Alymer

dirac, I'm sorry it's taken me so long to reply. I'm rather over my head at the moment. I have a date with the acountant on Tuesday morning, nothing is ready for him, I'm working all day on Monday and have relatives visiting tomorrow! So quickly, here are three points which I picked. They're not so much errors of actual fact but more a curious reading of circumstances (I don't have time to check the fine detail of other errors). She states that when Tetley created Field Figures for the Royal Ballet he "excluded Rudolf from the cast.............". There could never have been any question of Nureyev being available for that ballet which was created for the newly formed "New Group" a replacement for the disbanded touring section of the company. Robbins was mounting Dances at a Gathering at the same time and had first pick of the available dancers. Robbins was rehearsing multiple potential casts - and there was in fact a stand off between the choreographers over one boy whom Robbins "might use" and Tetley definitely would and did. (The New Group was largely made up of dancers from the former touring section whom Michael Somes charmingly and publicly referred to as "touring trash".) Re Manfred; Kavanagh states that the Palais des Sports remained half-empty. Well yes, there were empty seats to be seen. It's a large sports stadium and a temporary stage was erected in the middle of the arena. This meant that only a smallish proportion of the seats had any kind of view of the stage - the majority had none and therefore weren't on sale. I was in France on business at the time so I went on three or four occasions (the rest of the programme was quite good I recall) and although there were some empty seats it was a pretty full house, especially when Nureyev got back on stage. As an aside, I've never seen so many mink coats which were so obviously "this season's model". Very odd, especially in a dump which stank of ancient fried onions. She also describes how Nureyev invited Fonteyn to appear with him at the Coliseum in his Diaghilev season "in two works" and goes on to describe "the ballerina hardly able to rise on point in Le Spectre de la Rose". Fonteyn was not listed to dance Spectre, simply the Nymph in Faune. She decided to go on in Spectre just before the Saturday matinee - who knows why. I didn't see it but my husband did. Seemingly she asked the stage manager who was about to go before the curtain to announce the change of cast exactly what he planned to say. The reply was something like "at this afternoon's performance of Spectre de la rose the part of the young girl will be danced by Margot Fonteyn". He was instructed by the lady to omit the word "young" and substitute "portrayed by" for "danced by". I gather she was lovely and the audience ecstatic, though he by then, was really past being able to cope with the technical demands of the role. She went on again in the evening and that was the last time she appeared on a British stage wearing pointe shoes. I guess it's a question of the way you put things.........

I too enjoyed Delibes' review and I was quite relieved to read it because, unlike most reviers and psoters, I really didn't enjoy this book. I found it contained far too much in the way of irrelevant detail - do we really need to know about every holiday itinerary - and a huge number of mistakes. Too many to list. And I find Kavanagh's chronology somewhat suspect, though I confess I haven't actually checked dates. I would also suggest that (as with Meredith Daneman's Fonteyn biography) many of sources she quotes have their own agenda with regard to past history, but she seems to accept all their views as gospel truth. With regard to his relationship with Bruhn, Kavanagh appears to have only one side of their correspondence, which inevitably provides a slanted view. What I know for a fact is that the two men were devoted to each other up until the day of Bruhn's death. And while Nureyev may have had Guillem's photograph by his bed in his Dakota apartment or one of his other houses, the two pictures by the bed at Quai Voltaire were of Fonteyn and Bruhn. The thing that really made me dislike this book though was my feeling that the author neither liked or admired her subject and her interest is mainly confined to his sex life and his more glamorous friends. I think Solway gives a fairer view, although she too gives us less than we might like about his life on the stage; the most important thing in his life and the engine that drove him - and indulges in rather too much name-dropping.

