Alastair Macaulay to Retire from NYT

[Laurent]

The vision scene is considered to be by Gorsky as well, he may have borrowed from Petipa ballonné, his favourite step, no more.

[dirac]

Returning to our topic, has anyone seen any updates regarding Macaulay's replacement as chief dance critic? The original NYT retirement announcement from late 2018 said that they hoped to choose a successor by the end of last year, and we are now close to halfway through this one.

[Helene]

I think the NYT is using NYCB's concept of time.

[Fleurfairy]

This whole ABT Met season has been mostly devoid of performance reviews from the NYT. What happened to Siebert?

Edited June 28, 2019 by Fleurfairy

[angelica]

On 6/28/2019 at 9:05 AM, Fleurfairy said:

This whole ABT Met season has been mostly devoid of performance reviews from the NYT. What happened to Siebert?

Isn't Siebert mostly a modern dance guy?

[Marta]

5 minutes ago, angelica said:

Isn't Siebert mostly a modern dance guy?

He does review ballet, but mainly reviews modern dance. He also wrote a book on tap dancing.  Gia Kourlas seems to be getting more space in the Times.  I don't think they really intend to have a chief dance critic.  I find it unacceptable that there has been barely one review of ABT. 

[sandik]

In general, publications are moving away from reviews, in favor of profiles and previews.  The NYT still runs more reviews than most, but even they are shifting their focus.  It's quite possible that they will run a season review after ABT finishes their Met run.

[pherank]

1 hour ago, sandik said:

In general, publications are moving away from reviews, in favor of profiles and previews.  The NYT still runs more reviews than most, but even they are shifting their focus.  It's quite possible that they will run a season review after ABT finishes their Met run.

I wonder what the reasoning is behind the change?

[Roberta]

The world no longer revolves around a few elitist arts lovers (of the old-style European variety) who are privileged enough to live in one of a handful of expensive cities with major opera houses.

Furthermore, even if potential arts patrons live in those cities or on the less-expensive fringes of those cities, most people either do not have the time or energy to commute into those centers and $pend their hard-earned ca$h on the classical performing arts. Many folks are working 2-3 jobs just to take care of their families' needs. They're lucky to have time to click on YouTube or pop a DVD or BluRay into their sets.

At the end of the day, the NYTimes and other traditional or online newspapers don't want to spend resources to cater to - what? - about 50-100 persons? -  for whom English is the primary language and who really care about reviews of specific classical performances. How many Engl-reading  individuals really care? I'm guessing that all 50-100 of them post or lurk on Ballet Alert or balletcoforum.

[abatt]

What I find puzzling is the NY Times now regularly posts clips of the best of the late night TV shows like Fallon, Colbert.  Anyone with a computer, phone, tablet or other devices  can watch the monologues or the entire programs.  What's the point of the Times' coverage of what happened on these programs.

Edited July 2, 2019 by abatt

[nanushka]

9 minutes ago, abatt said:

What I find puzzling is the NY Times now regularly posts clips of the best of the late night TV shows like Fallon, Colbert.  Anyone with a computer can watch the monologues or the entire programs.

I don’t find it puzzling. This is “curating content,” and it’s a major part of the media and social media structures that organize consumption nowadays. A few causes: the need to sort through and select from the massive amounts of content now available; the ease of having something pre-selected, pre-digested, pre-interpreted; the desire to feel like (or even be) part of a consuming community (e.g. Times readers) rather than just a person alone with a laptop; etc.

FWIW, I’m not judging, just offering a possible set of explanations.

Edited July 2, 2019 by nanushka

[aurora]

13 minutes ago, Roberta said:

The world no longer revolves around a few elitist arts lovers (of the old-style European variety) who are privileged enough to live in one of a handful of expensive cities with major opera houses.

At the end of the day, the NYTimes and other traditional or online newspapers don't want to spend resources to cater to - what? - about 50-100 persons? -  for whom English is the primary language and who really care about reviews of specific classical performances. How many Engl-reading  individuals really care? I'm guessing that all 50-100 of them post or lurk on Ballet Alert or balletcoforum.

I think you somewhat underestimate the number of people who care about the arts.

