SanderO

I haven't a clue where she gets her ideas or what role her BF plays in her professional life. never met her or him.

There are some interesting articles on the Winger with multiple posters including David Hailberg.

Marketing does build audiences. The talented coloratura Anna Netrebko has had quite a meteoric rise and certainly helped the attendance and the buzz swirling around the Met Opera. She is prominently featured at their gala and marketing.

And speaking of DVDs, the Met gave out Anna Netrebko DVDs a few years ago at a performance of Rigoletto I attended. When I viewed it at home - two arias, one for La Traviata and one from Faust, I could see the influence of the music video as both had a very contemporary and "fun" look, and her singing was wonderful and I decided to Go out and get a few Netrebko CDs. (It worked!) And I am now a fan of this talented singer.

Today (dec 18) Ms Netrebko is doing another PR event at the book shop and was also the subject of a 60 Minutes segment about 3 years ago. Stop by and meet her!

The Met Opera also does live broadcasts on radio and recently did a fund raiser on PBS featuring the top 10 performances at the Met (Anna was featured in I Puritani, IRRC). In addition the Met is doing their simulcasts in HD in movie theatres around the world. So what has Mr Gelb wrought with his outreach? A practically sold out season months in advance! Damn, I called for tix to Lucia 4 months in advance and not a seat to be had!

I suspect Ms Netrebko was figured into their audience building strategy and I believe it has worked out even better than they imagined. But, of course, she has talent and can deliver thrilling performances.. and so this is not a case of all hat and no cattle!

I suppose the Met Opera is more flush with cash than ABT or NYCB but I believe that some more "aggressive" marketing, especially of their stars would build audiences. The Kristin Sloan - Tragic Love NYC campaign was very effective (better than the production!) and Ms Sloan has been made director of new media at NYCB. Watch for some interesting audience building from multi-talented Ms Sloan.

ABT, can you hear me? Can you hear me now?

(By the way, I contacted ABT several years ago about an approach and was met with all sorts of nay saying, legal hurdles to big to mount and union "excuses", but I suspect someone with more creds will get to them one of these days.)

I like to get dressed up to attend ballet and opera, day or night, weekday or weekend in NYC The are special treasured experiences for me and I like to mark them by my dress. I also feel it is more respectful for the performers. Dressing well does not mean being uncomfortable and so I don't feel the least bit of discomfort when I wear a suit and tie.

I've seen some very casual dressers at the Met and I find it goes too far in the other direction, old sneakers, flip flops, torn jeans and T shirts. There should be a minimum dress code at the Met, for example, in my opinion, but not prohibit casual attire.

I am taking my twin nieces to the Nut and I am sure they are going to be dressed to the nines. Their mother tells me they are so excited to see their first ballet.

Summer venues are a whole other story and it would seem completely odd (for me to dress "up" in Saratoga, for example.

For classical / story ballet there remains the notion that the dancers must represent the race of the characters... such a white girl for Juliette etc. It's a silly notion to cling to in ballet because ballet is more "illusion" and metaphor than anything coming close to resembling an historical presentation. Look at the ones which are pure fantasy such as Nut and Swan and Beauty, just to mention a few. So why can't we see black dancers in ANY of these roles? I think it comes down to a bit of prejudice and pandering to subconscious (quasi racist) expectations of the audience.

And then you have the cultural divide out there. There is a strong movement to embrace one's own historical heritage and culture. Nothing wrong with that, but it does tend to prevent blacks from venturing into ballet because it is perceived as part of white European culture. Ironically there seems to be a fair amount of Asians who embrace European culture. But I suppose this may be related to the fact that Asians have long established cultures and the young feel freer to embrace European culture and do not feel that they have been oppressed by Europeans (perhaps) as much a blacks do.

Thankfully, some talented dancers seem to embrace ballet regardless of all the above and any other institutional pressure (right on Danny Tidwell and Misty Copeland!). They and others need to be embrace by the ballet establishment/culture and the black culture. Blacks certainly have demonstrated that they can dance and have innovated so much to boot.

Amazing that the color of one's skin has so much "baggage" in the 21st century. That's a crying shame.

I am a big fan of Gene's work and in this incredible collection of images with Jennifer Alexander he captures her many facets. This is a must see and a fitting tribute to this fine lady of dance. May she rest in peace.

The attitudes toward males and dancing has been changed by break dancing and hip hop culture which values "cool moves". While this may be far from the rigors of ballet, a talented male street dancer my look to dance a career option when faced with "growing up" and pursuing his strength... movement.

