papeetepatrick

I doubt it. Farrell didn't need to be 'beaten' as she'd only been herself, what happened was an 'it takes two to tango' matter; Farrell was listening to herself when she made her decisions. Croce was comparing them both favorably to each other, pointing out their different assets. And when I get the 'Writing in the Dark' collection, I'll quote what she says about the 'Liebeslieder Walzer' production, in which she again compares them, but this time onstage together, and says of Mcbride (I think this is the quote, but I have to wait) 'she is as fascinating as Farrell.' Of course she loved Farrell, who doesn't? but I think she compared them in the most intelligent way possible. That's an excellent example of her own brilliant relationship with her partners. She is always very overtly appreciative of them. That's part of her tremendous appeal to me. No, but it was the obvious dissimilarity that made her capable of appreciating both quite unreservedly IMO. The fact that they were so dissimilar is what made them the greatest two ballerinas dancing for Balanchine during some years, even though Farrell had the bigger profile, and Croce is right about 'Farrell's grandeur'. But her partners are servants to a great degree. What Jack writes about McBride and Villella is a kind of interaction with the male partner I never saw with Suzanne and any of her partners (nor should it have been, she was something more of a 'sacred object'. ) This is superlative, the use of the word 'secretes', and I think is the key to understanding what McBride always did. Now that is inspired, because McBride always had a way of 'secreting'. She never didn't have a sense of secreting, and that is something of what bart and i were discussing some months back about her 'quiet inaccessiblity'. Farrell and McBride both 'secreted' (just love that as a verb) themselves, but, here again, in dissimilar ways. Patty smiles, and very naturally, a lot more than Suzanne ever does. Again, Croce here (at least) just can't keep her eyes off either of them (and I never could either.) I don't think Farrell exemplified Balanchine's approach or 'philosophy' in the purest sense that he defined it verbally, most likely McBride did this. What Farrell did was to take it beyond what he provided her with explicitly, and he knew that she was going ahead and producing some of the work herself that was not purely his own, but he was in love with it more than anyone else's, and so therefore she had a degree of freedom to, perhaps, 'choreograph' within his choreography more than any other ballerina. That was part of Croce's 'grandeur of Farrell'. Sure, everybody knows she had that.

Of course I knew immediately it was about us... ...Diva Worshippers and the men who love them...

I love it! what a hoot! Yay silly season! Not even too hot in NYC this summer, so easier to have more fun.

And that reminds me that I did value WQXR very much, because there were two older ladies, sisters and both deceased by now, who listened to it every day for 35 years or more. It was such a tinny radio I forgot that that was indeed why they knew such a lot about classical music. They always wanted to hear 'Les Preludes' and 'tone poems', as they called them. They were French and disliked Debussy and Ravel, though! Loved 'The Planets' and 'Til Euilenspiegal'. I miss them. And Helene does remind me that I did enjoy the Met broadcasts (always at their apartment.)

I've been thinking about that quite a bit too, all this that you say is right on the money. It's as though it you are always reliable and consistent--even if it's anything but the 'foolish consistency'--you aren't showing the, for lack of a better term, the 'human dimension of mistake and error'. But this itself is, of course, erroneous, since always (or almost always) dancing on a supremely high level is hardly a fault. Of course, if someone needs to fall from time to time, to break the ice and get over nerves or whatever that's for, that's legit too. But I agree that this will make her undervalued in some eyes. She just found it comfortable 'way up there' like that. I think 'sticklike' is a little extreme btw, but works as a textual strategy, as it were, when placed next to Croce's extraordinary paean to Patty's 'incorruptibility' and the rest, especially like that about the 'shyness'. In that case, though, the perceivers and observers really do miss, because a female partnering of the man is just as important when it's well-done--in fact, if it is that well-done, and I certainly think hers is very sensitive indeed, it is all the more reason to celebrate yet another special gift. Also, she never tried to oversell her 'value' either: talk of 'egoless ballerinas' may apply to her more than almost any, and due in great part to her sensitivity to the man. She LOVES them! and that's just adorable. And you never see that more than in the 'Tchai Pas de Deux', she is delighted with dancing with Baryshnikov, and she's not the least bit ashamed to show it! Since Balanchine's male dancers were often thought of as more partner for the ballerina (at least in the sense of major duty--Peter Martins had no illusions that Balanchine was interested in him at first more for being the right tall partner for Suzanne than for any of his other talents, this is in 'Far from Denmark') than vice-versa, this is part of her own independence perhaps? but a very non-flamboyant self-possession, I always keep coming back to the fact that she never tried to draw attention to herself--it just happens naturally.

