SanderO

Can an amazing classic work be made better with something new added in? Why not? The problem is that when you take a very powerful classic work and try to rework it.. you have a steep hill to climb and every decision made is compared to the classic benchmark. So we look at costumes or sets... or the re working of the plot, the score, the libretto and ask.... what have we gained? What have we lost?

And the answer is...?

Economic status in capitalism is a rather large determinant of what a culture looks like. As long as the system creates a class divide and offers certain things to those at the top... denying them to others we will have this painful divide.

It can be ballet or boating... life offers more possibilities when you have cash.

Ballet like much of European culture is caucasian centric because that is the environment and context which the works were created.

The world has changed and much of the West is now multicultural... that is we are living in an environment which is a mix of peoples and cultures and there are genres which cross "pollination" occurs... jazz, art, dance, theater, painting.. and so on But the issue of other "races" (hate the word.. we are one human race)...

Can we see past color and race and see a performance as simple form, movement and so forth? Why not? But it would represent a certain stretch and not be "historically" accurate.

When we look at renaissance painting we expect to see the people look (more or less) as they did in Tuscany or wherever the painter worked... the painting was like a photo snapshot of the time it was created.

I don't see that race matters, except as one tries to be historically accurate and mixing it up would be a jarring and "inaccurate"... but for pure form and movement.. even using classical technique... race is should be a non issue...any and all can and should be welcomed.

Some of us are curious and like to dip into the other cultures of the world (aside from our own) ... some of us have no interest in this and others like to mix it up and hybrids and new things are created.

The west is still very euro-centric and so it dominates the narrative and makes it hard for other cultures to penetrate. Some cultures do and some of them want to maintain their own cultural heritage/legacy as pure as possible for the future.

As long as there is tolerance and no some sort of institutionalized exclusion it appears that we will have some ballet looking much like it did in the last few centuries into the next few... and perhaps something new... Or would that be modern dance and not ballet?

If it ain't broke don't fix it... Why don't these new fangled choreographers commission an score and libretto which may be similar to some classic...After all there are only so many basic love story plots... and not mess with something which is iconic in our culture?

I suppose they can create buzz by exploiting the expectations of the audience... get them into the theater and show them how THEY see it.

Sure there is ego dripping in these efforts.. and these creative people do get the glory or suffer the indignities of crushing reviews.

One special appeal of ballet.. that is classic story line ballet.. is that it is like looking at a renaissance painting... a time capsule so to speak. We do appreciate new visions, but we don't like.. at least many of us... going to see the Bard and end up seeing Tennessee Williams take on what the Shakespeare could, should have done with his story.

There is surely a place for using classical "techniques" in modern dance productions... but why mess with something that doesn't need fixing. This applies to the plot as well as the sets and costumes. At the rate we are going we will see a future R+J about the Klingons and the whomevers (sorry I don't know this stuff) in a great outer space feud of civilizations.... danced with classical ballet choreography... all aimed at the "new generation". No?

We attended Wednesday's evening performance.

Tiler Peck was wonderful.

The choreography was not the least bit memorable... but the orchestra sounded wonderful.

At the ball most many of the guests had their backs to stage center.. odd that looked.

If you know the story of R&J... it was not faithful or well conveyed in this presentation.

The design team tried to find some modernist aesthetic which had one foot in fidelity to the times and the other into some 19/20th century art genre I can't quite name... not quite impressionism... but it was sort of crude looking and made no sense. I much prefer the way the ABT does their scenery/sets.

The moving set was clever but was a trap because the designers once committed to it had to force that set ... reconfigured to work for all the scenes... It was barely credible.

After all we are making a leap of faith... suspending our disbelief when we watch a performance on stage.. especially something like opera and ballet which use abstraction as part of their currency. But sets, costumes and lighting can anchor our fantasy in a bit of reality. These sets worked against that.

Lighting was no better than one would get in an amateur production. I recall some incredibly lighting in met and ABT productions ... even NYCB Nut.. or Firebird.

The ballet was not even well rehearsed and there seemed to be several missteps.

The sword fights were well done... but not great ballet.

When they turned R&J into West Side Story they took the classic story and really put it into a completely new context and it revealed the universal themes so well... anyone could relate to them.