Another approach would be for some more progressive schools to have dance programs as a joint "venture" with the arts and music and ATHLETIC department. Figure skating seems to now have the same stigma as dance. Or a semester or two of dance could be required so that all the kinds participate. Just a thought.

I picked up this on the internet and wondered what BT people thought:

"1915

"I was positively uninterested in the dance."

When Bernays took on Diaghilev's Ballet Russes American tour in 1915, he wrote, "I was given a job about which I knew nothing. In fact, I was positively uninterested in the dance." He wasn't alone. Americans thought masculine dancers were deviates, and that "dancing was not nice," and of limited interest.

Bernays began to connect ballet to something people understood and enjoyed. "First, as a novelty in art forms, a unifying of several arts; second, its appeal to special groups; third, its direct impact on American life, on design and color in American products; and fourth, its personalities."

Beginning with newspapers, Bernays developed a four-page newsletter for editorial writers, local managers and others, containing photographs and stories of dancers, costumes, and composers. Articles were targeted to his four themes and audiences. For example, the "women's pages" received articles on costumes, fabric, and fashion design; the Sunday supplements received full-color photos.

A Bakst creation for Dance Guerriere Caucasienne.

Are American men ashamed to be graceful?

Magazine coverage, timed to appear just before the ballet opened, was his next approach. Bernays tailored his stories to his editors. When Ladies Home Journal said that they couldn't show photographs of dancers with skirts above the knees, he had artists retouch photos to bring down the hem. His abilities to understand editors' needs resulted in wide coverage: The American Hebrew, Collier's, Craftsman, Every Week, Harper's Weekly, Hearst Magazines, Harper's Bazaar, The Independent, Ladies Home Journal, Literary Digest, Munsey's, Musical America, Opera, Physical Culture, Strand, Spur, Town & Country, Vanity Fair, Vogue, and Woman's Home Companion.

Nijinsky and Karsovina are among the Russian ballet artists who came to New York in 1915 to perform during a difficult period of world war

Bernays created an 81-page user-friendly publicity guide for advance men to use on the tour. When a national story about the Ballet Russes appeared, advance men could tailor it for local coverage. The guide contained mimeographed pages, bios on the dancers, short notes and fillers, and even a question and answer page that asked, "Are American men ashamed to be graceful?"

He persuaded American manufacturers to make products inspired by the color and design of the sets and costumes, and national stores to advertise them. These styles became so popular that Fifth Avenue stores sold these products without Bernays's intervention. Bernays used overseas media reviews to heighten anticipation for the dancers. When they arrived at the docks in New York, a crowd was waiting. Bernays then took photos of the eager crowds and placed them in Sunday magazines throughout the country. The ballet was sold out before the opening. By the time the ballet toured American cities, demand had already dictated a second tour and little girls were dreaming of becoming ballerinas. Bernays had remolded biases to get his story told. The American view of ballet and dance was changed forever. "

When such a beautiful being is taken in her prime it is a loss of unbearable sadness. With all the tragedies we witness on the stage, it is only this one which has brought tears to my eyes.

Thank you Jennifer for your gift to us with all your hard work and love of dance. You will not be forgotten.

Whenever the snow falls at the Nutcracker my thoughts will pull towards you.

I think this question is for the younger side of the membership. I'm way too old to start on anything athletic... my bod is way past the flexibility and strength required. But I have thought about what moves people into "physical" careers.. like dance and athletics as opposed to the non physical ones... like writing and architecture, or social work...

I suspect I might have been able to take another career path, but I am content with where I have traveled and even more so that I can enjoy the hard work of the talented performers... especially in ballet which for me is the synthesis of sculpture , architecture, literature, music and acting. Did I leave something out? I just came to the realization too late in life. My view of ballet was that it was a very narrowly focused pursuit about "dance". Boy was I wrong. Youth wasted on the young???

I wonder what attracts youngsters to ballet aside from the joy of movement. Ballet seems to be much more complex and nuanced than most young minds can comprehend. The older I get, the more I realize how little I know about everything. I'm going to take my 11 year old twin nieces to the ballet and see what they think.

SZ,

I am sure that professionals can feel the amazing wonder and mystery seeing an exquisite performance. I didn't mean to imply that all they do is sit there and study technique. Obviously a chef can enjoy a great meal and doesn't always sit there thinking how it was prepared. In a sense the professionals can see much more and seeing 32 fouettes whirl away I am sure they might feel something akin to closely identifying with the performer and the thrill she may be feeling up there, while I might be dazzled by the virtuosity and haven't a clue about what it must be like to pull that off.

