the dress called suzanne farrell -- photo in NY Times

[Paul Parish]

I think this is the michael kors dress named after Suzanne -- pink silk mini dress-- and it DOES look apt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/21/fashion/...ion&oref=slogin

NB the article is about dangerously skinny models, and the picture is shocking... a reflection in a distorting mirror actually, so they're making the point. And at the same time, have to admit, it IS stunning.

[Farrell Fan]

Yes, I believe that's the dress, too; thanks, Paul. Just want to say that Suzanne has never been bizarrely thin. In fact, I remember a Ballet Review article years ago in which John Taras complained about her supposed plumpness.

[Paul Parish]

Thanks, Farrell Fan--

Yes, it's true that she's never been bizarrely thin. I've also read that Mrs Ficker wanted her to lose a little weight and Mr B did NOT. She came back after Bejart thinner, Arlene Croce reported -- but she always looked healthy, especially when she was young. Still does.

[Helene]

Yes, it's true that she's never been bizarrely thin. I've also read that Mrs Ficker wanted her to lose a little weight and Mr B did NOT.

I think Balanchine had mixed feelings about this. In the letter Farrell read in Elusive Muse, in the PS Balanchine hoped that she would be thin (when he saw her next).

[bart]

There's "thin" and then there's "skeletal." No one in ballet ever desired or even imagined the kind of emaciation, boneiness, and apparent terminal illness that some of those models project.

[atm711]

they are walking coat hangers...no protruding bumps allowed... Oh, what women will put up with.

[carbro]

Not women; models!

I can't access the photo now (I think I'm having firewall problems), but I did see many of the shows (not the Kors) on a local station and was appalled that, even with New York's greatest lighting and make-up artists working on and with them, so many of the models looked downright ill and not much like women.