rg

i've just finally seen the 'ballet boyz' series from ch.4 (if that's the correct source), and learned there of a tradition i'd not previous heard. this concerns the 'tradition' of having a retiring male dancer, or at least one who is leaving the co, to perform a woman's role. i forget the dancer's name who was filmed in such an event, but he was shown being made-up and costumed to take the place of the lilac fairy in the apotheosis tableau of 'the sleeping beauty.' thus, a few questions: how long has this been a royal ballet tradition (if indeed it actually is one)? does it hold true, therefore, that when a woman is leaving the ranks that she appear in a male role? have there been any extraordinarily theatrical 'solutions' to making such 'final' appearances? or, what other information is there to explain this notion? w/thanks and apologies to the royal dancer in question, i can't right now replay my tape and make note of his name.

more tallchiefiana on the way, it would seem, given proper 'releases'/clearance: according to a source connected w/ VAI, there is a second tape in the offing and should be on the market as soon as all the permissions are signed/sealed and delivered. these are the CBC kinescopes of MTallchief in 3 segments: "LesSylphides" Pas de Deux w/ Royes Fernandez; "Pas de Dix" w/ Andre Eglevsky and "Swan Lake" Act2 pas de deux, also w/ Eglevsky (the rough cut i've seen would seem to be the standard 1950s ivanov version, not balanchine's version, made esp. for tallchief; dates not now available, but all 1950s vintage, i should think. (might even be out by xmas, if things go smoothly) [ November 17, 2001: Message edited by: rg ]

HMV is also in NYC but i've never learned what the initials stand for? His Master's Voice? (an old RCA/Victor slogan) His/Her Majesty's Voice? (a guess) none of these? this from the same person who initially thought LOL was net-lingo for lots of love! so, i suppose HMV could mean anything, or nothing.

re: Balanchine in NUTCRACKER from 1958, as the clips revealed at the 'Dance for a City: NYCB' exhibit at NY Historical society not that long ago, the kinescoping (if this is a word) of the NUTCRACKER was in 'living color' -- pale-looking nowadays, but color nevertheless. the reason one automatically assumes it was only black&white, as i assumed, comes from the fact that most television sets getting the original telecast were only B&W, so the color didn't reveal itself. but the hues are there on CBS's archive tape. wonder how many homes had color sets way back then.

wondering: JS: are you saying that the balanchine 'nutcracker' from 1958/playhouse90 is now commercially available or that it heads your most wishful 'wish list'? and yes, melissa's comment about pbs shows aired but not put out commercially reminds one of the things that still need to be 'put out there'. re: the 'allegro b.' it's a case of so near, yet so far, as the 'dance in america' that included the 'allegro' in question, was released EXCEPT for the 'allegro' segment itself, due, rumor has it, to the fact that nonesuch could not obtain releases from the lead(s) documented in the taping. (a similar situation prevented the 'dance in america' that included 'jewels' excerpts from including the 'rubies' pas de deux). so many telecasts; so few commercial releases! regarding the initial query posted here for ONE video tape, i guess i'd have to say i have no idea where i'd begin, so i won't even start the process of elimination. [ November 13, 2001: Message edited by: rg ]

taking Mel Johnson's advice w/ eagerness, and gratitude, i keyboard for the first time out of my normal word program: the name of THE SLEEPING BEAUTY's fair prince, Désiré. voila! quelle magique! keystrokes that now seem to be blessed by the wand of the beneficent lilac fairy. p.s great Florimunds/Désirés (seen live) in my view include: Anthony Dowell, Vyacheslav Gordeyev, Vladilen Semenov, Alexei Fadeyechev, and Patrick Bissell, (probably forgetting one or two more). [ November 12, 2001: Message edited by: rg ]

the british post-ers will doubtless be more informative and informed, but what i know of this video record is that dancing opposite acosta's frantz is leanne benjamin as swanilda (m. yoshida was scheduled, but indisposed due to illness or injury).

RE: Desire (haven't yet learned to put the acute accents but both e's get them) vs. Florimund. Don't now have a handle on the Florimund moniker but according to the authoritative Francine du Plessix Gray (authority on Marquis de Sade and Marie Antoinette, among other French luminaries), writing a review of a Evelyne Lever's "Marie Antoinette: The Last Queen of France" in a NEW YORKER piece entitled "The Child Queen," Aug. 7, 2000, p. 81, Louis XVI was known at the time of his marriage (when he was still Dauphin) as Louis le Desire (w/ accents, of course).

