SanderO

We saw Zauberflote at the Met two weeks ago and it was incredible. Don't miss that one.

Jennifer Dunning had an interesting review of Sleeping Beauty and seemed to like the performance she saw, but lamented that the 3 acts have been shortened into 2. Although she felt Balanchine and Kirstein's presence, my sense is that she feels Peter Martins' mark is clearly there in this version.

Sounds like Dunning liked the dancing, but her review pales in comparison to the BT ones. Mentioning who danced a part is hardly a "review"... but getting one's name in the NYTimes is not a bad thing I suppose.

It seems that the question about the future job had to be asked by the reporter. How could they not? If the question wasn't posed they would not have been doing their job.

Having said that, I don't think the parties need to discuss or negotiate a future post through the press. If NYCB wants to offer the post to Damian, they know where to find him and plenty about his qualifications. The fact that he is studying biz at Harvard only shows he is serious about a career after he leaves the stage. Good on him!

Vetting him is another matter and the powers that be at NYCB will do their diligence... so to speak.

Happy New Years to all.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the creators and contributors to this incredible resource. I am enlightened and humbled by readingBT... and it has opened up the ballet to me in the most wondrous way!

Dance!

I have a few brief emails from some dancers.

Recently I was in the Met Opera Book store and there was a poster announcing that Anna Netrebko was going to be there for a signing / promotion of her new Russian CD.

Being an admirer of her singing I am considering taking the opportunity to purchase the CD, and see Ms Netrebko up close and perhaps get a signed copy.

This may not be correspondence, but it is but is more akin 4mrdncr's experience with encounters of artists on the street. I wouldn't expect to have any sort of conversation about her work.

Leonid said:

I have been almost mesmerized by Ulla Lopatkina in Act 1 Swan Lake and had to applaud her attainment of control and a sculptural beauty. However it was Miss Lopatkina I was watching and not Odette so the point was missed, why, because I was constantly relating to the beauty and strength her personal physical achievement rather than the story.

I plead guilty to this in so much of ballet and opera. I am virtually unable to "suspend" disbelief and not focus on the person and their "talent".

I am curious as to how many people really do see Odile or Odette and not the ballerina who is attempting to represent these "character" through the abstraction of dance and movement and so forth?

I am also wandering is this really is necessary? Why must we believe that Rigoletto is a hunchback? Sure it matters in the storyline... but can't we embrace the music without the character?

For sure we do escape a bit in these roles... we ARE drawn in... But how m do we need to be so much that we no longer see the personality of the artist?

This may be OT... but how do you feel a dancer's age, life experience, emotional maturity effects their "art'?

Since life experience has a way of making us more mature, sensitive etc one does see artist evolve (often) as they age.

Of course, due to technical and biological issues, dancers "slow down" and have to retire fairly young... probably when they are at the pinnacle of their artistic maturity (assuming the underlying assumption is true - that age has a positive effect on the work of an artist).

I find that the same "issue" pops up when I see musical child prodigies who achieve amazing technical prowess while they are obviously still emotionally very immature (even if mature for their chronological age).

Technique and athleticism are more accessible to the younger performers, but "wisdom" and artistic sensibility may not be. Toss into the mix that disciplines which require so much dedication, it may remove people from "maturing" life experience as they perfect their technique with countless hours of practice.

So what may (a guess here) be taking place (too often?) is that the push for technique early on creates dancers that are simply too young to be artistically mature and sensitive... a sort of trap by their own success.

Does Zakharova have especially long arms? That is my impression from watching a few of her videos.

There are stars and there are stars. In the arts of ballet and opera. for example, no star is born overnight. It takes years of hard work to craft a real artist in dance or opera. It's probably less of the notion that there is enourmous amount of talent out there and it is often a lucky break that shoots one to star status as in acting, or perhaps pop music.

Celebrity status, need not be about talent, and often is not, as anyone who follows the US media's obessession with the likes of Paris Hilton or Britany Spears knows.