Oh ha ha, I knew you weren't. In fact, I like some of the 'wild arms', especially in that Farrell performance of 'La Valse', I just had never associated it with McBride, and maybe didn't see the particular performances where that would have been more pronounced. I defintiely think 'sweetness' is something that always comes across in her dancing too. I would have never objected to the 'wild arms' with McBride either, I always just thought she was too fast to have time to do them, especially as Swanilda! Helene, thanks. I saw her do 'Valse Triste' several times with Ib Anderson in the mid- and late-80s, and always thought it had such a bittersweet, melancholy air to it.

Are you speaking of when some of the other dancers were upset with the extreme attention Balanchine was giving Farrell? Only a guess, but I imagine she wouldn't have let it phase her much personally, although others did--I believe Hayden and Tallchief said things about this, and I think Kent as well. I'm just guessing still, though, so if you can (although not necessary to open that up too much as it's been discussed ad infinitum in many other threads), could you be more specific about how she 'saved the company', as I've not heard that before. It would come as little surprise that she'd be able to. And you see that very strikingly in the Villella film, especially in contrast to the even more than usual extreme agony he was suffering throughout. She is quietly supportive of him throughout IMO. I thought this in that period too, but I'm not sure it was exactly what you're talking about, I remember not only 'Liebeslieder' during that period and also the Peter Martins piece (a sweet, simple piece, maybe the only piece by him I really like), either 'Valse Triste' or something close, I believe to music by Sibelius. Do you remember this piece, Helene? I don't know if it's still done. I never saw her do 'La Valse', although I would have liked to, even though that one is pretty firmly imprinted on my mind as being an ultimate Farrell role. Alexandra, I saw her Swanilda in 1987, and even at that late date, the technique, strength and speed were still like some force of nature. The 'wild arm Balanchine style' may have been there in some of the dancing at the time, but I mostly recall that perfect precision that was always one of her hallmarks. 'Amazing technique' is definitely the term, though, I'd agree. Close to flawless most of the time.

Incredibly, I thought that had folded years ago. I never listen to the radio, it's as simple as that, I guess. But I never liked the station all that much when I did. I believe Bob Sherman's show was on WQXR, wasn't it? If so, I played something with the cellist Kermit Moore on there around 1974. Of the classical radio stations of the last few decades here, I thought WNCN was the smartest. I do remember with amusement WQXR as doing a lof of Carl Ditters Von Dittersdorf and other rather obscure composers more than I thought they would at some point in the 80s. There's another compser I never heard of otherwise that they were always playing, maybe he will come to me. Yes, I believe it was Max Reger, they did put him on the map for me. And a fairly good amount of Smetana and a tendency to schmaltz.

I've just reserved Arlene Croce's 'Alterimages', which I've been told has some important remarks about McBride's dancing as far back as 1971 (and perhaps even earlier.) Also, I remember myself an old review of 'Liebeslieder Walzer', which I am fairly sure is in 'Writing in the Dark', which I am also retrieving. She was talking about it at the same period I saw it when Farrell, McBride, Cook, Soto and others were dancing it. I had also seen it right after its premiere in the early 70s, and again in 2006 with Kistler, Nichols, Hubbe, and Nilas Martins, among others, but the 1985 performance was by far the most memorable. If anyone else remembers some of these old Croce quotes before I get the books. please go ahead and share them here!

For a moment, I thought I didn't have it and wasn't one of them (frightful thought), though, since I didn't know whether that was a British or internet acronym (still don't), but do now know it is not Transportation For Illinois Coalition. I suppose that one is an internet one, and most will know it, though I didn't: 'Tongue Firmly in Cheek'.

Obviously, Alexandra knows all of the answers which certainly I'm not pretending to answer by responding prematurely, and I certainly owe what understanding and appreciation I have of Bournonville to her; but just wanted to quickly say that all these things you wrote seem to me now to characterize the special quality of Bournonville, the 'subtle Danish art', as Alexandra has before said. But it IS a provincialism that you get too, but in a really good sense of the word-, the 'peace, quiet, stability, and support'-as you say- and then the presentation of that surely must owe something to the sophistication of Paris and its strong traditional structures--and the combination is, I think or think likely, special and unique. What other small country has a ballet tradition all its own that is not at all like the others? I like the totally unlikely aspect of Bournonville's output. It's one of those things that seems as if it could easily have missed its chance.

