papeetepatrick

Yes. I do not think that affirmative action can apply in disciplines like ballet and the other classical arts in the same way it can apply to moderately-skilled jobs like television newscasting and a thousand others, where the matters of racial unfairness can be dealt with head-on. Omshanti brought up a very interesting aspect of racism, and one of the most tragic: Sometimes it is the victimized group which one become racist toward because it becomes associated with the misery that has been endured (even when it actually bears less of the guilt). I thought his story moving too, and can see why a good experience within the ballet world would be especially treasured when the element of racism previously experienced was now absent. Of course, that is still one example of a non-racist experience in ballet (which the vast majority of experiences would be, of course) and doesn't cover the full range of what may have occurred elsewhere and might occur again, but it is still important, as are the isolated examples of blatant racism like Raven Wilkinson's story.

What's funny about that? It's funny that somebody read it and therefore thought it was meaningful to say. If they had just said 'I think Suzanne is unquestionably the greatest dancer in the world', I wouldn't have thought it funny, as she is many people's ideal dancer (and obviously wouldn't have thought there was anything quirky about someone saying 'Suzanne is my favourite dancer in the whole world,' etc. At the time, I probably thought she was the greatest dancer in the world too, although that doesn't mean she was. However, any journalist that would have said such a thing would have been insufferably amateurish, and probably ought to have been fired for getting so out of control. It constitutes hyperbole even if true. I'd have thought the same thing if it had been any other dancer, and also rather doubt that anyone responsible actually wrote this. These were enthusiastic teenagers, and at that age we all start citing critics as if that was the gold standard about something; very like talking about Oscar winners, when that is well known to mean a certain amount and no more.

At NYCB in the 4th ring about 1986, there was a group of young ballet fans. One of them said 'I read that Suzanne is the greatest dancer in the WORLD!!!'

Bart--thanks so much for bringing this up, as I would not have seen either of these. Last night I watched at least half of 'Don Quixote' and Ananiashvili (of whom I'd never heard till reading this) is scintillating, thrilling, all those superlatives we love and over-use. I also thought the State Perm looked a lot better in this than in 'Swan Lake' with her, although she makes almost anyone near her begin to look rather lackluster (even when they wouldn't otherwise.) I saw in one of the threads something by Paul Parish about dancers who look stunning to begin with and then have many further dimensions, aspects, etc., of themselves brought out in their dancing; and a second kind, who have more ordinary looks and that with those you see more of a kind of miracle occurring in the transformation. He prefers the second type, I believe he said, and although I love both types about equally, I'd say Ms. Ananiashvili with her peasant face, is a magnificent example of the second category, because she is so electric that even this 'somewhat peasant face' becomes beautiful while she cuts fantastic shapes of strength and boldness. Amazing energy.

That sounds more appropriate for modern dance, whether Bill T. Jones or Molissa Fenley or Pina Bausch or even Kylian, I guess. Maybe Anna Sokolow a few decades back. So you'd have pointe work in this? Or is that like severe hair--dispensible, and so just call it 'ballet'?

