cubanmiamiboy

The "by extension" concept... And now that you mention it... wouldn't it be interesting to survey a Japanese ballet troupe on the subject...? 🤔

Any specific example you might want to share ...? I myself have never encountered a ballet viewer who was personally offended by the piece. I don't doubt that they might exist, or that many on this forum understand and hence might felt "offended by extension"-( as with whites within the BLM movement). But I haven't certainly never encountered an Asian offended by Balanchine's ballet.

I've heard all and read all, and it is all very subjective, aesthetically speaking. I hated Woezzeck at the MET, and some people I know loved it. The PC aspect of the ballet is a whole different story. That it has been decided that it might offend Japanese people because it is a western fantasy on an Asian subject...a chinoiserie of some sorts, well...that might be. In my own world of ballet aesthetics it is a winner. I love it. I find it entertaining, misterious and very refined...and I wish it would be performed more regularly. To each its own, like they say....?

She comes from National Ballet of Canada.

Trust your own, as Drew says! If you don't have access to live performances, dig into videos. Compare different versions. One important, to me, issue in regards to ballet viewing is to define what aspect of the art form is more interesting to you. Hardcore ballet fans, or balletomannes, seem to fall into certain categories. Some of us , like myself, dwell more into the historical side of it. Performance history, reconstructions, recreations, and the like. Some others are more into dancers. They might be at stage doors getting pictures and autographs. Sort of the grupie type. Some might be ex d

Old Hollywood is disappearing little by little... https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/sean-connery-james-bond-dead-90-report

Bumping up a bit this thread, although not to offer yet another "alternative" ending. I just watched an interview from Beverly Sills to Peter Martins during the intermission of his Swan Lake, from the "Live from LC" video. At some point she asks him a very direct question: "How is it possible to change a ballet finale...? I mean, as much as I wanted for Violetta to survive in La Traviata, that's just not possible. Don't you have to follow a certain original text?" To which Martins answers her not exactly addressing her question but more like dwelling into the dramatic components of his SL

My picks. 🙃

I've watched this many times during this hideous lockdown, and I agree with all previous assessments. This staging is a total winner. A cornerstone in this ballet's history. As many have observed, the most radical aspect of it , dramatically, is for the audience to be presented with this totally different design of Bathilde, who morphs from the well known high nosed, cold princess to a concerned and warm noble woman who doesn't show any sign of being too affected by his fiance's bachelor stunt with a sickly, fragile peasant girl. When both Giselle and her are pointing at their fingers, indicat

Disgusting. Extorsion 101.

I think every time a big scandal happens within the ballet world that somehow seems to hint at its inner world the company image gets indeed tainted. Being Bolshoi with the acid attack, being a ballerina speaking out -( Kirkland, Volochkova, Womack, Morgan among others), being an AD being removed due to sexual conduct-( Martins)- bits and pieces of the enclosed world of ballet is revealed as a Pandora's box for the rest of the world to peak and be scandalized at. And those stories stay somehow in people's minds. Tell me that if after the acid attack your vision of how the Bolshoi was the same.

Gelsey Kirkland's point relayed heavily on this. She believed that, besides her own, NYCB and its directives-( Balanchine at the time)- were indeed very responsible for turning a blind eye to situations.

I'm glad that Ramasar didn't have his career destroyed, and that his is a cautionary tale for all men, both those guilty or those others who might suffer unjustified vilification if your theory is indeed being applied to them.

So sexual assault is then equal to sexual abuse. Waterbury was assaulted because she was unknowingly filmed. Even if the sex was consensual. This is how it works...?

But I'm confused. If they had consensual sex, that could be considered assault due to the unknown, to her, recording...?