DefJef

I found the original question quite intriguing as a non dancer and ballet attendee. As my interest in ballet grows I am facing the task of looking inside of ballet to see how it is created... what makes it beautiful, what makes one dancer "better" than another... and so on. Obviously when you look more deeply than the surface (at anything) the mystery revealed is very rewarding. My own naive concept of ballet is that it is composed of a series of "steps" and "positions" that the dancer's body assumes in the course of a ballet. Each of these isolated steps and positions has an ideal form. These are what I assume are taught in ballet classes. Students struggle to get their bodies to perform these as "perfectly" as possible. This is analogous to the standards in dog breeding... where some ideal exists and each breeder is attempting to create a dog which represents the standard to perfection. But of course, a dance is also a series of transitions in time where the steps and positions and other "gestures" are blended into a continuous flow like a river. Technique would also involve timing and making these transitions... I would assume. Someone who has perfected ballet technique can blend the steps, positions and gestures into a seamless "event". Learning how to do this is about teaching and training and i haven't a clue how this body knowledge of movement, timing and position is installed in the dancer. But once the body has assimilated ballet movement... there is still room for the elusive element of "artristry" which is the intangible element which makes one dancer different from another. When one thinks of language (which ballet surely is) it is composed of words, and rules of syntax. Words have definitions which in fact change subtlely in context. A great author can string together words into sentences, paragraphs, ideas and so on. The words have meaning, the sentences may have a musical quality related to the sound of the words and their place in the whole collection of words. Poetry seems to extract more music from words than mere prose. Technical perfection and how to acheive it and who has acheived it and so on are interesting... as is who hits the most home runs or throws the most strike outs etc... in baseball. It sure does help to be able to know HOW it is to be done so that when you see it done that way you recognize it. But this may not be as important to the viewer as much as the overall reaction they are left with. Technical prowess and virtuosity are definitely eye catching and jaw dropping. But without the mysterious artistic expression a techinically perfect performance is lacking. What intererests me more than what is technique in ballet, is what ELSE is there in ballet what belongs to the dancer? What part does the choreographer play in providing this mystery? My impression of the ballet is not one of the brush strokes of a painting, or the sentences of a novel... but of the over arching emergent themes that the artists and the choreographer manage to extract... from the music via technique. Behold a great painting and it was one colors in a tube, but with the vision and technique of the artists it is laden with meaning, emotion and power. The miracle of ballet is to use the technical vocabulary to take us away and bring us to a place of dreams right here on earth!

Pamela, The Global village is likely to draw people from wherever to the best place to study and dance. The real question is whether folkloric dance cultures can "stand up" and support a ballet culture. From your post and my own ignorance I do not know about Spanish Ballet for example. But I don't doubt that there are remarkable Spanish dancers.... I have seen them at the ABT. Could you clarify your comment about ballet in Spain (for this idiot)?

America is built from a puritan background. Having said that we are a multicultural society and one can find pockets or almost anything here if you look in the right place. We may not be a country where dance and especially ballet is embraced by "everyman" but we do have some of the best ballet companies and schools, teachers, dancers and choreographers in the world. And I suppose it may not be a bad thing. When things get so popular they tend to get dumbed down to make them more acceptable to the great mass of people. That would be awful for ballet. Just try to deal with what we have and struggle for some incremental improvements.

Today we had two articles about ballet in the NYT, a review of the ABT Swan Lake with Dvorvenko with a stunnig picture of her and Beloserkovsky. That photo, quite large and in color is breath taking. Bravo to all. I am psyched up to see Swan Lake tomorrow! And the other article was about the Jackson competition which relates to the thread about ballet and sport. My impression is that it has an upside and a downside, but it is clearly modeled on the olympics which is about as much a sporting competition as there is! Seems as if many dancers get their bounce into the "big leagues from there, but seems as if some complain there is too much emphasis on technique and not enough on art. In any case, the Times is doing some interesting writing about dance these days.... or is it that I am more aware of it because of BT?