I think what Helene wrote is superb, and captures more than any single other post the way I feel about the issue. Also I think Carbro's post was especially illuminating here. 2dds--a moderator therefore gave you the special privilege of 'talking about each other' which the rest of us were warned against--else the thread would be closed (this warned first by Leigh and seconded quickly by Alexandra) You have therefore tried to take control of the whole discussion by determining that people should have to agree with your 3 principles if they are to talk about those. This causes people to turn a deaf ear and a blind eye to many, or even all of your best ideas. I personally am not interested in what you write because of the heavy and oppressive way in which you have lectured here. When you talk about the people at Ballet Talk, you are not finger-pointing apparently, but since everyone else is considered to be doing so if they do precisely the same thing, isn/t it really little wonder that some of us are going to then pay little attention to what you say--even if it happens to coincide with what we also think? In any case, Helene's post does cover what I think are the most important matters from a ballet-artistic point of view, not a professional diversity-training (usually used in corporate workshops in my experience) and social-worker's point of view: I have to go back to kfw's earlier question on several threads, which is whether ballet, or I would add, any classical art, should change to be recognizable. It is one thing to train and cast color-blind and to expand the acceptable body types across races, and which I've already seen among white dancers in a number of companies, which is why it seems a bit absurd to me to claim that the same body type in a dancer of another race is somehow unacceptable. It is quite another to change ballet and ballet training to be more culturally acceptable. I've never heard a demand that if a white person were to train to become a Kabuki performer, that the classical canon of Kabuki would be expected to be made more recognizable to white people, or that the strict, classical training be changed to accomodate anyone who wanted to express his or her own ethnicity or individuality during that training. Is there a demand that traditional African dance be made more recognizable to a white audience?This is very different than training an audience to see art forms that can be intimidating and not immediately accessible, and in providing technology aids, like seat/supertitles or the simultaneous translation headphones that were available for Kabuki performances in NYC in the pre-titles era. It is different than the compact versions of the Peking Opera (as it was advertised in the late 70's and early 80's) works that the company brought in its first US tours, or than the hour-long versions of The Nutcracker that are appropriate for the attention spans of small children. When Dance Theatre of Harlem presented it's Creole Giselle, the difference between the classicism in that production and ABT's was nil. That the venue could change from Germany to Louisiana without missing a beat showed the timelessness and universality of the story. The assumption was that the audience would accept classicism on its own terms, in a more immediate context. At the pre-professional level, there is a very rigid code of behavior and dress. The teacher rules, with varying degrees of benevolence. Classes are quiet. The style is formal, pulled-up, and elegant. Hair is kept up and away from the face. Very simple clothing, with the entire class in the same colors, is required so that the line is not obscured. A reverence ends class. (I would have lasted about 15 minutes.) Whether this is at all appealing to the kids who have to sacrifice for an art form that is alien to most people is questionable. But for those who are willing and have talent, I think it's critical that they are not blocked by notions of a racially homogeneous stage picture or the inability to cast based on ability in a role, because it is "unbelievable" that a non-white would be a romantic hero or heroine, which is even more absurd in the neo-classical/abstract works. There are already huge concessions made by ballet companies to produce marginally classical works to be "relevant" and recognizable to its core audience. With the dumbing-down of the repetoire, I can see how it could be insulting that concessions are made to a primarily white audience that are not made to any other audience. I would rather see an audience educated than catered to. If the form of movement is irrelevant or uninteresting, then not everyone will like everything, but at least the choice is informed.

Kate--so what do you prefer then in order to be clear? Is it better to just say 'non-white,' 'black,' 'African-American' or 'Hispanic' and 'Asian'--because the division is clearly between white and non-white. You have to decide on terms to describe the different ethnicities that are then not offensive, because there would be no sense of racism at all if these differences were not perceived. It's possible this really is better, because 'coloured,' as you say, does suggest 'colourless' for whites, and then it would really get twisted if someone white said 'I'm too colorful to be considered colorless,' so best to stick with 'white,' 'non-white', 'black,' 'African-American.' I never use the term 'people of colour' myself, and 'colored people' is from long times past. I say either African-American or black, and Hispanic (I knew one person who used to say 'brown people' for Hispanics, but I never heard it again) and Asian. I don't much care for 'European-American', but maybe it's useful.

'Colored dancers' is not far removed from 'colored people.' I don't find this offensive personally, and do agree, Herman, that non-U.S. people probably are bewildered by these distinctions. I think that 'colored people' is probably associated more with Deep South 'colored only' signs in the hard-segregation days, separate water fountains so marked, etc. People from elsewhere may also not care for 'people of colour.' (I don't particularly). However, anytime you hear local programs on PBS, such as 'Black Journal' (I'm not sure that continues) or shows about the Dominican or Puerto Rican communities of a city, you will hear the black and/or Puerto Rican hosts and guests always use the term 'people of colour.' You should note this, Kate, because if is offensive in the U.K., it is nevertheless the term that black leaders use here. Hard leftists always use it, too, although I am not concerned with pleasing either the hard left or the hard right myself. This is a minor point perhaps to some of us, but not to everyone. On a different note. I was a student usher during the 1979 Met ballet season, and saw all but one or two at most of the performances of Alonso's Nacional Ballet de Cuba. We all loved this one virtuosic dancer named 'Carreno', but I cannot remember his first name. I thought he was astonishing and thought he would have been magnificent in any ballet company, and his looks were very pronounced African. I'd be interested to know if anyone knows if he continued in Cuba (probably) or went elsewhere or what.