As an architect I am not "jaded" when I experience a great building, rather I am in awe of the magnificent space and volume and texture and light and so forth. I actually enjoy being in buildings more than creating them! hahaha. I am there receiving the "message" and it feels very fine. I suppose dancers in the audience experience something similar.

This is something that I always think about as a non dancer. How can a professional possibly experience the wonder that those such as myself experience at a performance? How can they not be looking intensely at technique and so forth. How can they feel the magic of the story when they have seen it or danced it a hundred times? They see more, but they see something completely different. Don't they?

I have used a series of under a hundred binocs with mixed results. We don't sit in the orchestra and being not close you can't see detail as in facial expressions or fingers and hands and so forth. This is important because when you do see this level of detail, you can see how much the dancers and choreographer focus ON the smallest details.

On the other hand, sitting up and back you get to see the wonderful broad shapes and forms and especially the spacial aspects which you completely miss with binocs. I often want to be seeing the detail AND the broad perspective at the same time and this is frustrating. I can't imagine going to ballet or opera and sitting up in the balconies without them.

I will treat myself to a quality pair for my next birthday. Cheap ones don't even last.

I think Kinkos can scan something for you and save it to a CD or thumb drive. You can then upload it to photo bucket and place a link on BT. PM one of the mods who know about these things and might guide you through the process.

ABT has changed... When did it happen? What drove the changes? Was it gradual?

Mel,

Your writing is wonderful. Can we commission you to write an entire book about your Joffrey remembrances?

What an incredible essay. Thanks for sharing that. I only wish it was accompanied by some pictures.

I don't know boo about classical ballet or modern dance. My impression having only seen a bit of both is that classical dance is more "grounded" in formalism and this makes it more comfortable to watch and more predictable. The formalism seems to lend itself to measuring a performance as well. How perfectly does she do her fouettes? But in contemporary we don't see these sorts of recognizable "things". Now this may be the point, because, it is about movement and freed from the constraints of formalism.

It's like modern architecture. We experience it and might be thrilled by the spaces, the textures,for sculptural form whatever but have no frame of reference to evaluate it except comparing it to "known" architecture style and formalism.

A modernist choreographer can certainly have a recognizable "signature", but it seems rather unlikely that this will become the basis of a larger body of work spanning many choreographers and much time, perhaps the way some movements in art (impressionism for example) have; enough to recognize the style. I see modern dance as more disorganized. And that may be a good thing in the sense that freedom is a good thing.

I do think it's hard to build audiences for modern dance and I think companies that mix it up is good thing.

As a genre I like ballet but tend to only like individual modern pieces and consider modern the "not ballet" of "serious dance" (excluding things like ballroom etc.). There is much interesting work done and do be done in modern dance.

What do I know? Nothing. This is a very provocative thread and I am looking forward to reading the comments.

The issue of "snobbery" can perhaps be placed at the feet of the audiences and their level of insider knowledge. I sense that a large proportion of ballet audiences are in or of the dance and music world. And I think this is less so in opera because the nature of the work is more literal.

Most people can "appreciate" musical comedy; not esoteric knowledge required. Opera resembles comedy. In fact, it is the"Broadway" of times gone by in a sense.

Ballet and dance are much more abstract and always require a leap of "faith" with story ballet. The language of the "steps" seems arbitrary and a mixture of beauty and athletics. But athletics where there is no game, no winner, no scores, nor records to break. The genre is definitely one what almost requires some experience to get something profound from the experience. And how does ballet reach out to its audience and lift them up to understanding? I don't see much effort in that. I don't even know if ballet sees this as part of its mission, as much as simply preserving their esoteric art. Could this be why it is painted with the snob brush?

Ballet and Opera are really very different and it's hard to compare them even though you find the same librettos in each genre.

I don't think Boccelli would have become associated with opera were it not for his cross over marketing appeal. There's a whole lot of these pop opera singers, most seem to be coming from the UK.

I was thinking about who attends ballet (dance) and opera. For one thing dance is a young person's "game" while opera seems to favor more mature singers. Dancers loose their edge as they age and singers can go on and on. So this might and probably does have an influence on who attends the two.

If you bring in pop music to the discussion you can see it attracts young audiences and the acts are young

Returning to audience at opera and ballet, you can see older people (I'm one) who attends both, but clearly the average age seems to be younger for dance. And dance is offering all sorts of contemporary productions as well as the classics. Opera seems to be less responsive to new works. And then there's the cost. An opera production seems to be much more expensive to mount than a ballet. If you look at the Met Opera and the ABT's productions you can see the difference, same locale, same theater etc. Big production costs means more expensive tickets and these are purchased by the well heeled to can afford it and sponsor it. There's lots more money in the opera genre all around.

