4mrdncr

LA GIACONDA, Gran Teatre de Liceu (BARCELONA) 2005 How apropos this topic was as I was just thinking of asking what people thought of that Dance of the Hours? Now available on DVD. (Deborah Voigt as LG) It was contemporary in sets, but singers wore costumes that approximated the time period with some Comedia del 'Arte references. The Dance of the Hours all-female corps had flowing dresses, contemporary again. But the two principal dancers? A gold dusting of torsos for both Angel Corella and Leitizia Giuliani; him shirtless in cropped tights, she topless with some strategic body paint, and only a thong below. My reaction(s): 1) First and foremost for me "what's the point?" ... There was an element of meeting/wooing/consummating in the choreography which may possibly explain the 'au natural' aspect, but it wasn't explicit (no pun intended). So then I thought, it's Europe, they don't care, everyone does it, so why not them too? But...WHAT is the point? HOW is it relevant to the action, the dance, the story? 2) "ouch,ouch,ouch" and "how unfair to her!--as usual, it's the female who provides the view. Poor Ms. Giuliani, despite the strength of her chest wall, would still have discomfort during and after the performance. And I did wonder if the gold dust/body paint made the partnering more difficult or not. Lots of rosin I assume to compensate? I also noticed that Mr. Corella was careful about where he placed his hands. 3)I should notify all world fitness gurus that all their routines and videos and exhorbitant fees will never provide them with the musculature, athleticism, and grace of Ms. Guiliani. Oh yeah, Mr. Corella's physique was not bad either. At least the second time I viewed the dvd, I managed to concentrate on technique and the fascinating play of what muscle was used during what step, and forget about the fact Ms. Giuliani was exposing more of both. Of course, technically, both dancers were superb. The choreography was classical with embedded excerpts/references (intentional or not I do not know) to most of the classical rep (I saw lots of Swan Lake, Don Q, some Giselle, and of course Corsair etc.etc.). Christopher Wheeldon, who also used both dancers in his "Dance of the Hours" for the Met last year, commented that Ms. Giuliani was a 'good partner for Angel' with her 'bendy Italian thing' and I agree, physically and technically they were well matched. She did a beautiful penche, had a floating yet powerful jete to match his, and an extension and flexible back. Something else I subliminally felt rather than overtly observed was a VERY subtle, almost defiant attitude in Angel Corella's performance. A "so there" addressed to his audiance that changed into an almost ecstatic smile at the strength of the ovations after. I'm hoping, they, like myself, appreciated the dancing and dancers, rather than what they were wearing...or not.

SCHEDULE CHANGES? ABT's website is showing an added performance of SS (Corella & ?) opening night in London. Does that mean he's still dancing SS on Saturday Feb.17 too, or was it changed to accomodate the gala in Madrid on the 16th with someone else to perform on the 17th? The whole thing is beginning to remind me of Rockwell's speculations in the NYTimes about marketing. (I will say though that Corella & Lane were VERY good the one and only time they performed it in NY last October, and it would be great to see Misty get her chance to dance it too.)

Springfield, MA. The ONLY time this century I think (until two years ago)... Baryshnikov with a tour group from ABT that included Robert LaFosse, Leslie Browne, (and I think) Jaffe, Harvey, Yeager. Sorry, can't remember much else. It's sad considering its proximity to Jacob's Pillow. Gotta feeling the 19th century was better represented.

Two major influences a) Before "The Mozart Effect" was discovered, my mother tried her own version when I was growing up in Japan (so no tv/radio) just hundreds of 4hr reel-to-reel recordings of all the classical composers compiled and played at home, and trips to concerts, ballets (as well as my own dance career). I didn't know "Pop/Rock" music existed till we returned to the States--to this day, I'll recognize a song but have no idea which group performs it. b) Most other musical references had to do with what was played in class--ie. this for plie's, that for tendus, that for pique turns etc.etc.etc.. (In the beginning, we didn't have rehearsal pianists so much of it was fully orchestrated recorded versions played back with 'pitch differentials'.) MUSIC I LIVE WITH in my head ALL the time...(Or why I don't have an iPod yet) SWAN LAKE. First heard at age 2, then on Fonteyn-Nureyev soundtrack (didn't realize till I saw SL live--age4, there was different music for the Black Swan pdd). Whenever I am upset, consciously or not, I end up humming the Princess' waltz from Act3. To this day I can hum the entire score in order, at correct tempo, and dance to most of it. (I try not to when attending live performances.) All other Tchaikovsky...I love him, I can recognize him in 3 notes, but only in small doses please. 2) PROKOFIEV: ROMEO & JULIET--ALL of it, like SL above, I live with it; but Bedroom scene & the very last note resonate most musically. "Cinderella": The ballroom pas de deux. The rest, like Kudelka said, is the waltzes only; but I do like the cacophony at midnight. (Also like Lt. Kije (sp?) 3) RESPIGHI: ANCIENT AIRES & DANCES (Suite 2 especially). I adored dancing to it, and choreographing it. 4) J.S. BACH: Anything, anywhere, any time. Definately a candidate for that..."___wrote 600 works and they only choreograph to____." Why is that? MOZART--but not always to dance to. (I had forgotten how powerful Stierl's "Lachrymosa" was--but the music had a lot to do with that.) Poor overused Pachelbel--the first recording (Paillard) still best for me, with Fasche trumpet concerto on that album more a favorite. 5) MAHLER's 5th Symphony ADAGIETTO--"Round of Angels" is probably still the most beautiful, serenely detached, work I've ever seen. 6) ADAM: GISELLE - Mostly just Act2--esp. the two pdd's, and the last part as she returns to grave. 7) CHOPIN: Les Sylphides. (Bb?) Etude choreographed by Ashton at end of "Turning Pointe", and "Piananissima?" used by Ashton in "A Month in the Country". 2nd Piano Concerto adagio/andante. 8) Modern and/or Minimalist composers: STRAVINSKY: Apollo, Firebird, Petrouchka (sorry, I prefer harmony to dissonance) IVES Unanswered Question, PART (I still love all variations of Fratres--why do people have to ruin it by overuse!?), GORETSKI's 3rd Symphony (First movement). I also really liked the score to "In the middle...". Can't wait to finally see Wheeldon's use of Ligeti this March at BB. 9) RAYMONDA, MANON (Lanchberry's re-working for Macmillan), SYLVIA, Les Patineurs in winter only. 10) CORSAIR's PAS de DEUX/TROIS--is this available on CD or not? Mostly, I hear a piece of music somewhere and immediately am choreographing it in my head--like Mr.B I "see" the music (as dance). And like many, there is a continuous internal musical accompaniment.