Here I only have difficulty with the concept of "one note monotone," which I simply cannot relate to the rich artistic tradition -- musically, visually, and in terms of dance -- of ballet over the centuries. I can imagine an largear, richer definition of "ballet" in the future. But I can't accept that what we have so far is so deeply crippled by its limiations? (I say this not to be argumentative, but because many who read this may also find it difficult to think of the art they love and admire so much can be seen by others as a kind of a "steady drone.") I fully agree with Bart here, however I find that the other requirements also primarily come from a 'social problem' context and that these are not appropriate for reconstruction of the ballet world, although they could provide subject matter for creative work. I find them to sound a bit like a manifesto that is not first concerned with the matter of ballet as an art itself, and is rather a social prescription that grows from without ballet, not from within it.

It gives you an example of racism in ballet history. Historical racism in ballet is necessarily significant in any survey of 'race and ballet' today, even if the exact same circumstances no longer apply. And you asked Kate Lennard about racism as regard to those dancers she listed, so that's why I placed it here. So that I think if ballet history formed what ballet is today, all aspects of its history are part of all those aspects of what it is today even if things have changed--whether improved or gotten worse. I have no opinion on these terms, in fact I find them all irritating. I wrote this about the difference in 'coloured people' and 'people of colour' because that is the Politically Correct stuff. Even if one doesn't subscribe to this, it is important to know, because some people are extremely offended by 'coloured people' but have agreed to speak of 'people of colour.' This is important to know for such kinds of communications as internet discussion, because there are so many dimensions left out that the 'spirit in which it is used,' while I agree that is the important thing, will often be missed with people who are only screens and typed words to each other.

Here's a piece of Ms. Wilkinson's story. In the documentary, it may have been told by Tallchief, but I can't remember. Any way, her career was cut short. Grace Under Fire - dancer Raven Wilkinson Dance Magazine, Feb, 2001 by Heather Wisner All Raven Wilkinson wanted to do was dance. But as one of the relatively few black American ballerinas of her era, she found it wasn't always easy. The time their tour bus pulled into Montgomery, Alabama, during a Ku Klux Klan rally, the dancers of Serge Denham's Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo had good reason to fear that this wouldn't be an ordinary one-night stand. It was the mid-'50s, and Jim Crow segregation was in effect throughout the South. After a Klansman boarded the bus and began throwing around the dancers' bags, the company decided that Raven Wilkinson shouldn't perform that night. Wilkinson, the only black dancer in the company's half-century history, had been warned by her parents about racism long before, but nothing quite prepared her for that evening's dinner in the hotel, where the dancers shared the dining room with a group of white men and their families. Wilkinson came to the startling realization that the men were Klansmen and the formless white sheets piled onto nearby chairs were their gowns and hoods. "The company told me, `Stay here, lock the door and don't come out' while they went to perform," she said. "I did, and from my window, I saw a cross burning outside."

kfw--I am trying to remember what documentary it is--it may be in the '6 Balanchine Ballerinas'--that the story of Raven Wilkinson is told. And that definitely is a tragic story of racism. The term 'people of colour', as I've understood it, is considered an acceptable term, whereas 'coloured people' referred only to blacks, and so was dropped, even though the term itself is substantially not any different. I had still usually heard 'people of colour' used primarily for black and Hispanic, but it may also be used for Asians, even though I've never heard it.

