Eileen

Thank you Marga for your on the scene report! Imagine TV cutting that scene!

Listening to Valery Gergiev's plush rendering of the Nutcracker on the NY classical radio station, I realize suddenly - the 1958 version omitted entirely the little prince's solo, in which he depicts slaying the mouse king. The highlight of his role has been cut, to make room for commercials. Or did Balanchine later create this episode? If it was cut by the TV mavens - what violence to his art Balanchine was compelled to put up with!

Did he create the mime for the little prince after 1958? Or was it in the original 1954 choreography? Does any Balanchine scholar know?

Yes, Eric, it was worth sitting through a very tepid production that was true Balanchine, despite all the silly voiceovers, awkward editing, dead time (Clara contemplating the owl grandfather clock), misguided snowstorm that actually camouflaged the snowflake-dancers - it was worth it, and something I've wanted to do for a long time. What a revelation, to see Allegra Kent at her peak! How interesting to see how Diana Adams was nowhere near as charismatic as many NYCB principals today, and more matronly than queenly. It was instructive to see how Balanchine was forced to use the forces at his disposal, to "make do" with the ingredients at hand. What a relief it must have been for him to have the State Theater where his genius could find full expression.

Thank you, kfw. I do hope Hendrickson does a wonderful job as Drosselmeyer, as I recently met him and he has such a piquant quality and puckish, mobile features. Since I'll be sitting in row J center of the orchestra, I hope he will register effectively.

Further on the Nutcracker TV film:

The Library of the Performing Arts at Lincoln Center (NYC) has some interesting Balanchine Nutcracker material, including apparently the entire 1958 television recording. Here is a link to a documentary on Balanchine's Nutcracker, and if you read the entire description, you will find a reference to their having the entire film and a classification number.

http://nypl.biblioco..._the_nutcracker

Jack, the man at the front desk was very helpful in advising me that you don't need to pay $15 for a "Scholars Pass" - which is for people who need to use the research room for more than 1 -1/2 hours. He told me to buy the $10 adult admission which allows you 1-1/2 hours in the Scholars Room. And since they are not at all busy now - the archivists looked up eagerly when I entered the fourth floor - they will allow you another 20 minutes if you need them. But now I'm thinking.... What about the Library of Performing Arts at Lincoln Center, which is free? Do they have the Balanchine Playhouse 90 version? Check the nypl.org catalog. They also have a room full of screens and earphones, only not as posh as the Paley Media Center.

The reason NYCB has so many boys is they are able to finance a program of full scholarships for boys. Boys pay nothing to attend, and admission is still competitive. If MCB could afford to let boys study for free, they would also have actual boys playing boy parts. Balanchine worked with what he had until the Ford Foundation grant came through in the early 60's, which allowed him to send his dancers out to scout for the best ballet students, one of whom, Roberta Ficker, became Suzanne Farrell. Then the scholarships for boys in later years under Martins improved the school and its performances enormously. Even in the 60's, in an interview, I remember Balanchine saying, "We have Jacques D'Amboise, he is married and has children. We have Edward Vilella, he is also married with children. So we're doing 100%." This was obviously to reassure parents who were afraid for their sons to be ballet dancers. So Balanchine knew exactly what he was up against. Vilella's father insisted he abandon ballet and join the Merchant Marine Academy. Luckily he went back to ballet in time.

I'm very concerned about MCB without Edward Vilella. It seems insane, or at least counterproductive, to fire the founder at only 75 when he has so much knowledge and experience. If Balanchine had been fired at 75 in 1979, we would not have had Mozartiana! I'll check out the MCB forum to see what Miami and Fort Lauderdale audience members have to say.