More info re: IN THE UPPER ROOM There are TWO CDs of the score readily available--I think originally it was included on "Glassworks" (not sure it's complete) and now the newer "Danceworks", which includes 3 Glass works that were later choreographed. This second CD includes the complete "In the Upper Room" and "Mad Rush" which Kirk Peterson choreographed for the ABT Studio company. Both CDs are available at Amazon, B&N, and probably other sites (or stores) as well. The music is very popular to choreograph to because it creates a sonic "wall" of music, and no matter what you do, you'll always be on a beat. (Something that's also true of Bach.) I happen to like "minimalist" music including the ubiquitous Part, Adams, Reich etc. so I can find it oddly soothing as well as enervating. The first time I saw "...Upper Room", (after a very long break), by ABT in 2005, the fog effect was so thick there were MAJOR complaints in the City Center Mezz because the dancers were totally invisible! Then an ABT staffer ran out fast, informed the FX guys, the fog cleared a little, and Lo! We could see. In 2006, I saw it ABT do it 3x. It is a marathon performance, but there are breaks, not all dancers are onstage all the time. I tend to view it by concentrating on particular duos and groups through the entire piece. Because of this, I can watch entrances/exits and how they react or differentiate themselves from the general "corps". Partnering (and difficulties there) also becomes more apparent. There is also a LOT of repetition, so it is possible to then turn your attention to others who may be doing something different in the corners. What I enjoyed most was watching the most classical dancers in ABT just 'let loose' and yet still try to retain the technical control that's so ingrained. I'm not sure if that made it correct "Tharp" but it was interesting. I have a feeling the Bolshoi may have a similar hurdle. I agree totally that Stella Abrera got the head 'bobble' the best. (I miss Cheryl Yeager.)

Finally! Hooray! I heard about this possibility last November, and thought there would be an announcement in February, and now they've even beat that deadline. Wonderful! In an interview in the winter 2006 edition of "Dance International", Corella explains his purpose and plans for the company and school, and the recruitment, auditions, and practical renovations/re-construction necessary to make it happen. It all sounds very beautiful, and ambitious. Vision, focus, determination, and very hard work coordinating and organizing all the development and administrative staff necessary to make it viable and sustainable. All the best to Corella, his Foundation, staff, and the people of Spain. I am so glad it will be a CLASSICAL ballet company (and now maybe two classical companies?). I look forward to the next announcement. RE: Touring...Of course Corella and the approximately 10 dancers from ABT, NYCB or elsewhere that make up his group have been touring around Spain for several years now. So yes, many of those beyond Madrid and Barcelona environs have had a chance to see some great dancers perform and maybe to appreciate the artform and its exemplars more. I do have one question about the Madrid gala mentioned in Carolina's post...Did she mean 16 February 2007--ie. the DAY BEFORE Angel Corella is scheduled to perform with ABT in London, or next year? I know he likes a tight schedule of performances but I'm a little surprised that ABT management would agree--especially if any of his current colleagues are also scheduled to appear at the gala.