WOW! does she ever! GORGEOUS! One of the great smiles in history! Thanks for starting this, bart. Yes, I am totally devoted to this dancer, she is my all-time favourite. I like her even better than the men. Will say more, and hopefully less giddy, later. I meantime, have to get over that ANYONE could age that well.

Well, I sure can get it out of my mind, and that's why I'm not googling!

My guess is that they will eventually do it, and that some of the extreme 'cat mystery' won't hold out against such technologies. I think that a Deep Blue Rose has never been done either, albeit lavender ones, and surely many other horticultural hybrids have been attempted, and animal types that won't yet work; with cloning and other biotechnologies, the sky will eventually probably be the limit. There are interesting connatations of witchcraft with cats, and these do tend to happen with a certain kind of person. I hate to say it, but there are way too many cases of small houses with a hundred cats living in them, and these people are usually called out by the neighbours for filth and nuisance violations. I myself had to put an evil woman out of business along with the ASPCA for keeping about 400 half-starved cats for experiments in small cages on 4 floors of a W. 3rd Street building--as well as staiwells littered with cat corpses on which she was doing 'preservation experiments'. (I had been sent there to look for a summer student job, that's how I encountered this nightmare.) She would not only not feed them properly, she wouldn't neuter them either; easily one of the most negaitve and dark things I've ever encountered. It took 12 years to stop this horror, but that mystique is curious, because a real negativity is produced when it goes that far, although that's probably not limited to cats, I'm sure there are also vile houses full of dogs and any number of other creatures, snakes, whatever. In my experience in New York, though, the houses full ot scores or hundreds of cats has been the kind I've run into, or seen in local news reports. Cats have marvelous charisma, and most 'cat people' prefer them to all other animals. My favourite animal is the horse, which has a magnetism, majesty, and strong charisma, but not quite a hypnosis the way cats do. There's a VERY good story by Paul Theroux in one of his London collections about extreme cat lovers, those whose lives really DO become controlled by cats to an unhealthy degree. I'm going to look that up, as it was rigorous and energetic the way Theroux is at his best. Something of a bizarre horror piece, but adds to the literary collection Dirac has asked for. Will look it up now... Yes, 'The London Embassy'. I couldn't find the name of the cat story, it was quite good, as were several other stories here, one of his best. there's one with a 'prime minister', clearly mrs. Thatcher that is very good as well.

And it's not possible to say they would be wrong to think so. My art history teacher in a Baroque Painting and Sculpture course was naturally always talking at least some about Parmigianino and Tintoretto, about Brill as well, and although a Baroque specialist herself, she would speak of these often as being 'very beautiful. And of course with Tintoretto especially, we have an unsurpassed master. It's only when the more robust and muscular starts seeming really necessary that those things begin to reek of the overdone. And so that, while I wasn't sure if the 'famous Mannerism' had been called such, there are, of course, many examples of art becoming mannered, and it can be in the popular arts as well as the high arts. It can be seen as a kind of decay, but won't necessarily be. And there definitely is a place for the excessive, the extreme, the unbalanced even, the bizarre and the grotesque have their merits in all the Arts, it's just a matter of deciding when it's teetering toward collapse too much. But America in the 80s and 90s has been full of mannerism of all kinds. And the Balanchine imitators are perfect examples of mannerism.

And that IS maybe the most important point, insofar as mannerism is always inevitable. There are dozens of examples throughout the history of all the Arts, and the one that usually comes to mind as such is Dutch Mannerist Painting, although I now doubt that even that was called 'mannerist' until later. 'Mannerism' cannot be the desired term even if it's the case, so when mannerism is a de facto phenomenon, it may always have this amorphous and ill-focussed and diluted sensation to it. Yes, I think periods of 'mannerism' are never called that when it is meant as a thriving, living expression; it is called something 'more positive' even if it really IS mannerist. In fact, identifying it as Mannerism is probably the most positive way to look at ballet right now, if one thinks one can really expect that the more muscular developments are still to come. That way all the versions of the End of History or PoMo can be thrown out (at least when we can.) Maybe the minute Mannerism is identified as such and too pervasive, that's the moment at which it begins to wither away as such. Maybe.

