I felt that in each case, the couples had some unique quality to infuse into them. Some were unfamiliar dancers like the Matvienkos (she is a beauty) who stunned me with their fine individual quality. The classical elegance that Roberta Marquez brought to the "Don Quixote Pas de Deux" kept it from becoming a trite bag of tricks and she was partnered (and well) by that puckish sprite Daniil Simkin, with his offbeat charm and wild virtuosity. The "E Lucevan le Stelle" showed much of Ronald Savkovic's elegance and passion but I could have lived without the feeble Russian tenor the Tencers dug up probably from some Toronto restaurant/café. Frankly a recording of Franco Corelli or Luciano Pavarotti singing the aria would have been better. The tenor actively detracted from the work, his stage presence was quite as awkward as his singing. BTW: I liked both Nakamura and Savkovic but found their choreography boring after a while. I think that Svetlana Lunkina and Lucia Lacarra are two of the most beautiful, expressive ballerinas out there. With the retirement of Ferri, I think that Lacarra is really the torch bearer for this kind of lyrical, emotional and dramatic dancing. I would love it if she guested at ABT and danced a few of Ferri's old roles. I know she does the Cranko Juliet, not the MacMillan but she could be a sensational Manon. How is Lacarra's Giselle? She must have danced it when she was with SFB. Often one dreams of a dancer from one company partnering another dancer from a rival company - it was delight to see Hallberg and Kowrowski together. He is quite big enough for her though the fact that they don't often dance together showed in some tentative lifts and careful partnering. Like Marquez, I wish there was a way they could have found another solo or duet for them. I loved the two Roland Petit pas de deux's: the gorgeous and sensuous "Thais" with Lacarra and Pierre (she has magical arms) and the deeply moving and mysterious "Rose Malade" to music by Mahler with Lunkina and Tsiskaridze. I am unfamiliar with these dances and I found that among the "modern" pieces, they were the strongest choreography. Many, many Russian speaking people around me, including Irina Kolpakova who was seated in the orchestra.

I have only seen Mezentseva on video. I do not like the Giselle, but it has been a while since I watched it. I actually find much to admire in the Odette/Odile in "Swan Lake" on Kultur DVD but she doesn't deeply move me or blow me away. One thing I feel is that she is actually a fairly big-boned rangy woman who has dieted herself into another physical emploi. I don't feel that the fragility is natural but assumed. I think by nature she is a big gestured "heroic" kind of ballerina with some technical limitations as to speed and extension. I also agree with the comments about her limited facial expression. She gives off an aura of remoteness and severity. It is I think among the qualities that attracts the Soviets to her. She isn't voluptuous, flashy or pretty. She is very much "an artist" with an introverted air of suffering. This can also be a kind of a limitation in and of itself. As I remember, her Act I Giselle very much lacks girlishness and joy. Compare for example with Maximova, who I saw live late in her career (at age 49) who radiated the aura of a 16 year old who has discovered life and love in all its fullness and very shortly is going to lose it all. That was something to cry about. Mezentseva's Giselle is very much the tragedienne who is doomed from the start and seems to know it. Mezentseva, like Lopatkina, can also be accused of giving a performance by herself and for herself - lacking rapport with her partners and seeming wrapped up in her own artistic universe. The arms are long and flexible but sometimes the thinness and lack of suppleness create the "brittle" edges some complain about. Other times I can see the "creaminess" and the sculptural elegance others admire. Big, broad gestured steps and dances can be filled out very generously, in other places she seems to break up the movements in an angular fashion. Again, I see this as a conflict between her natural physical endowment - big, long-lined, slow - and her ultra-streamlined, fragile assumed persona. Delicacy isn't really natural to her. She is too big for some of those little gestures. They come more naturally to a Makarova or a Maximova.