I lived in southern cal 8 years and am quite familiar with the lovely freeways and the two hours it would take me to go the 12 miles from my house to H'wood during rush hour. During the '80's I remember ABT coming for 3 WEEKS to Los Angeles. And having to compete with the Phil for the Music Center. The orchestra used to complain about "dancers tights drying in the dressing rooms" etc. So then, ABT performed at Shrine Auditorium. Try filling a house that seats 6000! Baryshnikov was the draw that did that, but dancing on that huge stage, and using their ancient backstage facilities was never good. Then, when OCPAC was built, ABT had a new place to call home. But after Baryshnikov left, I never remember any more 3 week seasons. Now the Phil has the new Gehry Disney Hall, and ABT is free to visit Dorothy Chandler again without complaint. And like LA Ballet, they are planning a week in LA and a week in Orange County. The more the merrier. Boston Ballet is another company that does short programs (aprox. 1 week--sometimes single works: DonQ, sometimes mixed-rep) scattered over the fall/spring, and usually saves the multi-act story ballets for the longer runs. Their Nutcracker fills the coffers; though, like many other companies, the touring Rockettes forced them from the Wang Ctr. to the Opera House. The other change BB did, was seating in the Wang Center. They completely closed the balcony to tickets (only the Mezz left open) and charged accordingly. One of the reasons I preferred to travel all the way to NYC instead--even with the cost of transport (and sometimes hotels) I had better seats, at less cost, to see great ballets and dancers. But cutting back the seating within a house may offer the new LAB an option too. I am VERY glad LA Ballet is travelling to different venues in the county--more people can see them, learn, and hopefully build a bigger audience. One of my other peeves with BB, they never come to the western part of MA, like it doesn't exist past 128. Thank goodness for Jacob's Pillow and SPAC. And MA is not even as big as Orange Cty, CA.

It's interesting how lives can parallel. I too left a professional dance career and got two masters degrees in nonprofit management in Boston. (I turned down the Ivy Leagues though for the chance to double major at less expense.) Rachel Moore is another person with a similar career track--and look where she is now. Will Damian follow at NYCB? Yes, it was an interesting article, but also a very recognizable scenario to me. Also, if he is the new director at Vail, does that explain the other BT question/thread about Christopher Wheeldon (and a possible company of his) coming there too? I saw his BB gala performance Oct.25th.

No. I do not mean "how" one dancer or another does a role, or performs a work. I am talking about the STEPS THEMSELVES inherently illustrating a dancer's personal technique or character. So that, even years later, you don't have to "remember" a dancer doing the role, because in essence you still see them before you in the steps being performed. This is what I meant by a 'gift of immortality': even when our old brains have forgotten and memories dimmed, the original dancer will still be visible in the steps performed. Like Mischa and Natasha were in the "Other Dances" I saw (25 years after I saw them do it), and last Oct/Nov when I saw Angel Corella do "Clear" again after seeing others perform it. No matter who performed the steps, it was Corella's technique, musicality, and shear verve visible within each movement. That synergy symbiosis or whatever is a wonderful gift from a choreographer to a dancer. And I am sure it something many dancers hope to achieve when new works are created.

I've posted elsewhere about the time I wrote to ABT to have a book autographed by two principal dancers for a friend of mine who was ill at the time and so could not attend performances that year. The dancers wrote personalized autographs and the book was returned to me the next day. I believe this is the only written correspondence I've received. Both in writing, (I've made and given a few cards), and conversation, I make it a point not to "gush" simplistic compliments, but only speak if I have a specific observation or question about technique, business, or performance schedules. And yes, I NEVER ask a personal question beyond inquiries about an injury or recovery. If you respect someone's space and privacy, they will respect you in return. One time, I didn't even approach a dancer I met (they were busy with fans, I was exhausted);I merely smiled and waved, and got a 'flash of recognition' and a smile and wave in return. Sometimes you are lucky, and 'bump' into someone on a street or have a chance to chat after a performance, and twice now, I believe the restraint and respect I have shown in the past, has allowed me to have an informative and honest conversation with some very well known dancers. I've also noticed that they respect the sacrifices and long distances many travel to see them. I once received an email, but since I couldn't believe anyone famous would ever write (though I have received emails from the family of a well-known actor), I opened it fast and deleted it for fear of a virus. When no virus ever appeared on the computer, it did make me wonder if the email was legitimate. Unfortunately, I didn't note a return-address. (It would probably have been blocked anyways.) If it was legit, then that was pretty amazing. The original thread for this noted the receipt of autographed pictures and notes by some fans. As always, I am amazed at how kind and generous the dancers of this generation are. Previously, I remember a much more guarded demeanor, and often entourages or actual security surrounding the more famous from any contact(s).