if mem. serves, the fairy variation ashton created for g.parkinson, esp. for the prod. that came to be nicknamed the 'plantagenet BEAUTY' because of the medieval decor by j.t.oman, was danced to the 5/4 'sapphire' variation written for the 'jewel fairies' quartet, and was called the 'fairy of joy' (though parkinson did, if mem. still serves, wear a rainbow emblem on her costume), later ashton's solo choreography was moved and inserted into the 'florestan pas de trois' as ashton had renamed the jewel fairy divertissement in act 3. the appearance of apollo in the apotheosis of an english BEAUTY was last done, in an british prod. in the late 30s(?), there's a picture (by gordon anthony(?)), which alastair macaulay drew many people's attention to in the wake of the kirov's re-instating apollo and his quadriga in the final tableau. [ November 10, 2001: Message edited by: rg ]

bausch's own wuppertal dance theater was filmed in her 'rite of spring' in 1980. the 35 min. film, which n.y.p.l. dance collection has catalogued, was originally made for a german tv network and was subsequently shown on u.s. cable (on Arts & Entertainment [as A&E was originally called] if mem. serves) around that time. there are copies around; various people who teach have been known to show it to classes. fyi: here are the particulars of the film: | Choreography: Pina Bausch. Music: Igor Stravinski, performed by the Cleveland Orchestra conducted by Pierre Boulez. Scenic design: Rolf Borzik. Choreographic assistant: Hans Pop. Performed by members of Das Tanztheater Wuppertal with Malou Airaudo as the Chosen Maiden. [ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: rg ]

having done a little checking it would appear that erik bruhn is NOT guilty in the 'scotch' case: nancy reynolds' 'repertory in review' does not have his name listed among the subsequent casts following a. eglevsky. so the anecdote given above is either misremembered by the teller or by yrs. trly. in remembering the details. as l.a.w. points out the bruhn/kent mishap story from 'divertimento 15' is documented in print, so perhaps the 'scotch' story confused the ballets, or i misremembered the details. (the divertimento story is well known.) of the partners listed in reynolds' book, i never saw h. bliss or a. prokovsky, so perhaps it was in one of those subsequent performances that mishaps happened. by the time i was seeing the ballet, w/ d'amboise, bonnefous, schaufuss, etc. the 'throws' were gone. tho' to be sure, as alexandra observered sometimes the transfer of 'sylph' to her scotsman's arms is part-throw and part-pass. tho' in my day it's been mostly pass w/ little throw, depending on the timing of the corps de ballet ballet men lifting and transferring the ballerina, and on the daring of the ballerina and/or of her partner. (i assume balanchine's original 'throw' intent was in some oblique way to reclaim an effect memorably recorded in ballet history from 'la peri' where it is said C. Grisi leapt from a 6 foot platform iinto the arms of L.Petipa during the 'pas de songe' an episode concerned w/ an opium dream. [ 10-05-2001: Message edited by: rg ]

EMERALDS has been recorded in a 2 CD set by Nonesuch. (I think NYCB's gift bar still sells it; the release date is 1986/Elektra) Robert Irving is the conductor of these CDs. The music listed on the disc is given as follows: EMERALDS Gabriel Faure Incidental music to Pelleas et Melisande, Op. 80 and Shylock, Op. 57 total running time: 28:30 "Pelleas et Melisande" 1] Prelude: Quasi Adagio 2] Fileuse: Andantino quasi Allegretto 3]Sicilienne: Allegretto molto moderato "Shylock" 4] Entr'Acte: Andante moderato; Allegretto 5] Epithalame: Adagio 6] Nocturne: Andante molto moderato 7] Final: Allegretto "Pelleas et Melisande" 8] Le more de Melisande: Molto Adagio (haven't figured out how to add accents to text outside my program)

from what i understand, the 'throws' in "scotch symphony" disappeared not too long after it's premiere. i've never seen them; i first saw the ballet in the early 1970s. i was told by a more veteran nycb goer that the reason was probably to avoid the chances of mishap, etc. memorably dramatized when, during one perf., for example, maria tallchief ended up flat on top of erik bruhn who had taken over the lead male role and was unable to negotiate the catch sufficiently. one 'return' to original details, i understand, tho' may be true for the farrell staging. i've been told that she's been using the 'original' karinska costumes which means that the female corps de ballet bodices are once more dark, forest green rather than the black that was used when they were rebuilt at nycb some years back. but i have not yet seen these for myself to learn if what i understand is indeed true. perhaps other longtime nycb goers have more particular info. to offer about the change from 'throws' to 'passes'. (my info. is hearsay and not the product of any thorough research.) [ 10-04-2001: Message edited by: rg ] [ 10-04-2001: Message edited by: rg ]