I saw what I believe were some of the first performances of Spectre that Nureyev gsve after having learned the proper choreography. This was with the company that is now English National Ballet at the Kennedy Centre, many, many years ago. They were amazing. All at once the piece made sense to me and I can only sum it up by saying that he was masculine and sensual without being sexual. And technically it was fine, but it wasn't the technique that you noticed, rather the complete identification with the role in the way that popularlibrary summed it up so aptly. Alas, all that had vanished the next time I saw him in the role, and it was Nureyev giving a Nureyev performance from then on. I saw Barishnikov with Lynn Seymour in Spectre at a gala in Hamburg, and while it was beautifully danced, it was a classical pas de deux we saw rather than Spectre. Much the same could be said of Misha in the pas de trois from Pavillion d'Armide which he danced on the same programme

Whenever I've see performances of Matthew Bourne's pieces ( I wouldn't necessarily call them ballets) Bourne sitting in the stalls and generally leaps to his feet and applauds vociferously as soon as the curtain goes down. Perhaps he does this because he's so enthusiastic about his dancers and grateful that they have given such wonderful performances. On the other hand................

In fact the dessert was a conical shaped confection of ice cream and meringue topped with a tiny silver model of a sylph. The piperade sounds more as if it was a tribute from one of St Leon's countrymen. And I'm sure I don't have to remind Mel that Cerrito pere was a veteran of Napoleon's army. But as he disapproved heartily of Soyer's attentions to his daughter, it is unlikely that he had any input into the Soyer stove.

I have been reading Ruth Cowan's book Relish, the biography of the chef Alexis Soyer. It's a book worth reading for Soyer alone - he had a most extraordinary life - one of the first celebrity chefs. It culminated in a trip he made at his own expense to the Crimea where he both collaborated with Florence Nightingale in setting up proper catering arrangements in her hospitals. Additionally, he developed a stove for the troops which remained in commission until as recently as 1982, although Soyer himself died in 1858. It's a book I would thoroughly recommend, not just for Soyer's extraordinary life, but for the insights it gives into life in England and France at the time. But the reason for mentioning it here is that Cowen describes Soyer's admiration for the dancer Fanny Cerrito, even illustrates an extraordinary dessert he invented and named for her, but also claims that she and Soyer were married in some kind of dubious ceremony - dubious because her legal husband Arthur St Leon was still alive. Nothing of this appears in Ivor Guest's biography of Cerrito and it occurs to me once again how often a non-specialist biographer, writer or historian can throw a quite unexpected light onto a life with which you thought you were totally familier.

rg wondered about Chagall's involvement with Markova's costume. According to her memoir, Markova Remembers, the head-dress was made to Chagall's design, so that the head and beak of the Firebird were on one side of her head. The feathers were bird of paradise. For the costume, Markova and Chagall met in costumier Edith Lutyens studio. Lutyens had made a gold lame leotard onto which Chagall pinned fragments of net in various colours which had been cut to look like feathers. Once they were placed to his satisfaction, they were stitched down. The whole look was completed with dark body make-up onto which patches of grrease were applied and then gold dust was applied to the grease patches. She recalls that she had to buy the gold dust by the pound and it was so difficult to remove that the ballet always had to be scheduled for the last item on the bill. If she was going out after the show with friends she wore a black cashmere sweater which covered her arms and back. During the busiest tours, when leaving immediately after the show for the next date, she often had to wear the make-up on the plane or all night on the bus.

With regard to the high extensions, Nureyev himself told me that when he was young he could shoulder his leg: "but then it all went into jump". As to the high demi pointe, he was aware that his legs were short so it could be that he wanted to give the impression that they were longer than in fact they were. [Edited to Add: a branch of the discussion about Nureyev's proportions and beautifully proportioned males dancers can be found here.]

I suspect that what they are constructing is a diaphragm wall (which is what they did after Chernobyl). This would allow the basement to be kept dry and it's a fairly standard technique for that kind of situation. Cofferdams work on the same principle, but they tend to be used only as temporary structures and actually in waterways ( for building structures such as bridge piers) where they allow construction in the (relative) dry. However, all that concrete could supply cover for all kinds of things - though I'm told that bodies encased in concrete can eventually cause voids which weaken the structure ....................... I don't think we should go there. You really don't want to know any more!