FYI: Go to www.pbs.org (sorry don't know how to link) and look under programs for "Great Performances" then you should be able to find the "Swan Lake" program and accompanying articles--including an interview with Gillian Murphy. I am glad Dance in America taped and broadcast ABT's "Swan Lake". I am glad it won an EMMY (yes, the US television equivalent of an "Oscar") because the television direction (Matthew Diamond--why are they always male?!), editing (Ghirish Barghava),and most of the camera work was good. (For reviews of the dance/dancers etc. see the ABT thread) But still must complain... (1) It really didn't have much competition (two other programs were PBS productions too), and since NATAS (The Academy of Television Arts & Sciences) eliminated the culture/performing arts categories, it gets a "special class" EMMY award (whatever that is) so there is a category for it to win in. (2) Only ONE, yes ONE station in the entire USA out of 345 public television stations does a major dance program "Dance in America" that records full performances, not just short news segments, not just documentaries. And its creative-production staff has not changed in decades. So other directors or dance film makers are never given a national tv outlet for their work. (So much for the Arts (now A&E) and Bravo cable channels ever doing ballets again, and don't even mention the broadcast networks!) Therefore, I am still confused who did the NYCB "Swan Lake" on PBS the year before DiA did ABT's? And is "Live from Lincoln Center" a completely separate program, or was it subsumed many years back under the "Great Performances" umbrella? (3) It's criminal that the "Live from Lincoln Center" 1977(?) "Swan Lake" with Makarova & Nagy (another EMMY winner) and later "Giselle" with Baryshnikov & Makarova (another EMMY winner) is no longer available on video and not yet on DVD. (Luckily I got the videos when they were first released) You'd think someone would like to make some $$$ from them! Just my minor annoyance showing. PS. In the spirit of full journalistic disclosure...I have worked at PBS stations, made dance films--though not broadcast any nationally, and won an EMMY or two.

PROMOTE THE STAR...or NOT? Apropos to this thread, I once had a very interesting (and somewhat oblique) conversation about this very thing with a "star". The question was, should management cast them because they were popular and the public demanded it? If it was good for the bottom line, and past experience had sort of proven that, then why not? What determined the choice? Aesthetics or economics? Kevin McKenzie said in an article in the NYTimes last year, that in years past, he had DELIBERATELY mixed up an established (and sure money-making) partnership with no great drop in attendence or $. Therefore, if economics wasn't the answer; then aesthetics was a much more touchy (confusing, frustrating, and hurtful?) reason. And that brought up the subject of why people are cast in certain roles in the first place. CROSS-TRAIN and CROSS-PROMOTE My first thought was that others need a chance, too, to learn or grow into a part. One of the things I always admired about Baryshnikov's tenure at ABT was his willingness to promote from within, and not dance every star turn role (maybe to save those knees?). This could create new "stars" in a particular role, and provide more casting depth and/or back-up in case of injury. An example of the standard business technique of "cross-training". McKenzie does this too. WHAT MAKES A STAR? TECHNIQUE or ARTISTRY? THE DANCER OR THE AUDIENCE? My interest in a dancer--and especially a "star" dancer--is HOW and WHY are they greater? Technique is one reason "how", artistry one reason "why". If it's a question of technique, then one is comparing it to a standard. Who created that standard? And if many dancers have excellent technique, what makes a particular dancer stand out from the rest? It's not just HOW they do a step, it's how they do it DIFFERENTLY. And here is the crux of that bias--again, it is a COMPARISON. Unless you have seen others perform the same step or role, then you cannot see or analyse what makes your favorite "star" truly stand out. Unless there is a "crowd" there cannot be one who stands out from that crowd. So, others MUST perform the work or role to provide a standard of comparison. And if technical mastery is equal, then again, it's how each does it differently. This is where the "artistry" comes in. Now we are being SUBJECTIVE because each of us has our own standard of what "artistic" differences please us most. A rather astute 'star' once said (paraphrasing) "at a certain professional level, all dancers are technically great, art[istry] shouldn't be competitive, and for the audience [and maybe judges at competitions?] it just devolves to a [subjective] liking of one dancer over another." A star may be created first by an objective critique of technique or technical mastery, but eventually it devolves to a more subjective predeliction (too strong?) or affinity (too mushy?) for certain aesthetic "traits". What is artistry? Tell me it's not a personal (and subjective) standard. What about stage presence, or charisma, on-stage and off? Charisma does help, if it reaches across the footlights to an audience. It draws an audience into the performer/performance, and by making them feel involved (and invested), creates an affinity. This consequently makes an audience forgive more if technique flags. I once said a certain dancer excelled in a role because of a synergy of looks, temperament, and technique. I thought it was the presence of all THREE traits, not just one that contributed. A more general audience probably goes by looks alone--the bane of many a "star" who wants to be taken as a serious "actor". Or dancer? (Take that Mr. Rockwell! for your sexist bemoaning of a lack of "glamourous" dancers.) Here, the audience (or media) creates the star. ADS: PROMOTE THE DANCER OR THE DANCE? e.g.: ABT's banners in front of the Met 2006 First there was Stiefel & Murphy in the lake in Fabrizio Ferri's photo. Was this an attempt to promote two stars (not exactly good, considering Stiefel didn't dance at all that season)? Or an attempt to promote the romance of "Swan Lake"? Or just an interesting pic to make people look up? I think it was (hopefully) a combo of reasons 2 & 3. Ditto Alessandra Ferri in her husband's double exposure pic of Giselle; useful as both a promo for her in a signature role, and as an intriguing "ghostly" image to draw in the less informed audiences who saw it. And how many times have we seen the passionate close-up used to promote R&J? I still remember BB's photos by -?-Brandt in the early 90's. All tight close-ups of tight clinches by their "hot" (ie. popular not just physically) principal dancers. Ditto ABT in the past: Nancy Ellison's close-up of Herrera & Corella used at the bus stops, and this year Rosalie O'Connor's photo of Reyes & Corella on the Met banners. But I don't think the R&J banners this past season just promoted a "star" in a signature role (and again, what makes it a signature role or that dancer a star?) Rather, like the ghostly Giselle pic, or Siegfried/Odette in the water, it promoted the essential plot point of the ballet--using THE most expressive dancers in those roles to illustrate it. What, in fact, F. Ferri said was the point of his photos--and maybe why his example of R&J was Tybalt (Hallberg) killing Mercutio (Cornejo): the conflict as principal plot motivator, not the love story. So Rockwell can look at the banners as promos for stars--but I saw them as promos for ballets using the dramatic actions/exemplars to promote them. Good for the stars, but more importantly, good for the bottom line if it brought in the curious.