Hans, As you may know I am not a dancer... I recently discovered the wonderful Ballet Talk and was so thrilled to find it. My interest and attraction to ballet is so different from an artist involved in the dance or ballet. I have always love the way dancers moved and glided. For many years I lived near the Joffrey school and was treated to many students who came and went. I had some modern dancer friends and attended numerous performances from Ballet, to Paul Taylor to Martha Graham and so on. I was not a frequent attende, but I did so when I since the 80s. Ballet was always very special to my eyes and on a "pedestal" as a sort of "gold standard" of dance. Once sense a history and that the "interpretation was rather subtle as the ballets were "set" works... so I thought. In the past few years we have been attending ABT 4 or 5 times a year. Each timeI attend I have a greater appreciation and "awe" of these dancers. It is very hard to articulate. I found myself focusing less on the foot work at first, more on the entire body and lately on the upper body and the arms... which I have learned is called epaulement and port de bras. We think of dance reflexively as being about steps and footwork, but the upper body for me is where all the "meaning" of ballet is found. I call it "gesture" for lack of a better word. I have little frame of reference because I have seen so few ballets and so few artists dance the same role. But I have seen Kent, Reyes, Wiles, Vishneva, Ferri, ... all the principals of the ABT. The epaulemnt/port de bras of Julie Kent and Paloma Herrera I found especially compelling and could not figure out where their bones went at times! These brilliant dancers can move their upper body (arms..hands fingers even) like some boneless sea creature who apendages flow with the current of the water. And this movement is in perfect synchrinicity with the music as if it is coming fromwithinn these dancers at time. It amazes me how they can be so perfectly timed.... or whatever it is that I am seeing. I love to watch the hands and arms with my glasses... as one never sees arms and hands move with such grace and beauty. This port de bras/epaulement seems to be something much more visable in the female dancers... am I wrong? Any way, thanks for taking the time with dolts like me... the BT board is a treasure!

I have seen some absolutely, stunning photos of dancers... What are your favorite photos of dancers and where can the be seen? Can they be had as individual photos or posters (I assume so)? Do you collect them? Is there a "coffee table" book of these photos you would recommend? I am referring to one or two dancers, and not entire scenes with the corps and sets and all... like a sculpture. Those are the ones that do it for me.

Sousa, Yes it is.. a vaste cultural, even bigoted wasteland... but there are pockets where you can escape from the provincialism. Go dance!

omshanti, You post underscores how our cultures strongly influences how we see the world. Yet as the world grows smaller as a result of travel and so forth... cultures merge. blend and there is cross pollination of values. American is the example of a cultural melting pot, though it is deeply steeped in eurocentric aesthetics... at least the "high culture/arts" part. But it should also be noted that America is hardly a culture as a whole which embraces the arts... but one that has pockets arts communities scattered throughout... representing cultures from around the world.

I recall last weeke when we saw Manon, that Julie Kent, wore tights which appeared soiled... could be wrong, but I thought this was part of the costuming... Perhaps Vishneva's legs were meant to look bruised as in an abused prisoner? ... a litte ballet verite perhaps???

drb That is an interesting explanation about DV's bare legs... and how she may have used it as a metaphor both within the story and within the genre of ballet... as Manon is obvious a somewhat "revolutionary" " ballet". If she did.. brava for that. How much control over costume do dancers have? Since the other Manons wore tights... it seems to have been her decision... no?

What I found odd was that there was no mention of Ferri and Bocca's performances. I was incredibly privileged to see Julie Kent dance Manon last week. I thought she was incredible in the role... and she wore light colored tights As far as bare legs... would this have been in the last act? If so, I suppose it was an attempt to draw a connection between prostitutues and nudity. Could this have been the calculus? Would this have been Vishneva's decision? BTW I liked the review, but wished she had gone into more detail... but it was the NYT... can you expect more?