My reaction to the Wheeldon ballet last night was that it was fluent, pretty but totally unmemorable. Very few choreographers have Wheeldon's command of the classical idiom but I found it like many Richard Tanner ballets. There is nothing wrong with them, they look nice, the steps fit the music but have nothing to add to the music and you forget the whole thing five minutes after the curtain falls. I also felt that the solo cellist did not have a great night and flubbed several notes (lots of knotty scale work in this piece). My other strong reaction is "Oh, my God, is Sara Mearns gorgeous or what?". Not just the lovely stage face with the wide-set eyes and high cheekbones but the creamy phrasing and lush movements that are fully filled out. Frankly, merely as an excuse to watch her for several minutes at a time, the ballet seemed worth it. I also wonder if the ballerina role in the final pas de deux section of "Stars and Stripes" has ever been better performed than by Ashley Bouder. Insouciance, attack, technical command and sheer, overwhelming joy in movement radiated throughout. She seemed to be having a wonderful time up there and it radiated througout the entire house.

Actually, this streamlining has been going on for over a century. Look at the 1890 Vikharev reconstruction of "Sleeping Beauty" vs. the Sergeyev (Konstantin) production from circa 1950. In the 1890 reconstruction there were lots of elaborately decorated costumes, lots of props, a shell with garlands for Aurora in the Vision Scene to balance on for her entrance. A helmet with lilacs for the Lilac Fairy and a shift and staff. A friend said it looked like British panto and she would know - she is from Ireland and remembers it when. Same dowdy, Victorian overstuffed grandma's attic look. Kind of heavy and literal in places. Sets and costumes in all kinds of colors and shades (sets looked a littled faded and old, the costumes a little too shiny and new). I think a different designer did each act. The corps was broken down into different divisions with different costumes - different lengths of skirt with different decorative objects sewn on them. The different costumes broke the corps into different units dancing together. Lots of mime scenes with no dancing, processions, every thing took time and unfolded in a leisurely, deliberate fashion. If a character wasn't dancing in that scene, he or she wore heeled shoes and a heavy costume. Tutu and slippers only in grand pas sequences. Big apotheosis tableau at the end with a vision of I don't know what, royalty spanning on forever. Then the Sergeyev 1950 version. Get rid of the mime. Get rid of the processions and the court etiquette and routines. Every ballerina is a ballerina in every scene with toe shoes and tutu throughout including Lilac Fairy. Have her dance more. Every corps person dances in same costume, all ballerinas in the short, stiff plate tutu in different pastel colors perhaps but all uniform. Corps is one unit creating unified patterns all over the stage. Sets are drops and simple frame like trellises, candelabras, chandeliers and frame doors and gates, etc. No elaborate built-up sets just drops and a few platforms off to the side and in the back leaving the main stage open for dancing. Color schemes are carefully worked out with coordination between the tonal hues of the scenery and lighting and the costumes. Pastel sets, pastel costumes. Soft brown earth tones in the sets, muted whites, browns, russet, gold and black in the costumes. Lilac comes on in her bright, saturated costume into the hunt scene, she is a vision from another world. Last scene is all blue and white and gold. (No royal apotheosis). In modern design the color palette is restricted to make artistic and dramatic effects. In the Victorian era, very few designers were working that way. The 1946 Messel I thought used some scenic elements of the Diaghilev production (Bakst?) from the 1920's - am I wrong? Or was that just the "Aurora's Wedding" they performed as Sadler's Wells? Anyway, that also is a streamlined and more elegantly stylized visual representation of the 1890 original even though it is closer to the original text than the Sergeyev version. I believe that the current reproduction of Messel's designs once again has altered his designs and shifted the color of the costumes to be more soft, subtle and more unified in palette.