Then I suspect you don't know many breeders . To say they can be obessive about "creating" a new, hot look would be an under statement. P.S. Seriously, you do raise a good point that never occurred to me.....if one could breed much larger cats, their superior pedator skills and rather unpredictable inclinations (unlike dogs whose inclinations are moderated by including you in their "pack") could surely be dangerous to have around. "Your honor, I just left my cat and son together for a moment."......I won't go any further. Sandy, there are the 'next size cats' even if they aren't 'breedable' as such from the smaller domesticated kinds of cats. The serval I linked to is a small cat but larger than any domestic cat. There is also the Leopard Cat, these are smaller than servals but just larger than any domestic cat. Then you get up to cheetahs, which despite their speed, suffer huge casualties as prey of lions and/or tigers (I can't remember which or if both, it was on one of George Page's old Nature Series on PBS.) There's still another wild cat that is literally no bigger than the biggest house cats, in India, and it can catch and pull fish right out of the water with its claws. And it works the other way too, therefore; there are a few house-sized wildcats. Small wildcats like Leopard Cats will usually run away if they are kept, though. As for the fancy breeds, I've been to two cat shows at Madison Square Garden and it truly is a revelation. You see those fantastic hairless Sphinx Cats, and they are lovely, I held one for a minute or two. Many don't care for this kind of extremely stylized animal, but I like all kinds of cats from the commonest to the fanciest, just like I like whippets and salukis, and know many people who don't like these high-strung sorts of dogs. I rarely dislike any cat, but have found some white domestic shorthairs who are very ill-mannered and always bite just for the hell of it, and I've run into a couple of Persians who seem listless and stupid. I guess the 'lethargic cat' is less appealing to me, and that probably includes those grossly overfed ones who never do anything but sleep.

That's interesting, I didn't know that. Alexandra, do you mean the state of musical comedy then? Or as now, when it just has not been saved on any great scale. Because people really started talking about the death of musical comedy back in the 60s, but it just lessened--there was still some Jule Styne, Kander & Ebb, Jerry Herman, even if I'm not that crazy about some of these, there was some Rodgers without his old partners, then Stephen Sondheim came in with his own music as well as lyrics and was the only major figure in musical comedy to emerge and really carry all the weight up to the present, at least in any purist sense. What Lloyd Webber and Alan Mencken have done is to continue shows in Broadway houses for tourists. And although musical comedy is not something so strict (at least as I see it) as ballet in its definition, a parallel veering very far afield such as Lloyd Webber and Mencken into the loud blasts of spectacular production could not be shouldered by ballet, of course. But IMO, by now, musical comedy is 'not saved'. You get an entertaining show here and there, but they rarely have anything to do with the grand tradition. Of course, the grand tradition of American musical comedy is not nearly as long (nor as grand) or as specifically defined as the grand tradition of ballet, but as I write this, I see that the loss of that tradition in musical comedy does seem to have been effected. In my survey when I did the thread on 'Scores of Musical Shows', I only found about FOUR scores in the last 20 years I thought were at all comparable to those that were coming out pretty regularly at least until the end of the 60s. Those were 'The Life' and 'City of Angels' by Cy Coleman, 'Passion' by Sondheim, and 'Urinetown' by Hollman and Kotis. That's just my opinion, of course, but that is not enough to call it a 'flourishing art fom', to my mind. Actually, ballet seems to be doing a lot better creativity-wise, than musical comedy, even if we are dissatisfied. And so I think that it is only the strength of that tradition that keeps it afloat at least somewhat, because what else could it be, while we wait, as it were? But also, it was in the 40s that Rodgers and Hammerstein did break new ground and the musical had its golden age for about 25 years or so. So I was confused if you meant 'saving musical comedy' in the 40s, since I'd say that's when it was saved, albeit temporarily; the numbers musical became outmoded in favour of the book musical, although there had already been a few of those. Not trying to veer off-topic with this one, but it did set me to thinking about art forms that do die, at least in some way, and survive in vestigial form as formulaic entertainment, without the old sparkle or electricity. As well, the concept you mention of 'stoppers'. Is Sondheim a stopper? Because here hasn't been anybody else, even though he's still alive.