Just want to add - you can't really compare the dancing of the 50's to that of later years. Suzanne Farrell (who was discovered by Diana Adams, by the way) changed Balanchine's aesthetic, he was choosing dancers who were more spare, more athletic. Just look at the photo of Patricia McBride supported by Balanchine on the cover of More Balanchine Variations, from the 1970's. Her arms are emaciated. In the 70's the thin aesthetic had reached its apotheosis, and dancers like Gelsey Kirkland were abusing serious drugs, which was causing them to be emaciated in an attempt at the "ideal" ballet body. Thank God we no longer demand that sort of unhealthy appearance. Dancers like Merrill Ashley in the 1980's, Sara Mearns now, look healthy. But the lean ideal is still there, although tempered by the greater understanding of health risks of being too thin. But in the 1950's, the body type was more womanly - viz. Diana Adams. There was less athleticism. You can't really compare a 50 year period of dance. We have amazing dancers at NYCB and I think NOW is the golden age, even without Balanchine.

Here is the link to my critique of the 1958 Nutcracker television version starring Diana Adams, Allegra Kent and Mr. B himself. I saw it at the Paley Media Center.

http://balletalert.invisionzone.com/index.php?/topic/34902-1958-balanchine-nutcracker-television-version/

Here is the link to my critique of the 1958 version starring Diana Adams, Allegra Kent, and Mr. B himself! It's at the Paley Media Center in New York.

http://balletalert.invisionzone.com/index.php?/topic/34902-1958-balanchine-nutcracker-television-version/

On December 25, 1958, Balanchine's Nutcracker was broadcast on CBS. In a diferent post I wrote "And is there in existence a film of the 1958 Nutcracker broadcast on CBS with Diana Adams? Is it in the Paley film archive in NYC? That broadcast is one of my earliest memories of television, and my first of ballet. I'd love to find it." And find it I did!

I sat in the Paley Media Center research room for 1-1/2 hours listening and watching to this period piece. My first impression, especially of Act one, is that he stage was too small for the dances (a reflection of the City Center staging?) and the involved setting, with two different rooms, complicated the action more than necessary. A highlight of the performance was the chance to see George Balanchine play Drosselmeyer. The production softened the frightening aspects of Drosselmeyer's entrance. By the way, the introduction by June Lockhart and her constant, intrusive voiceovers during the action were unnecessary and treacly. Balanchine's Nutcracker needs no voiceover to make the action intelligible even to a four year old.

The children in Act one were ragged. The boys were played mostly by girls - not even bothering to disguise them with short hair - two of the girl/boys had buns! Balanchine really suffered from the lack of boys taking ballet. The prince/nutcracker looked so familiar to me. I wondered if he could possibly be Eliot Feld - but no, it was Robert Maiorano, who went on to a career in the company and whose book Mozartiana graces my bookshelf.

Some of the staging decisions were downright annoying. While the polichinelles were dancing, Clara and the prince were standing in the foreground blocking the view of the dancing children. The snowflakes were nearly invisible due to the heavy "snowfall" which practically concealed their choreography.

Allegra Kent as Dewdrop stole the show. At 20, at her peak, she was simply lovely and overflowed with the joy of dancing. Her technique was perfection. A pity in her later career she was so ambivalent about dancing, and had three children while still in the company, That Balanchine kept her on and continued choreographing for her (Bugaku) says a lot about her luminous talent and beauty.

Diana Adans was always for me a mystery, an unknown quality. I had seen few pictures of her and no video at all. Now was a chance to assess her dancing as Sugar Plum. First I was struck by her regality, and by her more than passing resemblance to the then-young Queen. Perhaps Balanchine noted this and highlighted it in the role of SPF. She wore a calf length gown in the first act as is the present practice, but the last pas de deux (actually, pas de quatre) at the end of the ballet was rather odd. She still wore the long dress, not a tutu as SPF does now in Act II, and strangely enough, instead of a cavalier, Balanchine used four danseurs as her partners - Candy Cane, Hot Chocolate, Coffee (played with charismatic panache by Arthur Mitchell), and a Chinese dancer. Diana Adams floated from one to the other. (Where was Jacques D'Amboise?) So different from the pas de deux with one cavalier that we are used to now. Shows Balanchine made substantive changes over the years.

I was very annoyed at the cramped conditions of the sound stage - it inhibited the dancing, especially in Act one, and the gratuitous narration by the dulcet-toned June Lockhart. Shows what a difference the 1964 move to Lincoln Center made to Balanchine's artistic possibilities.