One thing about "Sleeping Beauty" is that it is about harmony, order and balance. The settings should reflect this as Petipa's choreography surely does. My suspicion is that Kevin McKenzie doesn't really appreciate the unhurried, formal, purely classical aspects of this ballet and so he tried to rework it into something BIGGER, FASTER, ACTION-PACKED, CINEMATIC, etc. More guys dancing big jumps. Special effects. Lots of glitzy, bright, shiny sets that look like they come from a kids playset or computer game. However, the order, the symmetry and the elegance are lost. Some of the idiocy and the overthinking clearly has been jettisoned as have some of the more egregious costume, scenic and choreographic excresences, but the misguided sense of the piece probably still lurks under the surface. None of the sets seemed in balance and broke up the stage floor, the costume colors were a riot of pastels and loud bright tones, nothing meshing or creating aesthetic harmony. Now "Sleeping Beauty" has enough internal integrity of conception through choreography and music that it will survive a lot. But when a staging concept, whether modern or "storybook" goes against the essential grain of the work, then it will fail. Compare for example with the Maria Bjornson production that the Royal Ballet toured fifteen years ago and is on the DVD. The sets are deliberately off-kilter and from odd perspectives like a Lewis Carroll or Salvador Dali concept of the ballet. But the choreography was kept very intact and close to the original. The company is brought up in the style and mime and elegance comes naturally to them. You could ignore the oddly stylized sets and see through them to the core of the piece. The ABT production just had random bits where I felt the original magic but then your eyes were assaulted with some new horror.

Did Julie Kent dance Aurora with Ethan and did anyone see them? In the last major runs of the old MacMillan/Georgiadis production about a decade ago, Julie was among the loveliest Auroras I have ever seen. She had a radiant soft English quality like Antoinette Sibley but with some Russian soul and attack worked into it.

Very likely Mladova was used because she was younger and more photogenic. Frankly, a lot of the choreography is gutted and only the can-can survives mostly intact. The direction is too fussy and arty and it is not a satisfying film. There is another contemporary short called "Spanish Fiesta" I believe and that has Danilova. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0165957/ That I would like to see restored. Let's send some e-mails to Turner Classic Movies!

The Victor Jessen film is edited together from live performances from the forties to 1954. All performances have Danilova, Franklin and Massine. However the Flower Seller morphs into different ballerinas sometimes in mid-pirouette. Danilova's hair style changes frequently and by the later footage is noticeably middle-aged. It is on VAI and is a black and white amateur composite filming that runs 37 minutes. This film is a color Hollywood short that runs about 20 minutes and stars Mlada Mladova instead of Danilova.

One major aspect of Gelsey's first book "Dancing on My Grave" is its recklessly confessional tone, she doesn't care who she offends, great or small, but honesty does carry the day. However, she also blames others for her problems, all of them. Even discussing her father's alcoholism, she blames him for her early need for controlling father figures but doesn't connect the dots between her own genetically inherited substance abuse and addiction crises as an adult. In the second book she manages to find herself responsible for some of the bad things that happened to her. The two good aspects that do connect the books are the excellent writing style and the devotion to exploring and creating truthful, emotionally layered dance in rehearsal, coaching sessions and with sympathetic partners onstage. Those bits where Gelsey describes how she created extra rehearsals and sought out expert coaches to help her realize her interpretations show real commitment and passion for art. They are some of the best parts of each book. Quick question: is Gelsey doing Carabosse now in D.C. and is she doing it in the Spring at the ABT Met season?