[abatt]

Although ballet  reviews now seem sporadic and nearly extinct at the Times, I have noticed that there has not been any diminished coverage of opera.  Every production at the Met Opera is reviewed, and sometimes when a new cast comes in later in the run the production is reviewed again.  Additionally, they frequently run reviews of operas elsewhere, such as festivals in Europe. 

[Roberta]

24 minutes ago, aurora said:

I think you somewhat underestimate the number of people who care about the arts.

 

I was referring to classical (Euro-heritage) performing arts and, of course, caring more for ballet. of course there's interest in "arts"...but our sorts of arts? Or maybe it's more of a problem with classical ballet...just noticing Abatt's comment about opera reviews.

Edited July 2, 2019 by Roberta

[Helene]

Yes, our type of arts.  I don't know the numbers on who attends the Royal Ballet and Bolshoi live transmissions, but if several hundred thousand people go to see Dialogue of the Carmelites Live in HD, not to mention encores, and medici.tv and other European broadcasters with full-time, paid arts channels, the BBC broadcasting live streams from the Proms and Glyndeborne, plus a resurgence of new American operas on timely subjects, there is no dearth of interest in the arts.  Not to mention the tens of thousands of small donors who support myriads of local arts organizations and projects. 

Ballet has two issues that don't impact classical music, at least as much: it's much harder to film and suffers from filming, unlike opera, which is enhanced by close-ups on the whole and is physically static by nature, and very few American companies have sorted the rights issues and can broadcast, even if they could find the $$$ to film and the media/bandwidth to distribute.  And the ability to view (or mostly listen) from home or on a bus is a big boost. 

[angelica]

I've been watching the PBS News Hour for a couple of years now, and they have an "arts" component they call "Canvas." I have never seen a single segment on ballet. Moreover, I can't remember a single segment on any form of dance. I should write to them. (Maybe we all should.) It would have been nice to see something about ABT BEFORE the opening of the Spring season. And then one afterwards.

Edited July 2, 2019 by angelica
addition

[nanushka]

Hasn’t ballet typically perceived itself as being stuck in the middle: too lowbrow to be taken seriously by the serious arts connoisseurs, too highbrow to appeal to the masses?

[angelica]

5 minutes ago, nanushka said:

Hasn’t ballet typically perceived itself as being stuck in the middle: too lowbrow to be taken seriously by the serious arts connoisseurs, too highbrow to appeal to the masses?

My former ballet teacher used to say that ballet is a Fine Art, like painting, and is not in the same category as other forms of dance. This is, indeed, an elitist attitude to which I wholly subscribe.

[Jack Reed]

3 hours ago, angelica said:

My former ballet teacher used to say that ballet is a Fine Art, like painting, and is not in the same category as other forms of dance. This is, indeed, an elitist attitude to which I wholly subscribe.

I think it's an elitist attitude to which we can all aspire! 

[angelica]

3 minutes ago, Jack Reed said:

I think it's an elitist attitude to which we can all aspire! 

Oh, I love you, Jack Reed!

[sandik]

Lots of thoughts here.  As far as the function of newspapers in our world, as Nanushka points out, they are curators -- from all of the possible sources and about all possible topics, they pick and chose what they cover, based on their own mission statement and their judgment about their readership.  Sometimes that readership is fairly narrow, in terms of economic interests (think Forbes or the Wall Street Journal), geographic concerns (think most local newspapers), or avocation (all sports publications).  This function is essential for their readership and their budget -- there isn't a publication that can cover everything for everyone and afford to stay in print, whether that print is on paper or on your screen.

(just pointing out that Ballet Alert curates its content for us -- as do all other specialty websites)

Of all the art forms, dance has traditionally been the one that is the least well documented, because it is the hardest to write about.  I've been participating in multiple conversations recently about reconstruction and repertory, and so I've been thinking about this even more than I usually do, which is a lot, but I'll try to keep it brief.  As many folks have pointed out, there is no easily accessible universal text to refer to (just click over to the "now you see them - now you don't" fish dive discussion about Ratmansky's SB), which makes writing hard.  If I had a nickle for every time I've had to insert a capsule description of Balanchine's repertory into a review or commentary I could fund this website into the next century.  (No, I'm not irritated, just experienced...). Add to this the private nature of dance watching -- the kinesthetic experience is very powerful and personal.  What moves me (literally and metaphorically) may mean nothing to you, and both of our experiences are legit.  Again, this kind of "I was there, and you weren't" pov makes writing hard.