I noticed Balanchine particularly. He hammed at times, but he moved with such theatricality. He disregarded his own dictum, "Don't act!" When he produced the walnuts for the Nutcracker, his hand all but danced - the movement of his hand was artistic. The editing cut down the magical/mystical moment when Drosselmyer takes the place of the owl on top of the grandfather clock, it passed by momentarily.

Although we complain about the corruption of Balanchine's standards now, I feel so grateful that on the stage of the Theater Formerly Known as State we have totally professional, spacious performances, with the children rehearsed to perfection. No ragged performances now.

Also, now Act II opens with the floating by of the angels. Act II in the Playhouse 90 version opened with gingerbread houses and candies - reminded me of Hansel and Gretel. Balanchine certainly improved the 1954 version of the Nutcracker over the years.

I'm seeing it with Mearns, Peck, Catazaro in the last performance of the season and am almost sated by all this Nutcracker. But the chance to see it on the capacious stage of the Theater Formerly Known as State, up close, to see the amazing Mearns and Peck and to assess a new talent, Catazaro, are too tempting to miss.

So if you want to compare now and then, go to the Paley Media Center, 25 West 52nd Street off Sixth Avenue. They have a wonderfully comfortable set-up on the 4th floor for seeing classic television setups, and their librarians (archivists?) are very helpful. You can skip the commercials, and much of June Lockhart. It's less then 1-1/2 hours. Seeing this dated and cramped production has made me very grateful for what we have now at NYCB.

My apologies to Mel Johnson, who actually originated the phrase in a post earlier this year I see from a Google search. I did not see his post and thought I had originated it. Great minds.....

I missed the Tuesday evening theater broadcast of Nutcracker because I came down with an illness. And I have no TV so couldn't see it on PBS Wednesday night. But it sounds from all these posts that I did not miss a true Sugar Plum Fairy. So I splurged and bought a ticket to the very last performance of Nutcracker at the end of the year, but with Mearns at Sugar Plum and Tiler Peck as Dewdrop. The cavalier is Zachary Catazaro. Does anyone know anything about him? I was also thrilled to see Adam Hendrickson as Drosselmeyer, because not only did he get stellar reviews from the critical Alastair Macauley, but I met him the other week with his father outside the Theater Formerly Known As State - note to all Ballet Alert posters, I originated that bon mot and I expect full future credit when it is used by others, something along the lines of "My thanks to Eileen, who came up with this apt phrase." I am truly in the Nutcracker spirit, listening to Antal Dorati's recording with the Royal Concertgebouw and so grateful I can see Mearns and Peck at their most brilliant.

Two questions: What is marley? And is there in existence a film of the 1958 Nutcracker broadcast on CBS with Diana Adams? Is it in the Paley film archive in NYC? That broadcast is one of my earliest memories of television, and my first of ballet. I'd love to find it.

I checked the casting for the week ending December 24, and Kathryn Morgan still has not been cast. There's only one week left of the season. I have not checked what she has said on Twitter, as Twitter is a mystery to me. I am rather heartsick at not seeing Morgan's name yet again on the casting list. What a talent she is. She was one of my favorite dancers and I am fearful for her career. Does anyone have any information?

I am a subscriber and have two tickets for an all-Balanchine performance Friday evening, May 18 featuring the exquisite Liebeslieder Walzer and exciting Brahms Schoenberg Quartet. They cost $149 at the box office, but I am offering them for half price. I hope they will go to NYCB posters who love the company. Please PM me and leave me your phone number. The seats are located in Row J of the Orchestra, a few seats to the left of center.

Hurray, More Balanchine Variations arrived yesterday and I am absorbing and inhaling it. I just finished her description of Symphony in C. I do think this will be of interest to those who are familiar with the ballets. Because I've seen the Bizet so many times and listened to the music countless times, when Goldner would describe the multitude of tendus in the fourth movement, I was reminded of the music, the music led me to the image of the tendus, and I knew exactly what she was talking about just through audio and visual memory. If you don't have that memory, you will not appreciate her analysis. Though let me keep reading - her next chapter is Orpheus and she is so interesting, although I haven't seen Orpheus, I suspect I may appreciate it, as well.