I'm pretty sure it was the Bedroom pdd. Luckily I've forgotten if it was the Balcony--maybe at the end of it? Bedroom pdd is marginally endureable because it really is the end of life for them together, but the Balcony pdd?! I want to see a free-flowing plunge into love in that pdd, not a heavy foreshadowing of all the tragedy to come. Otherwise, where is the shock when it happens?

Round of Angels is still my favorite. Nothing compares to seeing it live and watching the curtain open to that huge velvety starfield and the silvery light glimmering off (and limning) the dancers. The Mahler Adagietto, too, works to create a feeling of an infinite serenity above and beyond commonplace worries. Magical. Does anyone still do this ballet? Also, who choreographed "Panoramagram?" I will never forget the dancers on risers in the opening piece perfectly immitating a computer circuitboard, and that drop from a 10-15ft. high tower into the arms of attentive partners.

Last October I saw a performance of "Other Dances" and, as usual, attempted to match the current execution of the steps with my memories (not having seen it danced since its originators performed it), and was suddenly struck by how much Mischa and Natasha "lived" in those steps. For the first time, I saw the steps as the living embodiment of their original creator/interpretors. No matter who performed them, it was Mischa and Natasha--THEIR technique, THEIR personalities--visible in each movement. Many times one sees other dancers perform a work and remembers the originals dancing it; one of the reasons Jacques D'Amboise so eloquently noted current performers have to work harder or be greater to supersede (paraphrasing) "the memories of those who came before." That is not what I mean. I am NOT remembering originators dancing a work, I am seeing them VISIBLE WITHIN the steps that were created on/for them. This is perfection in choreography: to so completely understand a dancer's abilities, that they are incorporated into the steps themselves, and a gift of immortality to an ephemeral art and artist. Can any of you think of other examples--where the STEPS THEMSELVES embody the choreographer's and original dancer's technique/artistry/sensibilities? My most recent encounter with this phenomenon, was watching Angel Corella do "Clear". No matter who else performed the lead, and many excellent dancers have, what I saw was a gift from one artist (the choreographer) to another (the dancer); a symbiosis of form and technique and ultimately artistry that perfectly illustrated a singular talent. The other parts in "Clear" were more interchangeable; all perfectly executed by the various casts, but not "living embodiments" of a single technique or artist--though I thought I could see Julie Kent's long endless line missing somehow from Xiomara Reyes' performance, which must mean that Kent was inherent in those steps as well. Or was it just my memory?

Hello, I have very distinct memories of the R&J Choo-San Goh did for Boston Ballet. Yes, the sets and costumes were gorgeous. And when Rudy Van Dantzig did the next version of it for them, BB kept the sets pretty much intact. Unfortunately, they have since taken those sets (and backdrops) and painted EVERYTHING black! Ugh! They turned what looked like a replica of a piazza in N. Italy (with equestrian statue--though not Leonardo's in Milan) with warm amber lighting into a modern "black-box" production any small (and poorer) company could do. Choreographically, the biggest difference I remember was the interpolation of a "Fate" character. Danced by a female dancer (en pointe of course), she danced a solo prologue during the overtures for each act, and then interpolated herself into the big actions, or by interweaving between the principals in many of the duets--which I found terribly distracting and totally unnecessary since I always thought the music and principal choreography sh/could explain all even if one did not know the plot! But the most distinctive and memorable use of the Fate character was at the end of Acts (or some scenes) when she would streak across the stage carrying an absolutely HUGE black banner as a kind of foreshadowing of (or commentary upon?) the tragedy to come. Choo-San Goh did explain his creation and use of a Fate character, probably in "Sightlines" BB's subscriber newsletter. If you are interested, maybe BB has archives of old issues? Or the NYPL Perf.Arts Library archives? In conclusion, I liked almost everything he did with the ballet except making the pas de deux into pas de trois. That banner, though, still sticks in my mind and was incredibly dramatic.