Am about 10 pages into Casanova's 'History of My Life', probably being read for different or reverse reasons from Ms. Bentley, although her recent review reminded me that previously I had tended to skip thought to 'the good parts' (she focuseed on those too, it seems). But it's all good, his childhood is extraordinary, and Fellini fury about how 'there are no children, no families, etc.' only comes later when the episodic nature of the amorous adventures begins. I don't know how long it will take me to finish it, or whether I'll feel the need to given there are about 1300 pages of text, followed by copious notes up to 200 more pages, but I'll see. It's got a lot of character, more than I remembered perusing it before, when I thought it a more pornographic version of some of Mozart's operas. I really don't know why Fellini made the film, maybe as a deconstruction of Casanova, but it's pretty well-known that he hated Casanova as representative of some kind of national stain. Anyway, the kind of book you can get a lot out of, even if you don't read all of it. He's not really one-dimensional, though.

It's also true that the most egregious thing you wrote you did not even make much concession toward. Sorry, but people are interested in preserving the traditions of ballet quite religiously, not stiffly and academically (unless they are, and there are pedants everywhere), but such 'truisms' (Gawd!) about 'ballet and hip-hop' both being 'genres', isn't that a little bit like saying 'you know, literary fiction and sci-fi, both being genres' or 'opera and local church choir music, both being genres' , oh please, I think I've heard it all now. And you can imagine you drive your John Deere tractor to the gas station 'balletically', of course, but did not the reactions of the 'good ole boys who are no more stereotyped than the Juilliard yogurt-eating dance students' let you know that it may well not have been ballet? And that even that term would have been easier to understand than 'driving a John Deere Tractor balletically'. But, who knows, it's a genre, and may even be Conceptual Sculpture Modern Dance Improv Ballet. However, some of your written expressions are very campy, I daresay, I am most amused by the 'financial supports' that hip-hop, as opposed to ballet, enjoys. Yes, gangland in its earliest Compton manifestations, and probably some thefts and cocaine sales to the LAPD, along the way of drive-by shootings, with the occasional casualty. I agree with everything bart said in his reaction to your remark, but would only add that yes, ballet and other 'serious art' are STILL HERE, they are quite extant. We are not really looking only to infuse one thing into another, this begins to sound a little like 'getting people together' or some other such tacky fugue. We are not nearly all of us trying to 'break down barriers'. They need, if anything, more money to protect them in their exclusive and Empyrean realms from the barbarians. let the barbarians learn to make their way into ballet, it is not the duty of ballet to 'spread itself around like manure and money', to paraphrase Barbra Streisand in 'hello, dolly1' Of course, I can see why you'd not care for this attitude, and it really is a matter of simply WHO prevails, which camp prevails. If there are those who 'can build bridges' and 'break down barriers', it is certainly clear enough that they will do so. Can they be held back? That is very possible, but you have given clear and present proof that that is unsure. There aren't many 'not-exactly-ballet' (and consult Leigh's definition of what ballet is, I think on this thread, for a good point system on this) dance works that are on the same level as ballet. Martha Graham unquestionably is, and a few more, but most of the time they deterritorialize, not out of desire, but rather because they find their own level most effortlessly. Of course, I'd concede that, of course, it really IS a matter of whether ballet can get enough money to remain itself. But the thread already gave on 'the next Balanchine', for the most part, and began to dwell on the possibillity of another great genius. There is NOT going to be another Modernist genius in any of the Arts, because Modernism is no longer the central movement. But there will surely be geniuses in all fields, although their appearance is likely to be more random than in the past, and sloppy theorists will have a hard time pigeonholing them into their media studies courses, etc., By now, most of the trendy theorists, like Slavoj Zizek, just concentrate on movies and skip the rest, saying it doesn't mean anything anymore since it's taken out of its own time and era. Well, of course, it's not the SAME to hear a Bach cantata now as is was in the early 18th century, but that doesn't mean it doesn't still have great power and life. Same with Balanchine, Petipa, et alia. But some of that sounded like 'ballet for the masses', and there is no such thing. The closest you get is what there is now--many more regional companies of high quality that didn't exist before. And we've had many discussions on how there is too much Balanchine-orientation in all these companies run by great Balanchine stars. Never thought I'd get to the point where I hardly find that a serious problem, or at least not unduly pressing--but you have definitely helped me to realize it may be a minor sympton, and may Ms. Farrell get the dough for many more recherche Balanchine productions! Yes, managing to get Pithoprakta revived was no minor achievement. That doesn't mean miliosr's desire to see Humphries, more Limon, etc., is not valid, but here we see an entirely different shaped tidal wave, a different animsl, and one begins to thank one's lucky over-Balanchined stars.