She covers all the best Balanchine ballets, I'm sure Amazon must list the chapters, and with such detail and what I can only call insight. It's more than visual observation, it is connections made. I could quote many wonderful passages: "I think that the most important development in Balanchine's career was to cast off the influence of other people's visual and literary ideas as the driving force behind ballet". This in the introduction, in connection with the reduction of the costuming in Concerto Barocco and Four Temperaments in 1951. Her discussion of Ballet Imperial (Tschaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2) makes reference to Merrill Ashley's Dancing for Balanchine, which led me flying to my 1984 copy of her book, which unfortunately doesn't have an index! But my point is she makes many important connections, and pulls from many sources, including of course the dancers themselves.

And the small size of this book and its prequel make them each the perfect accompaniment to your trip to NYC Ballet; you can read the relevant chapter during intermission and view the ballet with new eyes.

Sorry about that, thank you for posting the correct link.

I have taken another look at Goldner's first book, Balanchine Variations. What does Goldner add that a DVD does not? Insight and analysis. She has depth, and is able to perceive depth in Balanchine's great ballets. Especially in the mysterious Serenade - and it is mysterious - she recognizes its mystery. She explains both abstract and programmatic ballets (with stories) with the utmost respect and clarity. I can't praise this book enough. It will make you want to see the ballets you don't know, and see anew those ballets you have seen many times.

This is my next Balanchine book to buy and keep. I keep Nancy Goldner's Balanchine Variations close at hand and have read and notated it carefully. Now Alastair Macauley of the Times has reviewed her sequel, with 20 more ballets analyzed. In her first volume she limited herself to ballets that would be in the repertory of many companies - so her book would have more relevance to non-New York balletgoers. But her sequel includes many ballets that are not in wide circulation, in fact, that are only performed by NYC Ballet. So she includes many important ballets, which Macauley describes. I just wanted to draw your attention to the book. I am ordering it post haste! I admire the careful way Goldner describes Balanchine classics and her critical eye. Here is the link to the review:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/arts/dance/fromnancy-goldner-more-balanchine-variations.html?ref=arts

Not exactly on topic - but Adam Hendrickson will play Drosselmeyer in the Dec. 13/14 performance(s). I met his father by accident on the street and he was kind enough to introduce me to Adam, waiting outside the theater. Adam is charming and puckish - which is one of his roles. I told his father I had seen him as the Jester in Swan Lake, as Candy Cane in Nutcracker, but never as Drosselmeyer! Mr. Hendrickson also told me he is married to Rebecca Krohn, whom I also admire immensely. If you read my posts, I often write of dancer sightings - because I live just behind Lincoln Center and my regular route takes me either through the plaza or down 62nd Street. This was a very pleasurable encounter. Adam's father is very open and down to earth.

Who is Kelly Ripa? Jenifer Ringer should host the broadcast, she speaks beautifully, is lovely and refined, and most important, is a principal of New York City Ballet. I wish Jenny had been Sugar Plum as she is featured in the promotion video. Megan Fairchild just doesn't have the level of maturity that Sugar Plum needs to project beside the child dancers.

To answer your question, it's to accommodate those who don't own televisions. Like me. At least that's how I'd like to interpret it! What would I do if it were only on PBS and I had to miss it entirely? There do exist people who limit their diet to sprouts and organic beans, others who run every morning at 5 a.m., and those whose personal idiosyncracy is to place a huge empty bookcase where ordinarily the huge TV screen would go. I am one of the last group, and my empty bookcase will hopefully fill up quickly with all the books I long to read - in between going to NYCB!

Thanks to Helene Kaplan's cast list, I see Kapstova danced Princess Florine in the bluebird pas de deux in the filmed performance we saw on Sunday.