For me... if I did not know R&J... I would have thought this was a silly story.

But I did love Tiler and thought she did a great job at being an adolescent in love.

Peter Martins and company... back to the drawing board on this one... and be careful with your "aesthetic"... because not everyone will feel comfortable with the genre you use with such a classic.

While the costumes were interesting the same comment applies...They committed to a certain "aesthetic" and tried to be consistent.. but it made the costumes a distraction.. at the ball it was especially obvious.

Don't take my word for it.. see it for yourself. Despite all the above... we enjoyed seeing ballet. Never can see enough of that!

We just returned from the performance. Tiler was amazing.. she owned the stage when she was on it. She does amazing work with her arms and hands.

She seemed short and prefect for a young Juliet. The last act when she has taken the potion and appears dead... she really is completely lifeless. This may not be balletic movement but what an actress she is.

I'm now a Tiler Peck fan.

Go see Tiler as Juliet... you will be glad you did...

The overall performance needs a but more polish. I think they'll get there very soon.

What percentage of the operating budge is derived from ticket sales for a company like ABT, NYCB or even the Met Opera? All performnces I have been to in the last few years were well attended to sold out. Is there really a problem of not enough attendence?

I have a pair of Westies... Belle and Beau so watch it. Hahaha.

A great mind has been taken away. Thankfully he shared so much wisdom with us. We are the wiser for it.

DH RIP

This is an interesting discussion. What would be some examples of music not suited to ballet or dance? Philip glass is danced to in In The Upper Room... and that does not sound at all like Swan Lake!

I usually associate ballet with some sort of formalism and classically structured music... and not being a musician I can't really define even that... but ballet music is the music which can be "played" on a human in "formalistic motion. I see the "steps" in ballet like the notes and phrases of music and the choreography like the "orchestration" of a theme into a complex and nuanced weave of motion and form and space.

For example, I can conceptualize a single dancer or a pas de deux performed to a soloist.. piano or violin for example.. but I find it hard to imagine a full company choreographed to a solo piano or violin. In my mind it doesn't make sense. I can see a single dancer or a pas de deux danced to large orchestral scores or multi part baroque... as they are just another "instrument".

All these musings from a non musician and one who has no education in dance.

Of course some music is literally a "type" of music for a type of dance... like a waltz. It's like what else could you choreograph to waltz music?

But I haven't a clue as to how a choreographer conceptualizes a a dance from music. To me it is a mystery and a miracle and why I love to see ballet... It is like watching a painter create a painting... it's that a miracle and a mystery?

Incredible turnout for the free tix. I got there late...820 and there were more than a thousand on a line snaking back and forth on the plaza in from of the NYS Theatre.

But by 1020 when I got my tix... there were two thousand as the line was as long and it was when they had given out the first 1000 or so tix. When I got to the window all that were left were left row O fouth ring. These would cost $15 at a "real" performance. I saw it coming when I got on line. I did the math and it was a no brainer.

I took the tix and went to the BO and bought some orchestra low L center seats for Wednesday 5.02.

Poorly handled promotion because they should have taken a different approach to the large crowd. One idea would be to simply give out numbers as people show up and so they can tell where they might get a ticket. After a few thousand you know you are going to be up in the clouds... and might just walk away or head to the BO and purchase a seat. I would have done that at 900, but the BO wasn't opened of course.

Having people stand around for 2+ hours was inconsiderate. They certainly could have started passing out the tix a lot earlier... even at 800 though they announced 900. It took 1.5+ hours to process 1,000 or so. NYCB had people pass out questionnaire forms for a data base... and small water bottles... like the NYC marathon.

The only two good things about the experince was the fine weather, and the people (and 30 or so dogs) on the line. Most were young it seemed. I was fortunate to have made the acquaintance of a Japanese woman next to me, who works as a NY correspendent for a Japanese news service. She is a ballet and opera lover and is translating one of Twyla Tharp's book... she also studies photography. Very interesting woman. I don't know that she will attend the rehearsal. I gave my tix away to someone back in the line... so I won't be sitting near her next week. (they didn't even say thanks!)

I will write to NYCB and tell them that they messed up a great idea in the execution. I hope that R+J is not all hype...