Like Leonid I really dislike this production, not some much for the decor which I think is totally misconceived, but for the drunkeness and bad manners which Dowell has incorporated into the production. The choreographic text hower is pretty good, with some exceptions. The Act I pas de trois was staged by Irina Jacobsen and is, I think, inferior to the more straighforward version formerly danced by the Royal Ballet. I don't like David Bintley's Act I waltz, but then I think any choreographer told her or she must incorporate stools and a maypole into the number is working under a considerable handicap - unless you happen to be Petipa or a contemporary of his. Acts II and III are pretty faithful to the Sergeyev text, as is the last Act with one exception. Towards the end of the Act Odette and Siegfried used to walk together towards Rothbart forcing him to retreat momentarily by (I imagined) the shear force of their love for each other. Now Odette is carried forward in low lift while she does a developpe - ber point shoe aiming for what in a mortal man might be described as a sensitive target! It's more "dancey", I suppose, but less effective than a simple walk. The two casts I saw were Soares (who is injured) and Nunez whose performance sharpens and deepens all the time. The second cast was Lauren Cuthbertson, reasonably competent, but not I think ideally suited to the role, and Rupert Pennefather who could become a real Danseur Noble, if he could only look a little more involved with his partner. He's scheduled to partner Nunez on the tour, so perhaps he will respond to her. Earlier in the season I saw Tamara Rojo partnered by Carlos Acosta and I think you would have to travel a long way to see better.

Yes.congratulations and every good wish for the future to all members of the Bruhat-Souche family. I hope especially that mother and daughter are doing well.

Scherzo, I saw the same cast in Birmingham as you saw on 20th February and would say that your comments were spot on! The only difference was that on that occasion the balances in the Agon pas de trois were rock steady. But even so, I thought the cast took it too seriously. I used to love Virginia Johnson of Dance Theatre of Harlem in that; she had a very saucy little twitch of the hips in her solo variation which seemed to me to add a little spice and colour to the event.

In that same publication he rhapsodised about the Royal Ballet dancer Marguerite Porter, lauding her in the most extravagent terms. Then he suddenly fell out of love and attacked her for deficiencies which had always been there. It must have been most distressing for the poor girl. His book about Fonteyn is a very slim publication and I know that he never saw her dance - he has said as much in print. And I do rather question his list of "leading experts" on Ashton. I think there are others who might claim as much expertise and certainly more personal knowledge.

I learned today that the choreographer Glen Tetley died on Friday. The cause was given as cancer. He would have been 81 next month.

the sounds coming out of the pit are usually inferior to the quality of the dancing on stage. This probably wouldn't be the case at the Paris Opera or Vienna State Opera. I don't know about Paris, but I've seen a really trashy ballet in Vienna which was made quite bearable because of the playing by the Vienna Philharmonic.

I haven't seen the Dutch company's version, but I believe they are very close, if not identical.

"retire early. (I say 'early' but at 36 it wouldn't necessarily be that early - I mean, who knows when she might have been planning to retire or wind down before all this started...?)." ENB has a new artistic director in Wayne Eagling, Clarke is now, as you say, 36 years old and in my opinion (and I see the company quite regularly) not of the same calibre as some of the other female principals. Even before this latest scandal I was surprised to see her cast as Giselle, I wouldn't have said she was that kind of dancer. Myrtha perhaps....................... That said, I'm sure she gave a competent and professional performance, despite the interruptions. But I would guess that when the time comes for her annual interview with Eagling there may well be a suggestion that there won't be a lot for her next season and perhaps she might like to make way for some of the younger talent in the company. Curiously, I suspect she owes her promotion to principal in part at least because of her British nationality. All the UK companies have a distinct lack of British principals and this is felt by some to be a problem.

Nureyev, Soloviev and Vasiliev were all phenomenal dancers and amazingly they all graduated in the same year. I honestly don't think you could say one was better than the other - they were so different. I know for a fact that Nureyev had huge respect for the other two. But one thing I do believe, we don't see dancers of that quality and that degree of commitment today.