As I've posted elsewhere about travelling long distances to see performances (for me it's mostly ABT, NYCB, Boston Ballet, RB/Kirov/Bolshoi guesting in Boston or NYC, and some trips to Los Angeles & OCPAC performances. I'd love to go back to Europe--London/Paris, and Spain--thank you CarolinaM and Grissi--if I can save up. Of course Russia and Denmark would be on the list too if funds were sufficient.) I'd very much like to meet up with the knowledgeable balletomanes on this site. I often travel alone and it's not much fun (re-)viewing and analyzing an amazing peformance with yourself. Also, group rates are still less than single rates last time I checked. (The only good thing about going alone, is that it's usually easier to find a single seat at a theatre.) I am planning to attend NYCB this winter, if possible, to catch up on all the Diamond Project premieres I missed and maybe Sleeping Beauty. I will most definately be attending ABT this summer, but can't get a series subscription because I work crazy hours and can't commit to the same day. Does anyone know when single ticket/different day make-your-own/FLEX subscriptions will be available? I am going to try and get to NYC this week (Wed.matinee?) to see Ailey. Most times I have to do matinees unless, I splurge on accomodations since late trains/busses home are only available on Fridays and Sundays. (Why not Saturday night?!) Am also considering Chicago in March. I am SO glad I have this site to "talk to".

Why long? Why buns? Others can probaby write more on this, but since the beginnings of ballet (18th century?) women have had long hair and used wigs. The British still use wigs in their law courts, parliamentary (just H of Lords?) events etc.! Short hair (except during those wild 1920's when the "bob" was current with the general populace) was still considered a mark of illness or a shameful or criminal conviction. (Now if it's too short, some people wonder about a woman's sexual orientation--how sad is that?!) Since Balanchine had such an influence on the "ideal" female dancer's physique: pinhead, long neck/legs, arms, underweight androgyny; I always thought it odd that he loved long hair too--the only truly feminine trait to survive that "ideal." Of course more modern choreographers have loved a more "natural" look so no buns, and it's permissible to 'fling' whatever hair you have as you move. The reason ballet dancers put it into a bun is so: (1) They can "spot" correctly doing turns. (It's a lot harder to find/see your spot if your hair is whipping about) A case in point for the same reason: figure skaters: single skaters and females in 'pairs'duos usually have it short or up; only women ice dancers have it long because they usually are moving slower and not doing all those "scratch spins." (Of course lately many MALE skaters have grown their hair long, I guess to look more "hip" or rebellious?) (2) The hair doesn't get sweaty and/or tangled in itself or with arms or costumes etc. while dancing everything else. (3) It's less likely to hit your partner in the face and distract him/her (though I've seen many a poor Romeo suffer that indignity and have to blink fast to save his eyes and still catch Juliet in the Bedroom Pdd. (e.g.: also one of the reasons I don't think Ferri's La Scala R&J video ends well--her hair entirely covers her face in the final tableau in the tomb--why she didn't have that braided headress holding it out of her eyes I don't know.) Just some thoughts. I am sure others can think of more reasons.

MORE "HAIRY" stories: I too have old pics of Christine Sarry, Zizi Jeanmaire, Gelsey and Makarova with short hair. Gelsey wore scarves too. The 3x I saw Gelsey this October (once close, mostly more afar) her hair appeared to be long. I thought all the above looked fine with short hair. I had heard the story about Makarova 'burning' her hair before too, and always thought that's why she loved scarves--more than some Russian "babushka" affinity. And yes, Manon has a shaved head because she was a convict and historically they did that to denote and denigrate them AND prevent lice infections--many 18th c. naval officers of the time also had short hair for the same reason (prevent lice) under their wigs. I too cut my hair after my professional dance career ended--but it took a long time (almost 10 YEARS later) before I cut it above my shoulders. Now, the older I get (and busier) the shorter it gets--not a "buzz" yet, but I do get tempted. I had problems keeping it in a bun when I was dancing because it was very long, straight, and thick. Nets, pins, shellac, hairspray--nothing really worked well. I remember once doing a chaines /double pirouette sequence across the rehearsal room and literally spraying everyone with 'bobby pins'. Eventually I resorted to braiding it first before putting it in a bun so net/pins could actually reach my skull to secure it--the bun would slip down but not come apart. Later, I did a little "dutch girl" thing: I made two long braids and wound them around my head. Not all O-O's I've seen had a bun--the feathery earmuffs usually covered the head enough so buns (or not) didn't matter. Now if only I could have managed that braided Juliet ballroom "do". The only people I remember donning full wigs rather than hairpieces were those old RB "Sleeping Beauty" and "Nutcrackers" which made everyone look like a Royal Doulton figurine.