Oh well... I've wasted more time on lots of Sunday AMs...

I may be an old coot, but I think of a 18 or 20 yr old as a "kid".. but then again there are child prodigies.... Some perhaps many dancers start at 7 or 8 yrs old.... by 18-20 they have been at it for more than a decade. That's a lot of preparation.

Bart I am not sure I agree with the notion. I have seen some vids of dancers from 10 or 15 years ago and they look young... fresh and different than say Ferri or Julie Kent now. I am not saying that a older dancer cannot dance the role of a younger person well.. and yes without binocs you don't see "close ups"... but it's hard to hide "age" on some perhaps hard to identify level. I also suspect older dancers are better actors... I feel the same about a very young person cast to play an older person.. can they do it? Probably... But I thing I like a bit more of reality.

Assuming that the young dancer can perform the part... I actually prefer the idea of a young dancer in the role.

This is all theoretical musing and when we see the performance next month... the jury will render the decision... and then the disagreements can begin in earnest!

I believe (not sure) Paloma Herrera was quite young... perhaps 18 when she was asked to dance R+J with the ABT... and it made a very strong postive impression. The part is a very young girl and having someone who really looks the part adds to the verisimilitude of the illusion. Now 2x the age when she first appeared in that role at the ABT... she still does the role. I didn't see her 18 (or so) years ago... but thought her Juliet was excellent in a recent performance.

I think casting a young dancer in this production is a smart move... especially when you consider how talented young artist are these days.

What do I know?

sz you are correct that the NYCB's site notes the free TIX for 4.29 are being distributed on 4.22... I saw the mention in the NY Times which may have (probably) made a mistake.

I assumed this was like the "rush" TIX approach of the MET where you get the $100 seats for $20 if you wait on line starting at 4pm on the day of the performance.

The NYCB free TIX thing must be something different. Great idea though.

The NYCB is offering FREE tickets to a full dress rehearsal of R&J on Sunday 29 April... Line up for free TIX at 900AM at the NY State Theatre Box Office.

Performance the same Sunday evening (29 April).

WOW... Ill be there!

What do you people think of a post performance online audience comment section on the company's web site? Not everyone is going to go online and write a mini review, but some might and it could be real interesting to read.. no? I think I would like to read something like that. Would you?

Urban blight, I mean tranformation was one of idea that Robert Moses embraced from back in the 40 and 50' Many neighborhoods were ripped apart and destroyed by these "emininent domain" projects. New York developers have no sense of community or scale but see everything as ROI.

The idea of an arts campus is great. The execution is pitiful. And the cost to the community cannot be calculated.

Wait to see the abomination at the old world trade center site. They never learn... especially when money is involved.

They paved paradise and put up a parking lot..

I very much like the work of Kristin, Tony and others on Winger and how they are using the WWW to expand on their dance world. It was reading on Winger that got me to see Hamburg perform Death In Venice and it was a terrific experience. This R+J site is going to get me over to see that performance a number of times... I suspect. Good for them!

Klavier, what a wonderful story. We are of a similar age and background and somewhat parallel experience although I became an architect.

What got to me about your story is that my best friend in LI as I was growing up was a trumpet player, studied composition and went on to study music in college and had a career in classical music. We have pretty much lost touch, but I did see him conduct at Lincoln Center and once in CT. He's married to a classical musician too I recall. But I was not very musical in terms of playing an instrument back then (or now), when this friend and I used to attend all sorts of concerts... at Carnegie Hall... and even up in Tanglewood. I never was also one who embraced pop music. Istill love to fall to sleep to classic music on WQXR, WNCN or WNYC...."here will we sit.. soft stillness, and the night become the touches of sweet harmony..."

I did live in most my life in NYC and had some female dance friends who did modern... Graham "spin offs" and so, with them / through them I would attend various performances from time to time, but rarely ballet. I recall seeing all the dance students (bun heads) back then in the village too. My hazy recollection of these modern dancers approach toward ballet was that it was "passe" and modern was where it's at... so to speak. I laso had a male roommate in college who took some ballet lessons for a while. All this teasing and nothing got me to see ballet.

It was only in the last 10-12 years perhaps, that I decided to familiarize myself with the "classics" again and this included looking back at all classical arts, music, architecture and dance and so on. They must be great because they have amazing staying power.