Interestingly, I too noticed the fourth cavalier with the feather headdress! He was the most princely of all. I'm so glad so many of you felt it was important to see David Halberg's debut at the Bolshoi. So Alastair Macaulay was there. I look forward to his comments. I missed the video with Halberg - too bad, I walked out during the half hour pre-ballet longeurs, and didn't realize there would be an interview. I also noticed the girl in yellow (chicken?) who glistened. It's tough to stand out when the general standard is so high and the dancers sometimes seem interchangeable.

This production makes me realize once again the genius of Balanchine, to peel away all this frou-frou and have his company class practice tendus. Stripping away all the ornateness to display the choreography and immaculate technique. He was a true original; he came from this Russian imperial tradition, he drew from it but discarded it. In changing the name of his Ballet Imperial to Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2, he famously remarked, "Nothing is imperial anymore, except - except the Empire Hotel!" (referring to the hotel across the street from the theater).

There I was at 10 a.m. on a Sunday, dragging myself to a Times Square megaplex to view the Bolshoi Ballet and David Hallberg in Sleeping Beauty. It was a first for me - my first time seeing the Bolshoi, and all happening in actual time! In the half hour before curtain, we were able to get a backstage view of company members, including Halberg, stretching, half-costumed, practicing pirouettes in leg warmers. Svetlana Zacharova was in sweats with a lace shawl tied around her waist. Hallberg was pacing nobly, detached from the goings on around him. Coaches gave last minute pointers and presumably, encouragement.

Then there was the Bolshoi as a building. A long shot of the outside of the building. There was no explanation, so I thought - naive me! - that it must be a Potemkin village, created for a movie scene. It was the actual Bolshoi as I soon realized, amazed. To this provincial New Yorker, I always thought the Metropolitan Opera the grandest theater imaginable. Well, readers, I was wrong. The interior was as imperial as the entrance - red carpets, chandeliers, along the lines of the Met, but much more ornate, much more theatrical.

It was some time before we got past the unnecessary narrator in English and French, and finally, the ballet commenced. I was surprised at the level of costuming - it seemed every member of the cast was bewigged and elaborately hatted, as well as decorated jackets for men and trailing gowns for women courtiers. As we know, Sleeping Beauty takes a while to get going, and the Bolshoi took every passage, no cuts, danced it all, and after awhile I began to miss the Peter Martins streamlined version! When will this be over, I thought. I preferred Merrill Ashley's Carabosse to the Russian man who mugged the role at the Bolshoi - too grotesque. Ashley played her as an evil beauty, and I loved the long fingernails which the Russians dispensed with.

I realized as I absorbed the "style royale" of the Bolshoi that they act as well as dance. They are emotionally present, they do not withhold their feelings. Also, every member of the corps de ballet was chosen for beauty as well as dancing, and that is certainly not the case at New York City Ballet. The female corps in the Bolshoi are uniformly rows of very pretty girls. That is their tradition. Also, they don't need their corps de ballet to be as skllled as Balanchine's corps needs to be. The technique for every member of the New York City Ballet is very demanding, and it's impossible to choose an entire corps de ballet of beautiful girls who also can do Balanchine choreography, where every dancer has to be top notch and ready for solos. Yet on the NYCB stage all give the illusion of beauty. (I just passed the Theater Formerly Known as State, and I saw the NYCB dancers sans make up, hanging out, eating lunch - I would never realize they were dancers if I weren't so familiar with every member of the company. I could have named each one. And they were far from conventionally "pretty". They were accomplished Balanchine dancers.

So I was impressed with the ornateness of the Bolshoi theater, the production values, the beauty of all involved.

At first I thought Svetlana Zacharova was too mature for the 16 year old Aurora. You see these things on film which are not apparent in the theater. She was technically perfect and smiling, always radiant. David Hallberg I had only seen in Ratmansky's Nutcracker last year at BAM and there I sat very close to the stage and noticed his look of wonder as he accomplished a feat with his ballerina. It was as if he was amazed they did it! His entrance on the Bolshoi stage was I can only call thrilling. His leaps, his command of the huge stage. You'd never know what suppressed power he possessed as you earlier observed him pacing slowly before the performance.

In the wedding scene, I felt that Svetlana Z was more suitable for the part as she had matured with the role. I noticed Hallberg's concentration as he centered her in her pirouettes, ending in a noble pose for both.