Kenneth Laws did a 'science and art' presentation on Oct. 1 at CUNY Grad. Center in NYC, w/ CPYP dancer Magrielle Eisen to help with the lecture demonstration. A handout at the event announced the up-coming publication from Oxford University Press of PHYSICS AND THE ART OF DANCE: UNDERSTANDING MOVEMENT. This book, 240 pp. w/ 90 half-tone illustrations and 25 line drawings, due out in January 2002 ($35.00) would appear to be a combination of Laws' two previous books, both published by Shirmer Books: 1] THE PHYSICS OF DANCE, 1984 2] PHYSICS, DANCE, AND THE PAS DE DEUX, 1994, which was marketed with an accompanying video tape. (no tape seems to be connected with this book.) THE VILLAGE VOICE ran a short piece about the lecture/demo by Eva Yaa Asantewaa in its Oct. 2 issue, which should be available on line. hope this helps.

there are two 'dracula' scores that i know to be recorded on CD: 1] Houston Ballet - Dracula; music - Franz Liszt,in an arrangement by John Lanchbery, marketed by Houston Ballet 2] Dracula (Ballet in 3 acts) [w/ Northern Ballet Theatre Orchestra] music: Philip Feeney (John Pryce-Jones, conducting Norther Ballet Theatre Orchestra) marketed by NAXOS hope this helps,

this from a double-minus-zero 'puter whiz: when i click on the link given in estelle's post i get only plain text about scripts n' stuff, HOWEVER when i click on the add. plain. i.e. www.bournonville.com i get a full home p. and all the components to be clicked on. but i have no idea if this says anything significant to this discussion.

robbins's 'ma mere' has had a reasonably long life, coming and going in rep over the years. not lately though. if mem. serves the ballet's full title is: MOHTER GOOSE (FAIRY TALES FOR DANCERS). it was given as a revival in 1990 for the little festival of robbins ballets put on at nycb. i believe it also had some performances beyond that but don't have my files at hand to double check my ever faulty memory. the scheme of the work was a back-stage/let's-put-on-a-show event, with dancers in practice clothes listening to a reading (mimed) of the tales and then taking it upon themselves, supposedly spontaneously, to enact them by getting little props and costume bits out of trunks and then presenting skits of 'sleeping beauty' 'hop o my thumb' 'beauty and the beast' and 'laideronnette, empress of the pagodas' arlene croce wrote rather favorably of it during its premiere season.

there was a short-lived staging of 'd&c' for n.y.c.b's ravel festival, by john taras, as i recall it had a 'biker' look--black leather chic--and starred peter schaufuss, but it is most memorable to some of us who were around then for prompting arlene croce to note in her assessment of the work that not even 'flame throwers would get [her] back for a second look.' then if mem. serves there was a graeme murphy(?) version for the sidney dance company that was promoted by a picture of daphnis on a skateboard.

regarding wheeldon's 'mercurial manoeuvers' it was, i believe, only one reviewer who pointed out that the 3 mov. ballet was given, due to stage space limitations, without the drops that were a significant part of the ballet's design. (i think the writer was percival, who reviewed the ballet initially after its nyc premiere.) though none of this would affect the way the choreography was given, this lack of setting would affect the way the ballet looked and the initial intentions of wheeldon's 'vision'. the first movement was much elaborated by the way the stage flats initially masked the stage and gave it intimate, false perspective and the way, then, those flats rose and eventually opened the stage to its full dimensions. i suppose some light cues might have indicated these original intentions, but w/out the flats (painted [or lit, or both] an intense red) the ballet's original intentions would be hard to assess. (this is a case, related to jeffrey's 're-do' question, when the design was redone not out of choice but out of necessity, a whole new kettle of fish.) [ 09-05-2001: Message edited by: rg ]