NYC is not a bad place to do that and some trips to Europe in this period certainly helped. The first new "high" came to me from the opera.. which I began to listen to on the "stereo" and then attend the amazing productions of the Met and the NYC Opera. I can kick myself for having passed decades while the great performances and performers were singing up the street from me... and I was not interested. I only saw Aida at the old met on 37th Street. I am trying to make up for lost time... rather impossible.

Ballet came into my life after my interest in opera and of course as I have noted in other threads it is something which you MUST be there to experience. You can't pop a CD into the car player and enjoy a ballet in traffic as I do an opera.

When I began my look at ballet, I bought a subscription to the ABT and was immediately taken by the idea that each ballet performance was precious and unique... even different from a play... where the cast tries to stamp out identical performances night after night. I do love theater, but that is another story. Each ballet performance is so nuanced. And how cool is it that ABT, for example performs the same ballet with different casts in the same season... this is like hearing different violinists perform the Beethoven violin concerto all within a few weeks.. usually with the same conductor and orchestra. Wouldn't that be cool!

What I loved a ballet was that it is the combination, in my mind, of all the arts... music, "painting", sculpture, and architecture... and more than anything else.. the dancers are the epitome of the developed human form and its complete range of motion. Dancers are living art!

And ballet has an interesting quality in that it is a silent art but it exists with a music coursing its veins. Dancers are musicians, their bodies their instrument, but they make only the music of form and movement and not a sound. Ballet is visual music... and moving architecture. And when you have storyline ballet it has all the elements of theater.. acting and human emotion... of course without a word and all done with "gesture" and movement. I like mime, but I adore ballet.

Like with opera, I feel I have lost decades of experiences I could have had in my memory.. of ballet not seen and now I am in a rather focused ballet "acquisition" mode. I simply can't see enough ballet.

And as a non musician my experience at the ballet is very different from those who have backgrounds in music. But I suspect, that ballet was not made for ballet savvy audiences, symphonies and operas are not made only for the ears of musicians only...It's made for all audience who are sensitive to the "form". I do envy those who have professional training because this enables them to hear more, and see more. Perhaps analogous to the way I can see architecture. But I love the "naive" manner I am able to relate to classic music, opera, and ballet, painting, sculpture and to a lesser extent classical architecture (who is trained as a classical architect these days?). I think my ignorance adds to my wonderment!

In closing I want to once again thank BalletTalk, its moderators and its brilliant contributors who have enriched my experiences and understanding of ballet. BT is such an amazing resource with some amazingly brilliant people. Klavier... you are one of them. I can welcome that.

Seeing what you can't see with the assistance of technoly can be interesting. There have been motion studies in the past to better understand things which seem to move so quickly that we cannot see what makes up the movement.

This can be useful for scientists and I suppose for people who have a techinical interest in movement. And it can be a type of visual art as well... perhaps the way an xray or cat scan is.

As far as watching ballet whirl by... I am just fine with the limitations of my own visual system.

Could one of you brilliant people elaborate in a theoretical way about what miscasting actually is in a ballet?

For example, where does the notion that a particular role is to be danced by a dancer of a certain body type? Obviously the role of a old man should be danced to convey old man, but isn't that about the skill of the dancer, or absence of it, for example?

I associated casting with stereotype we have of the character we see, but on stage and in film talented actors have a rather large range... such as Meryl Streep or Susan Saradon or Alan Arkin and more recently Di Caprio or perhaps Sean Pean. Their skill and that of the director is creating the illusion and casting them in a role is proving that skill!

If a dancer is unable to convey the emotion of the part it is more than miscasting, it is "incompetence" and their failure to create the illusion. Body type is a whole other matter... and so casting a tall girl in the role of child is cdertainly a harder illusion to create.

This makes sense for story and romantic ballets where there are characters to which we attach stereotypes. So much of "theater" is about the manipulation of stereotypes... isn't it?

Ironically in opera you find a lot of big female singers who are cast as delicate, beautiful sirens... and only rarely does someone proclaim MIS-CASTING. This did happen at the Met, I recall last year (?) when a soprano (was it Deborah Voight??) was removed from the cast because of her size. Also there are the so called "breeches" roles in opera such as Siebel in Faust which is meant to be a man but is sung by a soprano. How's that for "miscasting"... but the audience accepts the composers choice.