We have made some headway as far a hompphobia is concerned, but travel to the exburbs and beyond and homophobia is still prevalent I would think. But not all gay males are sissy types... many are macho! In my mind the problem is the conflation of ballet as something for females... for people who have little exposure. And the fact that only females are interested in grace and movement as is common in ballet. Flamenco, for example, seems to have a well defined masculine image for the public to think of when they think of male flamenco dancing... Lots of feet stomping and so on. For some reason, grace and beauty seem to be identified with the female... and surely many females possess this and these become the core of their appeal to males. And when you DO have a well know celeb such as Nureyev who is openly homosexual it reinforces the stereotype. I suspect at least some of the press Baryshnikov garnered was because he was literteally used to dispell the notion of male bellet dancers as being gay and sissies. Enlightened people do not care about the sexual preference of an artist. They care about their work. Unenlightened people can't get past their provincial notions of what "normal" roles are for males and females.

In pop culture dancing does not have this stigma. I suspect it is the "men in tights" thing and the fact that in the mind of the uniformed public ballet is "feminine". Finally there is the notion that ballet dancers (male) are narcisstic and focused on their "appearance" which is something which is permitted and even encouraged in females, but scorned in men. Ironically, this narcissism is tolerated in body building which is very popular these days amongst the same group that finds male ballet dancers "sissies". As a non dancing hetero male, I find these men wonderful examples of the well trained and disciplined male body... especially in motion. I love to see their virtuosity in ballet!

How DOES knowing "the story" make the ballet a "better experience"? It of course would provide some sort of context and meaning to the sets, costumes.. and dancers on stage... How does this knowledge actually intersect with your appreciation of the actual dancing? Does this awareness allow you to evaluate the "success" on some level of the choreography as distinguished from the dancing technique and virtuosity? Does this mean that certain dancers are better cast because of their "look", for example, irrespective of their technique?

This is a terrific question and something which I have thought about a lot. One the one hand art is meant to be a message we are meant to receive without secret or esoteric knowledge. Were it required the audience for the message of art would be incredibly small. The genius of art is that its message is "holographic" and depending on what the observer brings to the experience, the message can, will and does change in content and nuance. All works of art share this "holographic" nature and those who are especially drawn to art, as "consumers" and or creators have understood that the more knowledge you bring to the experience as an observer, the richer the experience will be. But again, great art needs no esoteric knowledge to speak to the observer. As a none musician and non dancer I cannot ever get to all the levels that are there... same goes for painting and sculpture in the experience of the work. At first I was drawn to ballet and opera because I marveled at the beauty and the rigor and the way music and movement create meaning... and librettos do contribute to meaning, but surely not necessary. I love the complexity and the simplicity of art, ballet and music... composed of little things merged together which such "craft" and beauty and speaking volumes in a language without words (except perhaps songs). I am drawn to the mystery of these abstractions because I simply cannot do them or without study understand them. But knowledge and understanding can be "incremental" and as the light shines brighter we do in fact "receive more". So I am slowly becoming more familiar and learning bit and pieces and as I do it amazes more! Now there always is the danger of focusing so much on technique and detail that the art is lost. And therefore some innocence is lost and some of the mystery must surely fade. This is what science does to the mystery of matter... it reveals the mysteries. Most of the conversation of BT is completely over my head, but I am now more and more interested in gaining a bit more understanding of the genre because I believe I will receive more as I watch a performance. I recall my first trip to a country where I did not speak the language. I observed immediately how I looked at the expressions on people's faces, their gestures ... anything non verbal that I might use to better understand what was being said. My initial experience of ballet was like that heightened awareness... searching for understanding and meaning in everything. Now I want to be able to "read" the language a bit... not enough to be fluent, but enough to get more of the message... the message which lives on levels which can only be extracted with insight and deeper knowledge of the work, the artists, the genre and the entire experience. I am enjoying my naivite immensely and my respect for the ballet is growing daily. Thank you for raising this issue.