museums and museum pieces are probably elastic terms meaning diff. things all around. balanchine was on record saying his co. 'vision' was not that of museum, which i think was to counter claims made by various ballets russes troupes, or was it specifically one of de basil's claims about his company's being a museum. in any case i think the whole thing has gotten out of hand, somewhat, w/ museum becoming equated w/ a bad thing. as for 'museum piece' which i'm not looking up in any dictionary at the moment, but i THINK it's usually a pejorative term meaning a musty thing that's become dated and is valued only as an artifact, etc. dance o'course is separate kettle of fish as if it's not performed it doesn't really exist. i think re-doing ballets should be the province of inspired artistic directors who have reasons for commissioning new this or that and who have THEIR own reasons for so doing. these reasons i should think would vary, the costumes don't become the current company's bodies, for example. as an artistic exercise, i for one, would welcome a look at THE FOUR TEMPERAMENTS in those controversial costumes, but only as alternative 'exercise' (and probably an impractical one, because the costs would probably far outweigh the version's shelf-life). dowell got fried in the reviews, so far as i can recall, for having 'rhapsody' redone, and unlike the 'rendezvous' results, which i feel made an effort to honor the extant scheme's silhouette, etc., those for 'rhapsody' seem, from pictures, to go in a direction all its own, which may or may not be successful aesthetically. but i'd like to see these on stage before assessing them. (i found the 'original' chappell ones undistinguished; ditto the setting.) david vaughan, by way of another example, has long lobbied for a re-do of the lancaster 'fille mal gardee' designs. i guess my feeling is that there are no set rules for what, when, where, why to re-do a ballet's decor and/or costumes. what matters is the effect of the resulting work. and that will prob. always inspire a whole range of reactions. i for one felt strongly favorable for the lacroix designs baryshnikov commissioned for 'gaite' and these were almost universally panned. (i find the zack brown set for the same production much less successful.) danilova said on a diaghilev docu. how the impresario taught her that 'with the taste, you can do anything; and without taste, you can do nothing!' i know, i know, who's taste? what taste? but that's probably the bottom line. sometimes it would seem that a new set of designs can re-introduce a work to a new/current audience the way the old set could (or did) not. then there is the notion of two 'looks' etc. for the same ballet: is 'ballet imperial'as a production in tutus and tiaras a separate ballet from 'tchaikovsky piano concerto no.2' in chiffon shifts, etc. even though the steps are virtually identical? i resisted the shifts' look for a while then i noted the way the chiffon skirts worked into the choregraphy's stage full of soutenu turns and started to see that there might a real, almost 'organic' reason to put the women in looser shifts. who's saying poTAYtoh and who's saying poTAHtoh? [ 09-01-2001: Message edited by: rg ]

it's hard to beat the 'source' as it flowed forth from ddianne, but i saw a final dress reh. and the prem. of 'sym in 3' as i recall the exp. was a chilling one as w/ from a force of nature. i don't ever rem. an overabundance of grinning faces in any bal. ballet, truth to tell, in his day. i wonder if the venue could have had something to do w/ jane simpson's 'view' of things, was the proximity to the stage at all diff. w/ s.f.b. vs. her previous nycb or brb etc. experiences? i think ddianne is on the money, no wildly grinning mugs were event nor was any specific, dour/serious 'emoting'. all the dancers' parts (and the dancers themselves seemed aptly 'driven' by their music, which at times thunders rather forcefully and at others gets more casual sounding. i saw s.f.b. do fine perfs. of the ballet at kenn.cent. and don't rem. an overabundance of bright, smiling faces, so i wonder if the uk perfs. took on a diff. tone for some reason. if ever there was a monument to balanchine's 'just dance the steps' advice it might be 'sym in 3' tho' it still applies to the rest of his canon. it's prob. always good to recall how often when g.b. made a ballet he was stretching/extending what his co. could do at the time and that the dancers, early on, were there, 'reaching' to the new limits, then when what the choreographer accomplished got folded back into the co's technique/expertise a kind of glibness can possibly take over. 'agon' is prob. the best example of a ballet stretching/extending its original cast, thus leaving later, more 'attuned' casts in the position of trying to find the original 'tension' without 'emoting' it. or something. bottom line: if s.f.b. seemed to cheerily, cheerleading the first mov. of this ballet, something's gotten lost 'in the translation.'

my understanding, jeffrey, of this 'question' is that it is meant to address efforts by 'others' to re-do work originally done by those involved with the ballet's initial (or, at least an existing, perhaps, longstanding, design scheme). i think there is no question that the artists who do the work are entitled to redo/adjust/tweak/change etc. any of their work as the work exists in rep. there are innumerable instances of this, and the public, even the individuals who might MISS the previous 'choices' (familiarity is often an ironclad factor of a public's mind-set). look, by way of example, at balanchine's choreographic (not to mention design-peference) 'revisions,' none probably more notably 'controversial' than his tinkerings w/ 'apollo' in the late 70s. (as i recall his response to all complaints about his cuts, etc. was something like: it's my ballet i can do anything i want!) so if i catch the point of this 'issue' you are well within your artistic rights to do whatever you want, and the public needs to consider, then, the latest version of your design as THE version. the bone of contention indicated here would come in if/when some other lighting designer re-does the plot and maybe someone different from the original costume designer re-does the costumes. then we'd have a 're-design' issue on our hands here. robbins btw was somewhat infamous for letting his designers do their work, and put it on stage, only to have him request revisions soon thereafter. THE FOUR SEASONS is an example of this costumewise, tho' the santo loquasto revisions were only somewhat different from the originals, but they were, if mem. serves different. ditto a situation w/ robbins's 'in g major' which initially had a terarutunian backdrop and then x-years later that got replaced, by robbins, with the current erte drop now in use. SO, if someone goes ahead and re-designs the 'g major' drop or the 'seasons' costumes, then i think the 'question' initiated here would be applied to the results. as to your urges to 'tweak' you own lights, i think, to paraphrase of mr. b around the 'apollo' time, you could call a halt to any complaint/argument about the changes by saying: it's none of your business! (which i think was the upshot of most of mr. b's response to the 'apollo' complaints).