The following were my impressions after viewing it last year... (Note--I've seen Bocca, and Carreno do Siegfried since, so take some comments with salt please.) Will there ever be a definitive Swan Lake? Probably not, since everyone has felt free to remove, rearrange, re-choreograph it since its inception 130+ years ago. That it still remains the world's most popular ballet is probably more due to Tchaikovsky's score and Lev Ivanov (with some Petipa) than anything else. So the question still remains: How true to the "original" can one remain and still retain that universal appeal without stagnation? For Kevin McKenzie and ABT that meant keeping most of Act II intact, and the ending where both Siegfried and Odette leap into that lake, killing Rothbart and breaking the spell. The rest is a mix of old and new--like most companies do--with some good, some bad, and some ugly. THE GOOD: Shooting this in HDTV. Finally, clear crisp color, picture, sound, and an aspect ratio wide enough to accomodate a stage. Hooray for technology. A prologue helps those not familiar with the plot, and I've not seen one since London Festival Ballet's many years ago. (But I, too, sometimes prefer just listening to all that pathos in the music alone with my own images.) At least the "magic of television" lets Odette do a quick change, instead of the puppet swan one gets in the live performance. And splitting the role of Rothbart does let one see how both Odette, Siegfried et.al. can/could be duped by suave, handsome, accomplished Marcelo Gomes vs. poor Isaac Stappas' evil/cartoonish green monster. (This is not a comment on Stappas' dancing--he isn't given much anyways.) Updating the time period to the 16th century vs. the usual 15th works okay--especially the Act III sets. The dresses are a little voluminous in Act I, esp.if the whole point is to see feet/legs, but they look right for the time period and the dancers are able to move despite the corsetting. The men, of course, look fine. The 16th c. always liked to show off its leg. And the dancing?... Unlike many others,past and present, Murphy and Corella have perfect musical phrasing. What a difference that makes to this score! Finally! Yes Gillian Murphy has great technique. (Has anyone else ever done quadruple multiples in between those fouettes? Maybe Ananiashvili but I forget.) Murphy can balance, turn (in attitude or otherwise), leap, has good extension, and can smirk with the best as evil Odile. But Odette?--see below. Ah Angel Corella. He saves this ballet. Why? Other dancers can leap and turn: Herman Cornejo of course--the Pas de Trois with his sister Erica and Xiomara Reyes; Marcelo Gomes of course--enjoying Act III's Russian dance with the glazed princesses. Both Cornejo and Gomes are graceful and powerful dancers. If leaping and turning were all, the part would be interchangeable, something ABT knows and exploits. But except for Ivan Nagy (yes, the definitive Siegfried) 30 years ago, no one now has the grace and epaulement in partnering that Corella uses. Not just the utilization of upper body/shoulders to stretch and mirror the line; watch how he uses his head to mirror the movements of his partner. He also seems to be one of the few to still do those almost-one-armed croise fouette lifts in Black Swan. (Is it a height differential or upper-body strength problem that prevents most others?) And of course, he can act. Has anyone else ever bothered to pour so much emotion into that reserved moody prince? Something this production's close-ups made sure to capture. One comment I read somewhere said he brings more "focus" to the prince roles. Yes, finally we can feel for Siegfried as much as poor Odette and watch the details of an interpretation that never before has equaled the technical and emotional requirements of its female dancer's. Thankfully, Mr. McKenzie's choreography makes Siegfried more than a pawn or porteur and avoids any freudian overtones. The first act solo (Nureyev's inspired musical interpolation) is a perfect melding of choreography and dancer to convey the emotional "dilemma" McKenzie sets up: Siegfried's need to find a soulmate while confined by the strictures of the court. Supporting characters/dancers: Besides the aforementioned Cornejo and Gomes, Georgina Parkinson and Frederick Franklin (still spry at 90), add wonderful nuance to queen and tutor. The white act corps is ok, though not the Kirov of years past. And I've only seen the Royal Ballet's four cygnets ever make an audience gasp and give an encore ovation for perfect synchronization. Act III's ethnic variations and 4 (why 4 not 6?)princesses are rather bland, but Siegfried is supposed to be bored. (However, catch the inside joke as Corella pauses in his final review of the Spanish princess.) THE BAD: Principal rapport? One reviewer called her "glacial". My mother, (no expert on technique, though a long-time viewer) said she was "too cold". I used to think NYCB dancers were robotic in Swan Lake since they learned the steps and then "Balanchined" all drama out of them. Not anymore. Gillian Murphy isn't that: Twice she captures the "deer in headlights" when Odette spots Siegfried. But time after time, when viewed (especially so in slow-mo) Murphy seems to be dancing with herself, or her own frozen image in a mirror. She looks offstage, she grimaces, she contracts in or pulls away her upper body--once visibly giving Siegfried a "cold shoulder"--instead of relaxing back into her partner. All the wonder, ardor and acting of Corella is wasted as it flies past that glacial swan queen. There IS a difference between regal and glacial. Technical control, droopy wrists and undulating arms are not what makes Odette "soft and vulnerable": It's the fragility, wonder, and awakening emotional attachment to her prince and hoped for savior. No rapport means only steps, not story. Cutting Act IV's music and eliminating the search for stricken Odette hiding amongst her swan maidens. Of course TV timetables mean cutting, though no commercials on PBS should preclude this. And the sad swan music does get preserved live onstage, so why not include it here? DVDs supposedly allow for more space, why not return it? THE UGLY: Details ARE visible in HDTV. Stage make-up looks almost grotesque in HDTV close-up. Facial expressions can look overdone. A lead dancer catching cat-naps onstage is also visible in Act III.(Bored, tired, or acting?)The camera sees all. If one is going to tape a live performance, maybe this once the above could be toned down--even if the live audience misses some. The La Scala R&J comes to mind, not HDTV, but close-ups that don't exaggerate. FYI: One note re the taping and Gillian Murphy's technique being captured once--PBS/DiA actually taped 3 performances and then edited the best takes together. So, without checking the exact dates, I would assume she had at least TWO full performances to exhibit her technical and emoting abilities (while the third perf was strictly for B-roll or pick-up shots).