How many of you non dancers collect and regularly watch ballet videos? I have only seen ballet on TV a few times and although I enjoyed the presentation I found it completely different from seeing a live performance. Since I am not a dancer who might benefit from studying technique, I have never even considered buying a video of ballet. This week at the ABT / Met bookstore I noticed many videos of ballet, partly because my raised consciousness from this message board. I was tempted to buy something but did not even know what to buy. What do you like, dislike, think, and recommend as far as ballet videos go?

The NY Times has TWO ballet reviews this morning and quite interesting, One by Rockwell comparing the Manon staged by the RB in Boston and the ABT at the Met. He included some bits about the Bocca Ferri partnership which "ends" in their performance of Manon on Thursday. We saw Manon last night w/ Julie Kent and Carreno. My favorite part was when Manon danced with Lescaut and Des Grieux (I believe). It looked like weaving a beautiful piece of clothe from gorgeous human threads! It was quite a ballet, but I felt the third act did not compare to the first two as their story seemed to take a pretty rapid dive. But maybe life IS like that.. slow on the uptake and the crash comes swiftly??? The staging had the feel of La Traviata and there were some parallels in the story about a fall from grace of a lovely young beauty. Anna Kisselgof did a piece about Julio Bocca's career in anticipation of his final appeanance in Manon. It was a fair attempt to summarize a brilliant career in 10 or 15 paragraphs. You can tell that he will be sorely missed.

Perhaps someone could identify a series of ballets or "dances" and place them on some sort of continuum from a completely classic type ballet through to the gray area where modern influences are seen right on to a contempory dance which has defintely balletic influence, but is mostly idenitfied as a modern work. I am referring mostly to "technique". I suppose. Are any new, but very classic ballets being choreographed these days? Which ones and by who?

This season the ABT had a wonderful evening called Latin Nights and it featured all ABT Hispanic principals of which Julio is one of them. The program was Le Corsaire and Julio danced with Paloma as Medoa. The Latin passion was sizzling that night and this was Julio's last season. I think Paloma is usually paired with Gomes, but this pairing certainly was marvelous. I am not a seasoned ballet goer, attending but 5 performances each season, but I thought he was amazing with Paloma that night... and she with him. And tonight we see Manon... It will be amazing I am sure...

Hans, Is port de bras more prominent in the choreography of classical or romantic ballet? Are any ballet dancers particularly known for their port de bras?

What about romance both on and off stage. Is this permitted .. or are dancers who couple up off stage asked to leave... It would seem kind of weird, but it may be policy... Any stories?

Which ballet dancer(s) in your opinion exhibits the "best" port de bras? Is this something which is consistent in every performance or is one role a platform for this exceptional quality of the dancer? Can a ballet dancer be great without being exceptional at port de bras? How important is this in the overall assessment of a dancer? In my own limited experience and "eye" I can see quite a difference between the principal, the soloists and even the corps as far a port de bras is concerned. I made this observation in my most recent ballet experience on Saturday at the ABT's Giselle with Herrera. Admittedly the lead has more opportunities to demonstrate "virtuosity" here, but it got me thinking about the whole topic. Any comments??

Glad I didn't waste my time reading the book. The movie was awful and the casting of Tom Hanks as a professor was terrible. Obviously a bad movie based on a bad book about a bizarre story which was bound to get millions of people upset. And it did... and I'm one of them. Don't waste your time.

The tutu in my mind (naive and uneducated in dance) represents the classic ballerina's costume. But this is surely not a requirement for the definition of ballet. I don't associate the tutu with anything but ballet. I do love the way a ballerina doing point in a tutu looks... usually stunning... no? What is the "deal" with the tutu and costuming in general? Are more "modern" costumes associated with more recent productions?

Are the gray areas mostly among companies in the USA? Or are these "hybrids" seen around the world? Another question is about Asian dancers. I have seen several of them in ABT and NYCB, but was wondering if there are any ballet companies based in Asia with most of the dancers of Asian decent? There are many extremely gifted muscisians...Yo-Yo Ma comes to mind. Is ballet eurocentric? and is this a result of where it "came from"?