Ballet and opera companies need real talent in all aspects of their productions, not just in the lead roles. But once a great performer emerges they seem to rise in importance, as they perform the most visible roles - the leads. These performers add their artistic genius to the works they appear in. The companies recognize this and exploit it, the public recognize it and flock to it... and stars are born. But these companies cannot let the overall work fall to sub par. The best pictcher cannot win a baseball game if there are errors in the field and no batting on his side to score runs. A star in opera or ballet needs a great company to support them artistically.

The idea of stars, the "cult of personality" is nothing new. It works nicely with the notion of being excellent and that competiton is essential in "getting ahead" in whatever you do. When you get out front in anything, you become one of the top dogs and the tandard to be toppled by one who comes along and can do better. There is and always will be focus on the great acheivers.

And then our culture becomes interested in the personalites of its stars... how are they like us? And how are they different? What made them great aside from the expected "hard work"? So this often works to inspire some people, I suppose who, want to be in the top wrung on the ladder of success in their chosen fields. And of course, in this culture excellences is then equated to econmic reward. Then cash and notoriety become the reward, often influencing the "star", their work and so on. And companies, teams etc. turn this into an economic instrument... stardom. No?

Smaller dancers and skaters can turn faster! It is physics. At the body gets larger since it is a volume the forces require and not linear. This why huge animals move slowly and hummingbirds dart about in such rapid movements.. it takes so much less energy with small volumes. The really fast stuff is much harder for taller people.. it's physics!

This was a very interesting article in this AM paper and is as much about art as it is about marketing the arts... ballet and opera.

World class companies can attract and do have the top talent and will use that as a commercial draw. It underscores the fact that these are businesses and lots of people are employed in a large company.

But how DO you get away from the attraction of a great artist in leading roles? Ballet and opera usually have lead roles and principal dancers etc.

One thing in the article which I found interesting and I paraphrase was the differing approach to multiple performances of the same piece. ABT tends to do all the same ballets in a run, with different casts... rotating principals. This has multiple benefits. It is cheaper than striking and erecting sets constantly. It allows principals to rest since they are not going to be the only ones performing the role. It also allows the cast to stay focused and the ballet goer to see the difference in approaches in quick succession of different principals. This IS one of the most interesting things about ballet... to see different artists do the same role and how it is different.

The Met Opera takes another approach and stages different operas one after the other in a rotation over the whole season which often features the same leads at different dates as is the case of Anna Netrebko singing I Puritani this season, stating tomorrow.

She like, some ballerinas are major draws, yet ballet companies are not as keen to market their principals as much as their companies. The article had an interesting bit about Balanchine and Farrell and his archetype Balanchine girls.

In truth of fact, each performance and cast is a different version of the piece, whether opera or ballet and one of the reasons why we return again and again to see the some works. And then the staging can change or the choreography and the only thing which seems to be constant is the music. But wait, the tempi and so forth can be changed too, so we have almost and infinite theme and variations and this is a hook for ballet and opera lovers...

This was a very thought provoking article by Mr. Rockwell and featured a lovely picture of Wendy Whelan of NYCB.

We thoroughly enjoyed the performance. The children in the cast were great.

The tempi certainly did seem too fast. In fact, I thought that some of the ballerinas almost couldn't keep up. I wanted the slower dances slowed down too... Whomever made the decision to "beat the clock" made a poor one... it made the dancing more athletic and less balletic. Too bad because, the dancers were lovely. At times it really seemed like you were seeing the ballet run on fast forward. That was unfortunate. The whole thing slowed down would have been so much better.

The only thing that bothered me about Reichlin was her expression. Her perpetual smile seemed forced... her skin was a perfect pink but her ears were like red lights on the side of her pretty face. She's a joy to watch move.

Saskia Beskow in the first act as Frau Stalhbaum has a lovely presence on stage. I'd like to see her dance some more challenging parts.

I have no frame of reference, but having seen it this one time I would love to see it again. It's a real fun ballet to watch. Mr. B... you did good, very good.

Andrew,

I think that females, in general use body language and things like clothes and make up and all sorts of things not normally used by males for non verbal communication.

This doesn't mean that these non verbal modes of communication are feminine or female. But we are more accustomed to reading the expanded vocabulary of non verbal language from women.