Other variations on this theme are that the Western imperialist powers are also the ones usually expected not to demand racial purity. There are also sorts of reasonable arguments for why this might be (and have to be, given that privileged positions always get questioned, have matters of cultural guilt associated with them), although I have been through them in other venues and don't mean to get into that beyond just its mention. What I mean to say is that classical forms like Peking Opera, Kabuki Theater, Shanghai Opera and Noh Drama have not been hiring Caucasians and blacks, at last report. Nobody wants to see Peking Opera without Chinese or Noh without Japanese. I don't know that much about Reverend Moon's Universal Ballet, whether this is by now a greater mixture of Koreans and white and/or black Americans, although I do know that there was someone from ABT with them to give them an early boost a few years back. I did know a dancer who did Bharata Natyam, the South India Classical Dance, but she was only technically proficient really and believed in reincarnation, which she thought would help, I suppose; she ended up as a 'laying-on-of-hands' nurse in an upstate New Age ashram. This was fortunate, as her Boston preacher's daughter background had not made it possible for her to become nearly as effective as the Indians I saw. In more folkish forms, nobody wants to see Polynesian dance done by anyone but Polynesians. The girls from Queens and Brooklyn who did the entertainment at Hawaii Kai (on Broadway in 50's in the early seventies not far from the old Metropole) were not very convincing. That's probably irrelevant, as we all know that if we see Armenian Folk Dance we actually want to be seeing the ethnicity, that's a big part of it. So it seems maybe that the Western Classical Arts are the only ones that are supposed to open their doors, and they do gradually do so. No matter what the complaints of unfairness are, it seems to be that there can be more opening into ballet and classical music than there can be a training of Caucasians and African-Americans for a life in Peking Opera or Indian Dance. I don't know a soul who wants to see an American in either of these. Maybe if they put versions in theme parks they can americanize it and make it less racist for white and black Americans alike, if only due to proximity. But this causes other problems.

Some may feel this way, but I think they should either be done as they were conceived or not done at all. Otherwise, it gets into sterilizing, and all this business of 'Huck Finn', etc. I know a girl who hated 'Blow-up', the Antonioni film from the 60's, because she thought it was 'sexist' for them to use the word 'chicks' for the girls. Nevermind she saw it in 1999 and thought new norms and mores should apply to old art--in this case a film from the 60's using 60's slang ought to be changed to suit her delicate sensibilities. Her own paintings reflect this sterilized ideal: They don't have an ounce of personality to them. Anyway, the ones that don't have 'obvious racial stereotypes' have plenty of less obvious stereotypes built into them, and certainly all sorts of 'class unfairness' to them. If people start applying the political correctness standards to old classics, they'll ruin what the piece was about to begin with. Better to use all races even in the seemingly bigoted stories--yes, let the black ones play the white oppressors, etc., if necessary--but to change the text of an old-fashioned story is much worse than just omitting it completely. There's already so much Orwellian sterilization going on. However, it doesn't always work: Some may have felt that 'The Wind Done Gone' was refreshing and would annihilate 'Gone With the Wind,' but it has had very little effect on 'GWTW's continued appeal when it came out 5 or 6 years ago. There are probably some that think 'The Birth of a Nation' ought to be banned completely, but among these you won't find a single film scholar.

Just a quick addendum to what I was saying about the dancers who did 'The Bride' in the Martha Graham 'Appalachian Spring.' It does make me think that I have very specific ideas about some works that I don't at all about others. The Japanese dancer I didn't care for in 'Appalachian Spring' makes perfect sense, by the way, in 'Errand into the Maze' and 'Cave of the Heart,' and I have seen her in the latter. This has to do with historical and traditional considerations (for me), although it's possible that I could have seen an Asian or black do this role and still been convinced (but not this one.) There are other extreme possibilities: A 'swan lake' with black leads would work, but probably be distracting if only one of them was, unless the corps was also very mixed. Probably the same is true of SB, even though this begins to move very far from the traditions. Both racial considerations and artistic traditions have to be balanced out, but I tended to agree with Herman Stevens on the priorities.