John Cranko's Lady and the Fool has a score which was arranged by Charles McKerras consisting of extracts from early Verdi operas. At that time these were not very well known and seldom performed. Now, it's a different matter. And of course the same team used Gilbert and Sullivan's operettas for Pineapple Poll.

It was very noticeable at the end of the Ashton centenary how much better the company was dancing. Cleaner, crisper, with far more attention to ports de bras, and generally a more lively approach. And not just in the Ashton ballets - it showed in everything they did. It would appear that the technical demands that Ashton made on his dancers - principals, soloists, corps de ballet - forced them all to raise their game a notch or two. I'm not sure what we can look forward to with Mr McGregor. Yet more extreme extensions, I suppose and probably more injuries.

That's wonderful Alexandra - (and I haven't heard my husband laugh so much for ages). I just hope you are not gifted with precognition! It's all too posible!

In Lazlo Seregi's version of Sylvia the heroine's pizzicato variation is fuelled by champagne.

I guess it's a good thing that we don't all share the same opinions - it makes for variety. I saw two performances of the mixed bill which came as a reminder of the constraints under which artists operated at that time in the Soviet Union. I also recalled that only a few years later the Bolshoi had to hurridly disinterr its old production of Swan Lake for a tour to London because Grigorovitch's 'new' production failed to gain approval from the Ministry of Culture. So at a time when the Royal Ballet companies for instance, were presenting The Invitation, The Two Pigeons and Persephone, Soviet choreographers had to keep to a very limited, party approved, set of subjects. The Young Lady and the Hooligan is a perfect example of this with it's Virtuous Soviet Maiden as heroine. But unlike Chiapuris I found Ivanova really charming. She found more variation in the character than I would have thought possible, she has a winning personality and the most beautiful feet. But I certainly agree that Zelensky was fantastic and so much faster than the other men in the company. I saw the programme twice; Bedbug didn't make much sense to me first time - although it's certainly lively. I then researched the play and the background to the ballet before the Thursday show, but was no more enlightened as to what was supposed to be happening. (Incidentally, I suspect Zoya's sickled feet are part of the choreography.) Leningrad Symphony was the piece with which I am most familiar having first seen it more than 30 years ago with Soloviev and Komleva. Problem is, if you saw Soloviev no one else comes up to that standard and I thought Igor Kolb fell far short. He's a gifted and sincere dancer, but I don't find him the Russian Hero type at the best of times and especially not this week when he sported a dubiously orange rinse and funny facial hair. Lopatkina danced nicely, as one would expect, but I found too many "ballerina" manerisms. The Golden Age I also saw twice and having read about the circumstances under which Noah Gelber made the ballet I have the greatest admiration for what he has achieved. It's a thoroughly entertaining piece and he tells the story and characterises the protagonists very clearly. Some of the choreography is a bit pedestrian, but I very much liked the soccer match - the man next to me commented "why no goalkeepers?" - and I thought the social dancing was very well done, especially Sophie's attempts to teach Alexander to dance. Less successful I thought was a cabaret number for "acrobats" and I thought a drunk scene for a group of young girls was a bit dubious. Again contrary to Chiapurus, I thought the last act was the strongest, especially at the later performance when the projections worked properly and the lighting was improved. I thought the duet for Alexander and his dying friend Vladimir was fine and very moving, and although I looked hard, I saw no signs of The Love that Dare Not Speak Its Name! (Nor did my husband, incidentally). The real tear jerking scenes came from Komleva and Berezhnoy as the old lovers. They were wonderful, full of emotion but beautifully restrained. They really deserved their final curtain call. Both performances I saw were very warmly received and I hope the piece lasts beyond the Shostakovitch celebrations. It deserves to.

At the first night of Roland Petit's Pelleas and Melisande - created for Fonteyn's ??? anniversary on stage - I remember the woman behind me saying "thank God" as Nureyev finished an incredibly difficult variation and ran off stage. And then as Keith Rosson ( a good dancer but.....) appeared she hissed to her friend "That's Nureyev" . I mean, they didn 't look anything like each other even before they started dancing!

It also appears, word for word, in Newman's biography of Sibley.