So to bring this back to port de bras, perhaps in ballet choreography since it IS so non verbal, we see port de bras with respect to males differently and maybe even used less or differently by choreographers and dancers. I am too inexperienced to know, but clearly males and females are usually very different roles and we expect them to be different. In fact, to my eyes, when the dance the same steps in synchronicity there is still quite a difference. Do you see it?

Leigh,

If it IS true that NYCB people are monitoring a site like BT, if there is a consensus about some "defect" such as tempi being too fast for a certain dance, I would think that it might find it's way to the conductor.

Whomever is making artistic decisions is not doing it in a vacuum. While I don't expect them to poll anyone for their decisions, reviews and critiques do surface up in future productions, not always, but they do.

I would like to think that some of the brilliant posters here, such as yourself, DO have an impact on the "industry" as you put it. The comments certainly inform the way we see the performances, which is why this is such a valuable resource. I don't expect any artist to admit it if and when they do change something as a result of a review. But to think that they ignore "us" seems contrary to why they perform on stage.

Something that occurred to me reading this thread is the obvious... men and women ARE very different... this is true in our roles in society, our dress, how we communicate non verbally and so forth. Ballet would obviously contain this difference. Yet we do see some "mirror" and "mimic" behavior where the male and females dance the same steps and the same time. Even this reveals how very different males and females are.

Perhaps this difference is reflected in all aspects of male and female dancing... and port de bras is simply something that the females carry over from femaleness off the stage... more emotive and expressive with their bodies. For some reason, aside from physical strength the female seems to have it "all over the male" in terms of non verbal communication "tools".

In a sense the male roles in ballet and dance seem to be providing males with some of the female tools... and although male dancers do not look feminine, they use female "vocabulary". Does this make sense?

The idea occurred to me after reading this well informed thread that wouldn't the conductors and so be "checking in" on a site like BT? I am not suggesting that the NYCB movers and shakers respond directly to the critiques so well articulated on the site, or even register and participate, but one would think with the reputation of BT that they might see what the buzz is out there on the other side of the proscenium.

Do you feel that these discussions have any impact at all on a company such as NYCB? Do you feel they should? Aren't they seeing the same things as some BT brilliant posters see? (hat tip to sz, Michael, Patrick , Klavier and others)

Could another reason for the hair being worn in a bun is to reveal the neck and the line of the body through to the top of the head without the "confusion" of hair?

Pulled back hair worn in a bun can look very sophisticated and elegant and it clearly defines the shape of the head and never conceals any part of the face.

No?

I am neither dancer or choreographer but I sense that some above are interpreting this question too literally.

Why does a choreographed aria have to be for a single dancer or a pas de deux? It could be like a mini ballet even... I would think it depends on the length of the aria... and most that I am familiar with are not 20 minutes long... In fact, they may be too short to develop something interesting for dance. (I am reminded of a Polina Seminova video I have seen of a "pop song" which was only a few minutes..)

On another "note" there was a John Rockwell review in the NY Times this morning of Richard Move's MoveOpolis which includes dance choreographed to Verdi ... I presumed his opera music. Move's work maybe far from ballet, but at least some choreographer has picked up this opera music as music for dance idea... among the ones mentioned above.

This thread is veering... but I just came from Zuaberflote and the whole Met production is visually stunning and there is some ballet/point by the birds in Act II. The Met preoductionn of the Magic Flute may not be to everyone's liking but it is amazing to see... no reason to leave for tea.

I have found most of the Met productions visually very powerful though not all the music in every opera is riviting the way a ballet seems to usually be.

But coming back to the original question of this thread... I was really not seeking entire operas that were done as ballets... but some lyrical arias... almost the way ABT did some of Sinatra songs.. short pieces...

Thanks Mme. Hermine... How were they? Well received? Are there any videos of these works? Seems like when it's done.. they do an entire opera and not selected arias... Is this true?

I was not thinking of a ballet choreographed to entire or even edited opera score/libretto. But some opera when I am not aware of the libretto is music with voice and the words are often barely intelligible to those who speak the language anyway.