Then there is the miscasting of partners who may seem not to work well together.. because of size for example. This would apply to any type of dance... No?

I find that female dancers tend to look more similar than different... while males have more individual looks from the get go. It's the bun head syndrome no? To me this means that females are more interchangable in roles in dance than males.

And finally, how much of the discussion of mis-casting is about the dancer simply not carrying the role.. something which they might be able to do with more preparation rather than something innate about their "look"? And this applies to technique in dance as well as in acting? How much acting experience / training does a young dancer actually get and what can we really expect from them at such tender ages?

My season tix came in the mail today, but the seat assignment for Manon with Ferri has not been made. I suspect individual sales will be coming shortly now that the subs have been mailed out.

What is interesting about art is that we are always different each time we experience it! So even for something as static as a photographic or a painting, as we evolve and grow, it is a different experience each time we look at it.

The experience of ballet or opera or music is very different for people who are intimately involved in these are as it for someone who is not. It is also very different as we accumulate artistic and life experience. as a performance art... it is never ever the same

I suspect this is one of the reasons that you see more older people at ballet, opera and in art museums and at concerts. A lifetime of exposure seems to open one's mind up to art in a way that perhaps a young mind is incapable of. But heck.. seeing something for the first time can be as memorable as losing your virginity.

Is the experience of seeing a ballet for the 50th time much different from seeing it the first or the second? Of course it is! it is because we take our entire life to the viewing experience and the more life we have in us... the more (life) experience we can bring to the ballet viewing experience. Technical training is a whole other matter and someone young with a lot of training and a lot of skill has a very different experience from someone untrained with little technical experience.

And then you have the geniuses who have been "in ballet" for years and then stay with it after they stop performing. Now those people really can see a lot that normal folks just can't. Thankfully for us non ballet people they generously offer up their wisdom.

I will say this about ballet and dance. It is an art expression that we (average John and Jane Q Public) have the least exposure to in our lives and probably the least understanding of it. Photography on the other hand is something which bombards us thousands of times a day and music seems ever present and hard to escape.

Ballet holds a very special and esoteric place in the arts.

You gotta go to it... don't ya?

Bart,

Photography is .. photography... Dance is.. dance. The subject of "art" is usually outside of the medium...

When dance is the subject of photography we are recalling dance and the fact that it is about living dancers... which may be dancing a "story" about people long dead or who never existed...

Art, whatever the medium is about "beauty" and is meant to make us think about life, form, and the human condition. If we are not provoked to think, then the artist has failed (with me anyway).

The artist who chooses ballet and dance as his subject matter is much like the artist or the sculpture who chooses to use humans as his subjects doing whatever humans do. You won't be hearing people say... that painting of is not about real living breathing people... it's just oil paint on canvas and the IMAGES of people.

But we think in images, and they have meaning as does movement and gesture. Some forms of art REQUIRE time for their expression... music is an example. You can't have a "snapshot" of music.. which has any real meaning or relavancy to the entire composition. Even the score is not the music but a graphic representation of it.

I believe that ballet photography can play a powerful and thought provoking role for lovers of ballet... and even those who are not "into" ballet. As a slice of time it can be graphically beautiful and demonstrate how the human body and form is evocative of meaning and for those who know the ballet it can activate their own memories which are little more than images flashing through our own brains.

A successful dance photograph is many things as Bart notes... but it is not dance. Neither is it "dance" when I sit in the hall and observe it! It may be for the dancers, but I am an observer of the dancers.

Dance photography is distinct from dance as painting is distinct from life. The key is what is the experience in the mind of the beholder. If the art works... it speaks to the observer. And there will be good dance photography and bad dance photography as there is good and bad dance... there could even be good photography from bad dance!

Read Godel Escher and Bach by Douglas Hofstader. he has some very interesting ideas in there.

I think, perhaps, this move was foreshadowed when they put Part in the Winter Gala at City Center in Symphonie Concertante. I suspect she will be advanced to pirincipal this season... ABT has lost several principals and Ferri is leaving after this Spring.

What happened to Ashley Tuttle?