I too was there with NYSusan and Canbelto (we chatted during the intermissions). I hadn't seen Uliana Lopatkina in over 8 years, having first experienced her as a very young ballerina in the Kirov tours in 1995 and 1999. Her glory is her upper body and her unique arms - they seem to be the biggest, most powerful part of her body - almost longer than her legs and more flexible. Lopatkina has the "russian back" described here and her rather grand, aloof presence reminds one of legendary stars of the last century - Garbo, for example. The spirituality was more pronounced in her interpretation but then supposedly that was the case with Anna Pavlova when she danced the role in Russia over 100 years ago. Her footwork is solid and her technique, though not as brilliant as such allegro technicians as Vishneva or Tereshkina, is more than adequate to express her ideas. Remember that Lopatkina's long absence from the Kirov and its tours was due to a serious foot injury and maternity leave. Her recovery took time. Like Veronika Part, she favors slow, almost sonnambulistic movements that seem weighted and deliberate and yet have great depth and expression in the phrasing. Lopatkina is very musical too much like Part (now that Lopatkina has returned to her assoluta position with the company, Part's departure from the Kirov seems apposite - they are too alike and there would be one too many). She is more of the "danseuse noble" as Alexandra described Part and has a reserved but not unengaged stage presence. I saw passion and even saw a smile in the first act pas de deux with Solor. Obviously, Vishneva has more nervous temperment and is more "realistic" in her acting. I have room for both conceptions, like NYSusan and was enchanted by a lot of what I saw from Lopatkina. I felt it was worth the trip and cost to trek down to see her after such a long hiatus. Kozlov is handsome and an attentive partner. He is not a virtuoso leaper or turner but was pleasingly old-fashioned in his support of his ballerina. I think with more work with the Kirov coaches his level of technique will improve and I look forward to his progress. We must also remember that this kind of tall, solid but not brilliant danseur has a long tradition at the Kirov, not every male dancer was a Nijinsky, Nureyev or Baryshnikov. They were the exceptions, not the rule. There was lots of Vladilen Semenovs and such types all the way back to the beginning. I enjoyed his performance. Tkachenko has the saucy look of a coquette - Gamzatti as Paris Hilton spoiled nymphet. She seemed small-scale and soubrettish next to this heroic pair of lovers. Next to more petite dancers she would seem stronger but there was a real mismatch here, not just of dancer to role but of dancer to dancer. I love "La Bayadere" in all its many forms (have seen the Makarova production at ABT, the Nureyev production with POB, the Vinogradov production for the Universal Ballet derived from the Kirov traditional version and this Chabukiani/Sergeyev production with the Kirov as well as the Vikharev 1900 reconstruction). In my head I love to assemble my ultimate version combining my favorite aspects of each version. But that is another long post. Anyway, a fine afternoon.

Here is a wonderful article about Sarah Bernhardt's silent films: http://www.classicimages.com/1997/june/bernhard.html She still had both legs in 1912 but one was lame and later amputated. I have seen a short clip of her "La Dame aux Camellias" and she is equally hyperkinetic. The whole film must still exist somewhere in an archive, I hope they put it out on video.

The Sarah Bernhardt "Queen Elizabeth" ("Les Amours de la Reine Elisabeth") 1912 silent was available complete on VHS years back and I viewed it at a library. It is kind of hilarious, kind of fascinating and at times very suggestive. Describing the other Elizabeths as reflecting the periods and fashions in which the films were shot, this Elizabeth looks very art nouveau. Bernhardt wears a kind of long, flowing, loose, bohemian night-dress thing that is accented with a ruff and jeweled overcoat. Her hair is in the curly coif that she usually wore in daily life but topped with a heavy crown. Kind of Elizabethan meets turn of the last century French bohemian. I am sure this was filmed before she had her leg amputated but she enters on a litter and gesticulates wildly like she is semaphoring to someone 50 yards away. Bernhardt has enormous energy and is always kept center stage. The camera is stationary and everyone enters and exits like they are onstage. The supporting actors (all quite bad) act as if they are onstage with a very presentational, gestural kind of technique - lots of Delsarte posing. Bernhardt seems more spontaneous and wild, thrashing about in paroxysms of emotion. The others look mechanical and inhuman like marionettes or puppets. Her best scene is over the corpse of the beheaded Essex (tall, leggy Lou Tellegen - her Dutch boy-toy discovery). His head is magically restored to his body and he lies on a bier, Elizabeth enters, mourns over his corpse and notices the ring that would have gained his pardon is missing (stolen by the jealous husband of a rival). Bernhardt has a speech which she is obviously reciting to the deaf camera in toto but there is a simplicity and intimacy of expression here. You can almost hear the silvery voice and see the feminine magic in her eyes and tilt of the head as she draws you in. Here she is still and working more internally and less presentationally, so the camera captures her acting style better. The last scene has Elizabeth entering the throne room and mounting the dais which for reasons that eventually become clear has the floor strewn with large pillows like a hippy living room or harem. Bernhardt is clearly delivering a final tirade in alexandrines bewailing the futility of power when love has been destroyed and all hope of personal happiness is gone. Her arms thrust upward and outward until she has a final paroxysm and falls face down dead on the conveniently placed large pillows anachronistically strewn about on the floor. Finis.