I have seen ballet done to contemporary music so obviously some choreographers choose the music without a libretto... So to restate the question... has any choreographer selected and aria and done a dance "around" or to it? Not story ballet... non story ballet (don't know the lexicon).

For opera lovers on Ballet Talk... have you ever thought about a dance to an aria? I am getting the impression that this has not been done...

I was just returning in my car from a business appointment and was listening to Anna Netreblo's CD Sempre Libera which has arias from Verdi, Bellini, Donizetti and Puccini.

And as I listened to several of these arias I saw ballet in my mind's eye. Of course, some opera includes dance and La Traviata comes to mind... and of course, ballet that I am familiar with is choreographed to orchestral music.

Arias are part of a libretto, a storyline and of course this would certainly be reflected in the choreography and staging.

So my rather naive questions are...

Have an choreographers done choreography to opera... such as the lovely arias on Netrebko's CD? To my ear they sounded like they could be wonderful ballet.

If this has been done can you point me to this... and if it hasn't been attempted do you know the reason why? If not, is there some sort on invisible barrier to the practice of ballet choreography of opera arias?

As a side note to this idea... As much as I enjoy opera and some of the amazing productions such as the Met Opera's Zeferelli La Traviata etc... ballet is so elegant and visually much more "musical" to look at. Stunning as Ms Netrebko may be watching her sing, it does not compare to a pas de deux of a Vishneva and Malakhov for example. I must say that some opera productions are stunning visually.

NYSusan

I am planning to do the NYCB this winter, but I have only just purchased the Nut for Sunday the 24th at 1pm...By the way... Ballet Talk made me do it.. the thread of Nutcracker reviews got under my skin.

Hopefully the children will not interfere with my experience... xmas eve... or maybe it will be the spark for a career in ballet... so children take notice!

I think I am going to seek the counsel of some BT members in selecting my NYCB ballets this winter. When I have made my selections I will let you know... BT geniuses... suggestions please.

I do understand the wonderful anonymity that the net provides whilst bringing minds together. I respect that. On the other hand I more than willing to meet some of these incredible people from BT... for me it would be an honor.

Wow... I made my way through the Y2K thread and there is a lot there to digest. Too bad the definitions came quite far down thread because it was a discussion about "things" which may be understood by those who participated but was only revealed to me by reading through the lot. And I am still trying to crystallize the concepts. very informed discussion here. I am feeling more and more I need to read and do some sort of formal study of ballet else I am missing the larger very important historical context. Ballet cannot truly be appreciated by the uneducated eye.

One thing which interested me in reading about emploi was: where did those who created these notions extract this from? Why is tall and thin considered noble, for example. I beleive Alexandra pointed to the Romans as the origin of these iconic notions. Could it have been the Greeks? And even back then when there was no ballet how and why were these iconic beliefs developed? Isn't this an odd sort of stereotyping, though admittedly a handy shorthand?

These types of "classical" constraints may, in fact, allow classicism to survive... like the orders of columns in architecture... they become the anchors of style (along with other "elements of style").

But I ask you geniuses to step back for a moment... can't we mix it up a bit and continue to have the ballet make sense? From reading the posts, it seems that some people found some dancers so miscast in a role that the ballet was a failure. I, of course, understand that some body types and sizes partner up better than others, or are better suited to allegro or adagio parts for exmaple... but surely there is lots of gray area... no?

Do we want perfect stereotype casting? Is that the only acceptable approach in ballet? Is it even possible? Is this about platonic ideals?

Is it assumed that "typing" or style is the domain of principal dancers and soloists only? Is this something that corps members are encouraged not to strive for?

What would be the main styles of dance and I am not referring to choreography in this question? Have some styles fallen out of fashion? Are there equivalent male and female versions of all styles? How would these styles... yet to be identified "formally" differ for different types of ballet or choreography or even from ballet to ballet? Do dancers adapt their style to the ballet or the choreography or is it something they express in all their roles?

Finally, is the most perfect style of dance virtually invisible, or is this something which individuates one dancer from the next and something "cultivated" as part of artistic expression?

Forgive all the questions... it's all part of my attempt at seeing more in ballet than "meets the eye".