No, I didn't mean that all Japanese dancers were sharp and angular, but that this one was; and especially since I'd fallen in love with Mycene, who did dance the role with a slow voluptuousness. It was not to say anything about Japanese or French dancers in general as I sought to demonstrate by the 'other Graham dances with Japanese dancers..' etc. Yes, I understand you, but a modern Midwestern Japanese would never seem unusual to me, whereas the idea of a Japanese 'frontier lady' is hard to imagine in the 'ballet for Martha' about a time much earlier than Martha even. I saw a review of that same season in which the 'Pioneer Woman' as I believe the character is called, was danced by Heidi Stoeckeley, and the writer pointed out how this 'Oklahoma native' had the look that so befitted the vast flat country. I experienced this very strongly with Ms. Stoeckeley myself (who was, incidentally, in both performances, and so preserved for me some sense of continuity from the previous performance). So that I think we still like to find what seems most traditionally authentic, but we can learn how to look at it in a more subtle way as we keep working at it. I'm now sure that it was this particular dancer I just didn't care for in the part. I thought she was exquisitely beautiful as well as a fine dancer. I just didn't think she was the Bride--but again, Ms. Mycene had me weeping so uncontrollably with what she had done two weeks prior that I probably could not have seen anyone of any race whatever do it and be rational about it. NOW I remember that even when I read about Graham herself dancing the Bride I resented it!!!

You answer much of what is probably being asked here by pointing out that the roots of jazz are black. Then it becomes something else as well. So that the reverse would be true of ballet certainly. It did not begin with African-Americans or even any Americans. It started out white, and therefore it takes a longer time for it to become more inclusive. However, all these things do change the original, but that's inevitable. It's a fine line to walk as I see it: it's important to keep many of the traditions intact, without which the essence of the art disappears, i.e., it's necessary to see race and ethnicity as part of the meaning of the work itself, but also to know that that is only part of it. At that point, it then becomes necessary for the 'color-blind' ideas to enter in, and they do; but they don't need to completely dominate either, because then you have a situation, for example, in which 'black blues' no longer really exists; and a situation in which a real Petipa-esque Aurora no longer exists. It has to go back and worth between these two poles and ought not to be expected to be too comfortable a process (little worry of that, it will definitely be difficult.) the 'roots of American modern dance', as well, are not Chinese, but gradually these elements work there way into it. and so on.

As I think more about this, I actually think it was the dancing itself that, in fact, made me unable to lose consciousness of the superficiality of the 'Japanese-ness.' Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure, but the combination probably made me unable to sort it out. I've definitely seen other Graham dances with Japanese in them that I thought were marvelous--but I have forgotten which they were precisely because I truly did not find it a conflict with anything artistic going on. It also may be that certain roles really do need a traditional look to them--unless the differently ethnic dancer is miraculously able to forget it--and make the viewer forget it. But not nearly all, of course. I do know that I didn't see this as politically wrong, but it probably made me think that there were kinds of movements that are specific to certain groups that just don't work within old traditions. I know that the very sharp, angular dancing of this Graham Japanese dancer seemed nothing like the Bride to me, as had the slower and very curvilinear look that Ms. Mycene had used so masterfully. I'm not sure which ones of these would be the most powerful, probably the audience. But classical ballet, like all the other classical arts, would carry old traditions with it much more than the more popular arts, just by the very nature of what the classical is, as something that has a strong line through long periods of time. Since the nature of all players in the classical arts would have changed less than those in the popular arts, all aspects of the fabled traditions would be held onto more closely, as the matter of trendiness is not so strong. For example, even though we love the American musical, only a few--say 'Gypsy' and 'The King and I' and 'Candide'--keep getting revivals that prove their perennial appeal. on the other hand, there are scores of operas that are much older than these that have never gone completely dark. As for modern dance specifically, it has long actually dealt with the modern issues, even as subjects within their narratives, much more than classical ballet has. There is much more modern dance about war and concentration camps and AIDS and 'verismo' scenes of all kinds than there is ballet about these things. Ballet always has a slightly bigger-than-life quality, often fantasy. This is wonderful to us, but there are the obvious pitfalls within a 'Sleeping Beauty', for example, that just don't come up with a new work by Molissa Fenley or Bill T. Jones.