D.Vaughan's book, which i didn't consult earlier today, has, as i trust you've all already discussed, a full rundown of the changes over the years of the design scheme, etc. (d.v. btw, as he's said himself in print, also intensely disliked ward's designs.) as to my admiration for his work--the men's and women's costumes as well as the decor--i found it all of a pretty piece, not nec. a definitive statement on this ballet but a fine one for this outing. i'm not sure what big-girl/little-girl distinction you refer to in the previous chappells, but, if you refer to the fact that one 'rank' had pink ribbons and others white as trim in their hair and on their skirts, etc i think ward offers a kind of distinction, tho' i'm not remembering things precisely here, but i recall that his use of color/polka dots involved some in full chroma and some rendered in pastel hues to distinguish one 'tier' of dancers from another. in any case, w/ the exception of the little hats, which i liked more in theory than execution on the women (i loved the men's boaters!) i thought the result was winning in an apt way, and suitably 'french,' in line with the music. the silhoutte of the dresses was pretty much that of chappell's scheme and tho' ward's gloves were mitts where chappell's were elbow-length ones, i thought the effect was still winning. i esp. liked the way the little colored gloves helped focus on the ashtonian 'wrist curls' as well as in guiding the eye to follow and admire the sweep of the hands and the arms rendering the ballet's lushly torsioned upper-body and epualement moves, etc. [ 08-31-2001: Message edited by: rg ]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record (remember records?), may I interject here a way of identifying "original" w/ regard to ballet designs? I assume you mean the Chappell design's most recently used as preferable to the newest ones by Ward. (And yes, I'm one of the few, perhaps only people ‘on my block' who actually admired them.). The actual ‘original' designs which I never saw live, are pictured in David Vaughan's invaluable "Frederick Ashton and His Ballets" and seem eccentric to a degree, but probably apt, in their ‘period' way for the Thirties. I also never saw the interim designs, but ‘grew up' with Chappell's last ‘thoughts' on the ‘look,' which I admired overall. But fyi, here's a rundown according to the dance collection's records of the designs and redesigns for the ballet in it's nearly 70-year-old history. Here then the list of credits: Chor: Frederick Ashton; mus: D.F.E. Auber (L'enfant prodigue, arr. by Constant Lambert); scen & cos: William Chappell. First perf: London, Sadler's Wells Theatre, Dec 5, 1933, Vic-Wells Ballet.//New production: Sadler's Wells Theatre, Nov 16, 1937, Vic-Wells Ballet; scen (new): William Chappell.//Revival: London, Sadler's Wells Theatre, Dec 26, 1947, Sadler's Wells Theatre Ballet; scen & cos: (new); William Chappell.//First New York perf: Mar 25, 1952, Sadler's Wells Theatre Ballet.//First National Ballet of Canada perf: Hamilton, Ontario, Palace Theatre, Nov 5, 1956; scen & cos: Kay Ambrose after William Chappell.//Revival: London, Royal Opera House, Covent Garden, May 7, 1959, Royal Ballet; scen: Sophie Fedorovitch (sets originally made for Act I of Verdi's La traviata); cos: (new): William Chappell.

settingwise 'liebeslieder' HAS been redesigned. d.mitchell re-did the whole ballet scenically in 1984, keeping the karinska costumes, w/ modifications [originally the men wore tights and patent pumps not fitted pants as in '84, and the re-built dresses (and tutus) were slightly altered at the time as well, either by intent or benign neglect]. mitchell's design's replaced those of david hays, which some nycb-goers said were preferable for their lightness of structure and for the transformation they allowed from part one to part two. (the late e.gorey, longtime nycb-goer was not impressed by the re-do, he suggested to me that after hay's airy/light latticed surround mitchell's heavier, more specific architecture made it look as if the salon affair were taking place 'in a bank' [actually, the new designs were meticulously based, on lincoln kirstein's guidance, on the architectural detailing and scale of the amalianberg 'lusthaus' in germany].) so i presume you mean you think that karinska's costumes should not be re-thought/designed. [ 08-31-2001: Message edited by: rg ]