Ok, my average seems to be 4 hours one way (8hrs for a round-trip). When I lived in about 25 miles northwest of Tokyo, I had to drive to the train station and then take 3 trains to get to the city. So sometimes it was fast, sometimes not, and sometimes Shinjuku was having riots and it got even more fun trying to find a taxi to drive us home. In the States, besides the 4hr roundtrip drive to Boston to see BB, I've flown back and forth to LA to see ABT at the Music Center or OCPAC. (And Kings of Dance last February, followed by the 8hr roundtrip drive to see them in NYC the following weekend--long story there.) I had relatives in CA so could save on hotels, but not recently. I now do the 4+ hours each way into NYC to see NYCB or ABT. If it's an evening performance, and there are no more late bus/trains home, I then must splurge on a ridiculous priced hotel room or go cheap at the Y. Which brings up the question of funding--it usually costs me about a week's pay to see 1-2 performances in NYC between tickets/hotel/transportation costs. The last time I was in London (mid '80's) I made sure to catch the RB in R&J, and have never forgotten it. Perhaps the most extravagent thing I've done recently (November), is to endure the 8+hr roundtrip in a single day for an 11-minute performance in NYC. I am SO very grateful for that experience and will NEVER forget the kindness of those who made it so. As I have been going alone to most performances over the last years because few friends/relatives are willing to endure any trips longer than 2hrs to go see a performance, I would greatly enjoy the creation of a travel group of fellow balletomanes to travel with in future. Group rates sure beat single rates at most locations! FYI: I've written two articles about us "Cultural Tourists" and submitted them to various publications--but haven't heard back yet.

Yes, Freixenet's agency must enjoy using dancers--both Tamara Rojo and Joaquin de Luz are also listed as participants in a 1999 ad. Many thanks to CarolinaM (and Freixenet's website) for posting this in a format my ancient computer could actually view (though no sound system available); I don't have a clue about YouTube anyways. And, though I've seen romantic fantasies (and soft lighting with sparkles) portrayed in holiday ads before, I do not think the US agencies would really have a clue about using ballet, or its stars, to effectively promote a product; they're still too fixated on the 18-34's & pop music. The ad itself is an interesting contrast between light and dark both physically (Paltrow v. Corella, dark studio v. bright party) and figuratively: The dark loner yearning for the warmth and lightness of society, as embodied by the champagne, in the person of golden (ie subliminal clue for richness?) goddess Gwyneth. And physically and subliminally lighting was important throughout--note Angel always in low-key/high contrast until the end, whereas Gwyneth wearing white, and then 'champagne' gold is almost flat lit with strong backlighting and diffusion scrims or filters. The slight height differential was compensated for by a 3 inch "apple box" (visible in the "making of..." clip) and Corella's upper body strength and a moving camera in that swirling Astaire-Rogers turn. Well I hope Angel Corella enjoyed 'just dancing around', Gwyneth had fun doing it, and some of the proceeds go towards Corella's Foundation (?). Question: Was the announcement about a national Royal Spanish Ballet (w/Tamara Rojo) at the same time the commercial came out coincidence or not? Will it bring more people to appreciate ballet, or split the vote?

It's not a photograph, but the one picture that always explained to me Odile vs. Odette and the black tutu (or not) was Tasha Tudor's illustration in "The Royal Book of Ballet" which I received as a young dancer many years ago. The illustration shows Odile in an identical costume to Odette's--ie. White and long (not a tutu / not quite romantic length) and feathery. Odette, meanwhile, is still a swan vainly trying to attract Siegfried's attention in the window. So Rothbart made doubly sure he could deceive Siegfried by (1) making Odile the (evil) identical twin of Odette wearing a white costume, AND by appearing at the ball too early for Odette to have returned to human form. I thought Odile's black costume was the same affectation that caused good cowboys to wear a white hat, and bad cowboys a black hat--ie. from the 19th c. early days of photography. But of course, black was associated with evil long before then. Very interesting pictures from late 19th-early 20th century. Thank you for posting them.

Gelsey was at several performances of ABT at City Center this past month (Oct.2006). She sat several rows in front of me at two performances I attended, and once I actually met her in the lobby of a nearby hotel--I was dying to say hello, but didn't want to intrude. Some have suggested she was at City Center perhaps to (re-)view the dancers prior to casting Sleeping Beauty? I wonder how much her opinion counted with Kevin McKenzie? There are still some TBA's listed on ABT's website, and I do know one dancer who was interested and still waiting to see if ABT management agreed.