No, it's good to read too much Ayn Rand, you just should read a lot of other things as well, but generally, I've in agreement with you. But FORGET about saying ballet is 'not cool', I just won't have it, SimonG! Ballet is the coolest of the cool, if you want to argue that what someone meant by 'uncool' (insofar as it was wrongly deployed), then you are right, of course, but I won't have one of my favourite complimentary terms--one which bridges the gaps between all generations interestingly enough. Ballet is so COOL, I proved it to someone and am awaiting his slightly delayed response (just kidding, couldn't resist that little dig to one of our most generous patrons here) I do confess I rather enjoy 'marketing through networks', though. It seems quite inaccurate and substantial at the same time. I mean, you've got to do 'marketing' and 'networks' do abound, but still, we need a little more talk of just 'free markets' and how they decide these things, in which case we find that is not so much Marxist as capitalist, and this is not always anti-mediocrity at all, although not always effective capitalistic societies still always have the best arts cultures, which Marxist always is. Marxism won't tolerate anything too 'uppity'. The only reason the Soviets used it was a cynical one: It helped their regime despite being diamtrically oppoed to everything they claimed they stood for. And since it was a venerable tradition, they had a much harder time making it shoddy, unlike architecture, which have always done a magnificent job, so much so that even Brezhnev complained about it. And who cares about 'snobbism' anyway. It's everywhere, in the best and the worst, which doesn't mean I think we shouldn't disagree with the forms of it we find most distasteful. Recently, I expressed my own disdain for 'Charlie's Angels', I guess that's a form of snobbism, and I'm not the least bit concerned if anybody thinks so. But COOL, simonG! Please, you-ah huh-ting me, as the actresses used to say in the 40s (stanwyck, etc.) Ballet is so cool it is amazing! I am very much a classically trained person myself, and do not think that 'classical lexicons' render artworks 'uncool'. I know all about why ballet is cool, and a number of the reasons why. Now, as for things becoming obsolete, one can consult Adorno, but even his disdain for the 'light popular cinema' has not proved a worthy prophecy. It is HE himself who is obsolete! Just perfectly dreadful, and believe me, I know my 'Negative Dialectics'. He also trashed jazz in a quite sledgehammer way. Who needs it?

Oh yes, that's the thing to do. I think it didn't occur to me that I would obviously have another cat that would not be a familiar, and I didn't see how I could go through that again. I had had many cats as a child, and loved all of them, but this one was very different, I decided I really couldn't have that kind of communication with anything but another person after that. It simply didn't occure to me that I wouldn't have had that with another cat. It should have, though, because my neighbour had lost one who was also a familiar and got another one immediately, and he didn't see it as a familiar. Here's the serval: Now THAT is ballet-style elegance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serval

dirac, I'm not used to flaws of logic on your part.......is it possible to OWN a cat?? Oh yes, Sandy, very good, no you can't, that's what those of us who love them love most about them: They love themselves. That's one of the reasons why they're so incredibly beautiful. There are a few reptiles that are hard to 'own' as well, but I prefer those outdoors. There's almost nothing more perfect than a cat, and the smaller wildcats, like servals, are the very prettiest of all, but very rare and they can't even be easily kept, much less owned, by any except by a few professionals.

Oh, of course, 'Cat' in 'Breakfast at Tiffany's', even in the movie, especially because he's really the only thing that works about that messed-up ending--something Hollywood was just not going to do, even though that ruined the film, which is otherwise enchanting. i alos like, in Mistral's Memoirs, describing one of his Provencal aunts gone a bit mad, who claims to have touched a black cat one time, who said to her 'Vous avez touche ROBERT'. I had a cat for 18 years whose primary name was 'Psyche', but I changed it according to whim, and she had a period in which she was known as 'Robert'. She was DEFINITELY a familiar, so I did not get another one, as is often done, after she died.

Were there not still these snakes, or modified versions of them, for New York City Ballet, to announce none to soon the casting, as recently at least as the 80s? Just not hung on nails, I think just stuffed out and loosely against the wall in some sort of slots just inside the entrance to the box office, against the wall? Although they may have been on the nails still, the suspense is killing me, I won't deny that. Not that the non-star system is still not effecitve, of course, but perhaps they had disappeared entirely in the last couple of decades, given that it had become to some degree vestigial to audiences of years past--except for Bouder, of course, and when Hubbe was still dancing.