I could have criticized the fairy tale characters, the cat without a tale and without catlike motions, Puss in Boots who never captures her, the wolf who lacked menace. But it's late and after all, it's only a fairy tale, isn't it?

If anyone saw this performance in Moscow today or the live film, I'd love to hear your responses.

There I was at 10 a.m. on a Sunday, dragging myself to a Times Square megaplex to view the Bolshoi Ballet and David Halberg in Sleeping Beauty. It was a first for me - my first time seeing the Bolshoi, and all happening in actual time! In the half hour before curtain, we were able to get a backstage view of company members, including Halberg, stretching, half-costumed, practicing pirouettes in leg warmers. Svetlana Zhacharova (sp?) was in sweats with a lace shawl tied around her waist. Halberg was pacing nobly, detached from the goings on around him. Coaches gave last minute pointers and presumably, encouragement.

Then there was the Bolshoi as a building. A long shot of the outside of the building. There was no explanation, so I thought - naive me! - that it must be a Potemkin village, created for a movie scene. It was the actual Bolshoi as I soon realized, amazed. To this provincial New Yorker, I always thought the Metropolitan Opera the grandest theater imaginable. Well, readers, I was wrong. The interior was as imperial as the entrance - red carpets, chandeliers, along the lines of the Met, but much more ornate, much more theatrical.

It was some time before we got past the unnecessary narrator in English and French, and finally, the ballet commenced. I was surprised at the level of costuming - it seemed every member of the cast was bewigged and elaborately hatted, as well as decorated jackets for men and trailing gowns for women courtiers. As we know, Sleeping Beauty takes a while to get going, and the Bolshoi took every passage, no cut, danced it all, and after awhile I began to miss the Peter Martins streamlined version! When will this be over, I thought. I preferred Merrill Ashley's Carabosse to the Russian man who mugged the role at the Bolshoi - too grotesque. Ashley played her as an evil beauty, and I loved the long fingernails which the Russians dispensed with.

I realized as I absorbed the "style royale" of the Bolshoi that they act as well as dance. They are emotionally present, they do not withhold their feelings. Also, every member of the corps de ballet was chosen for beauty as well as dancing, and that is certainly not the case at New York City Ballet. The female corps in the Bolshoi are uniformly rows of very pretty girls. That is their tradition. Also, they don't need their corps de ballet to be as skllled as Balanchine's corps needs to be. The athletic aspect for every member of the New York City Ballet is very demanding, and it's impossible to choose an entire corps de ballet of beautiful girls who also can do Balanchine choreography, where every dancer has to be top notch and ready for solos. Yet on the NYCB stage all give the illusion of beauty. (I just passed the Theater Formerly Known as State before a Nutcracker performance, and I saw the dancers sans make up, hanging out, eating lunch - I would never realize they were dancers if I weren't so familiar with every member of the company. I could have named each one. And they were far from conventionally "pretty". They were accomplished Balanchine dancers.

So I was impressed with the ornateness of the theater, the production values, the beauty of all involved.

At first I thought Svetlana Zacharova was a bit too mature for the 16 year old Aurora. You see these things on film which are not apparent in the theater. She was technically perfect and smiling, always radiant. David Halberg I had only seen in Ratmansky's Nutcracker last year at BAM and there I saw very close to the stage and noticed his look of wonder as he accomplished a feat with his ballerina. It was as if he was amazed they did it! His entrance on the Bolshoi stage was I can only call thrilling. His leaps, his command of the huge stage. You'd never know what suppressed power he possessed as you observed him walking slowly before performance.

In the wedding scene, I felt more comfortable that Svetlana Z was more suitable for the part as she had matured with the role. I noticed Halberg's concentration as he centered her in her pirouettes, ending in a noble pose for both.

I could have criticized the fairy tale characters, the cat without a tale and without catlike motions, Puss in Boots who never capturesher, the wolf who lacked menace. But it's late and after all, it's only a fairy tale, isn't it?

If anyone saw this performance in Moscow today or the live film, I'd love to hear your responses.