Things have probably changed a lot over the past few decades. I worked for a ballet coach here in NY back in 1983 who thought it was all wrong for African-Americans to be in ballet corps because it 'looked wrong.' I never thought about that, but I also had seen very few corps de ballet with African-Americans in them. This is probably a concern of some purists, not because of racism, but rather because of tradition, but I don't know. I do know the ballet coach was not a racist in life. Nor am I sure whether she felt differently about black soloists (I'm just now thinking about some old Allegra Kent footage with an African-American partner, but I hadn't been familiar with him before.) On the other hand, I think I noticed that the issue came up much less frequently with Martha Graham Dance Company, where black dancers were thought to be often especially desirable. In 2005, I had some difficulty in seeing two performances of 'Appalachian Spring' when the Bride was done first by a Frenchwoman and in the second by a Japanese. I couldn't ever forget that she was Japanese out in the American Midwest (or wherever it was exactly). However, this may have been caused by my perception that her rhythms were all wrong for the Bride, which had been done with much more simplicity and much less hauteur by Ms. Mycene. So I think that, even though there may have been this 'decorative concern' that some might read as racist, this is disappearing, if only gradually. Someone else said that ballet (and other arts) would reflect the racism that is in the society in general (or not.) I don't see how this could not be true, and Paul Krugman recently had a convincing reflection on racism in the current epoch. It's also true that in certain very aristocratic circles (which are becoming outmoded) that the question of racism never comes up in a different way, e.g., it would never be imaginable that in the English royal family one of the children would marry anything but a wealthy Caucasian; and as we all know from Wallis Simpson, there are disadvantages in such circles to even being 'just American.' So that things in various elite kinds of groupings might be determined in those groups to be an aesthetic thing but actually dovetail into racism too. But at the highest levels of these groups, these questions are not countenanced, because the tradition is very strong and thought to be beyond question.

The topic is 'race, culture and ballet.' It's therefore perfectly normal to be talking about racism, and there is not really any point in putting racism in brackets as [racism] We are not trying to make racism 'quaint.' This 'get rid of this over-sensitiveness on racial issues and be natural' is a trifle much. Again, the subject is race, not how not to be 'over-sensitive' about it. And the brackets really are bizarre, as if the term 'racism' did not really mean anything and had to be parodied by putting it in brackets. This is probably not what you meant, but it does come across somewhat this way, if only because you don't bracket anything else. ***OKAY: sorry, omshanti, I looked back at some of your other posts and you do use brackets, which is very uncommon as a substitute for quotation marks. However, racism does not need quotation marks-- as 'racism'--if 'racial issues' does not have them either. It's a legitimate term and very much a matter of daily dialogue, not at all exotic. Personally, I am not all that involved with 'race and ballet' issues, but it's a logical topic to have if people want to talk about it, I would think.

This will help quite a lot. I do know 'Brigg Fair' and a few other Delius pieces. They'd be lovely to hear in late summer--Delius is quite irresistible for the pastoral dream they bring. The Tudor ballet does sound like it would have been wonderful.

yeah, I didn't think that sounded quite right. Thanks. Surprisingly, the prokofiev complete is not all that easy to find. For just listening, they usually cut it a good bit, and that's understandable. I might want to listen to the Delius myself, not having known of it.

If you're talking about the Prokofiev, most of the recordings I've found are excerpts, even though there is a Liverpool one that is pretty extensive. The best way to hear the score in its entirety if all different parts need to be chosen from for whatever reason, is to get the DVD or VHS of the Czinner film with Nureyev and Fonteyn, because in that nothing important is left out. (and not watch it if that is distracting.) There are probably some complete CD's of the complete score, but I'm not aware of them; it's mostly a matter of orchestral suites.

I have reason to think so, but my statistics are both amateurish and not exhaustive enough.