But there is also the phenomena that ballet/dance is a much more precious experience. it can't be bottled into a CD and even watching a DVD is something which requires your attention and you can't have it on in the car, or in the background while you cook, and even then, the essence of ballet is movement and the essence of opera is sound. And then there is the ensemble nature of dance to consider. Opera is almost always defined by the memorable arias, even though they may have a few singers in them. But in dance some of the most glorious passages are involving scores of dancers in a rich tapestry. While there are the pdds and so forth it seems that on the whole ballet/dance genre is more interactive (even in a pdd!) as opposed to singer A belting out an aria in an opera with the cast standing there like statues.

I love both, but I find ballet and dance a higher expression of "art" and always involves some level of abstraction... perhaps because I am more a visual person. I'm more confused than a snob.

Has there ever been any dancers who crossed over to singing?

Perhaps she is referring to the performers, not the genre. My sense is that dancers are more aloof and almost always only appear on stage in public. Opera singers seem to do "other" public events, including book signings, or cross over events. Look at Beverly Sills, or Renee Flemming as people who was so out there and personable and of the people (as well as of the celebs). While there may be some exceptions to this "rule" for ballet, I sense that the public sees dancers as rehearsing 24/7 performing and then rehearsing until they retire into oblivion or leave from some injury.

Why not require dancers to have shaved bodies?

These are personal self expression thingies...right? So what about pink hair, or mohawks, or both? All these fall into the category of self expression and one often sees someone will all of the above, hair, tatts and piercings.

When one is involved in a performance, cast in a role, you are essentially a blank canvas to fit into, some rather preconceived "standard". It's pretty clear what that is for dancers, but there is certainly some room for variation. Performers are expected to add a certain je ne c'est quoi to their role, but a body mod I would thing are what is sought.

This crowd seems to find them a distraction and out of place in ballet. I wonder if any companies have any official policy about these things???

Of course it depends on the tattoo. Today we see all sorts of them on all sorts of people. Body mods have been mainstreamed to a large extent. Most of the larger ones and more visible ones are not attractive to me and some are actually repulsive. That's a strong word, but some body mods are more than mildly unattractive or even very unattractive but can make me have a visceral negative reaction. I can recall being served breakfast in a diner once by a waitress covered in tatts and metal in her face. I lost my appetite, literally.

Some tatts are completely inoffensive and by themselves "pretty", usually when small and discrete. But the idea of doing that to your flesh seems odd to me, especially the permanent nature of them.

Sometimes I see what I think is an attractive person and then see their ink and think, why did they "ruin" themselves? Obviously, they think it an improvement and probably can't even imagine how someone would think the reverse?

There's a TV show called LA Ink and it's advertised on a huge billboard on the west side highway. The woman looks like she made herself into a carnival show "freak" and in a sense you can't see her without being assaulted by all her tattoos.

The more extreme the bod mods, the more I find them offensive. And even when they are small, discrete and "attractive" in themselves, they don't seem to add anything to the human body, they're more like putting a pretty postage stamp on human flesh that you can't get off.

But I'm with Helene, if I can't see them, then I don't care.

I'm speaking of classical ballet. I noted above that a tattoo could be part of the costume/wardrobe/styling thing but it would have to "make sense"... if you get my drift.

Bod mods off stage are fine. Who cares? It's your bod you can do what you want with it. They don't belong on bods in stage IMO, no exceptions.

How ironic that ballet dancers feel a need to distinguish their bods by mods when they usually have created through their own hard work exceptional bodies. And by ink, they make them look more like common Jane at the mall.

There's no accounting for people's taste. This is swriling off topic, but I tend to see that dancers develop their bodies through hard work and training of their muscles and joints to be able to execute movement to the full potential.

The aesthetics of any body modifications are completely personalized alterations... like a blue person. You might like blue and think it looks better, but that is not a natural human being - look. These types of personal expressions may be interesting or beautiful, but ballet is a rather dogmatic and tradition bound art form and I find it hard to imagine that the creators of ballet would not find body mods and "intrusion" and a "distraction".

I'm all for personal self expression, but that doesn't mean I, or anyone else has to like what people do with and to their bodies. I prefer art on canvas or similar, piercings disturb my sense of aesthetics, and that includes earrings, though having seen them 100 million times I am used to them.

I don't think my expectations for ballet dancers' appearance is uncommon. I would be, and am surprised that they would get easily visible body mods.

I am referring to what we see in a performance. If we can't see it, I could care less.

return to topic.