(and again, I'm not complaining)

And we have all noticed that we are in the middle of a paradigm shift when it comes to media.  Just as the art being made today mirrors the social concerns of the society, the media we use to discuss these concerns deal best when they focus on the individual, the personal, the multi-layered and the intersectional.  We are trying to find a way to combine knowledge with humility -- I may know a lot about a topic, but I need to acknowledge that I don't know everything.  And so we put the individual or the personal in the primary position -- we are looking for the profile of the artist or the inside information about the project.  And because the current media is like a firehose, running full speed all the time, we don't have a lot of flexibility to look back, and that is, essentially, what reviews do.

So yes, we're all passengers on a really crazy boat, and we aren't always going to find ourselves at the front of the flotilla. 

This doesn't thrill me at all -- reviews are what I've always done best -- but this is the world I work in right now, and I can either sit on the veranda and sigh after the good old days, or I can keep educating myself so that when there is a chance to reflect, I've got something valuable to say.

I will stop now, and I know you're grateful, if you've read this far.  Thanks for the loan of the soapbox!

[pherank]

I'm with you in spirit, Jack Reed (and others), but I'll just add that "elitism" is one tired argument with regards to ballet, and very misleading, since ballet training did not actually create aristocrats from commoners. The earliest ballet training may have been connected to deportment and social etiquette lessons, but the creation of ballet companies and professional performers resulted in a very different subculture. Dancing with a 'superior quality' has always been the focus, not creation of a group of individuals to lord it over everyone else. And if one's local ballet classes are any indication, the children are not attending because it's seen as a ladder to the aristocracy.

If it isn't painfully obvious today, it should be:
There are no aspects of human society and relationships that are devoid of hierarchy/status/pecking order issues. There's always a pecking order, whether we're talking about a family of 4 living in Trenton New Jersey, street gangs, a Zen monastery, a local union meeting, 3 astronauts in a space capsule, a meeting of stock holders, a basketball team and its staff, a ballet class in Oklahoma, whatever. The issue these days seems to be one of attitude: most people do not like to witness a 'superior attitude or behavior' associated with an 'elite', but is that something we generally see with ballet companies, schools, dancers? No. Just plain no. Behaving in a superior manner is not the function of a ballet company, nor has it ever been. Ballet is an art of aspiration - an idealized art. And the fine arts are pretty much all idealized arts. Practicing an art forces one to learn about the world, and craft, to feel and make choices/decisions. I think that's a positive and ultimately healthy way to spend one's time. The idea is to aspire to something more developed, fulfilling, integral, and fundamental - not to merely occupy a 'superior' role or rank in the hierarchy. So we should be talking about ballet's changing aspirations and ideals, not its elitism.

[Roberta]

19 hours ago, angelica said:

My former ballet teacher used to say that ballet is a Fine Art, like painting, and is not in the same category as other forms of dance. This is, indeed, an elitist attitude to which I wholly subscribe.

Count me in with the proud Elitists! This thread (@Pherank's q above) asks us to address the reason behind the dearth of classical-ballet reviews in the NYTimes and other traditional media. I'm afraid that our pride in being elite won't be helping matters but big deal. It won't keep us from enjoying our ballet.  I'm willing to be the Last Balletomane Standing, reviews or not.

Edited July 3, 2019 by Roberta

[Quiggin]

The Times may be having a difficult time finding the right voice for a lead ballet reviewer. Macaulay was unique in being able to create color and (melo)drama around City Ballet and ABT, always advancing the cause of seeing Balanchine afresh, introducing Ratmansky's new world to the readers and keeping an eye on Cunningham. John Rockwell's short tenure just before AM's did not work out, so maybe it's not an easy position to fill.

In comparison, there seem to be three visual arts reviewers at the Times now, Jason Farago joining senior reviewers Roberta Smith and Holland Carter. Together they post on average three articles a week and then, along with two or three stringers, write a group of four thumbnails on what's current. Kimmelman does a couple of non-specialist architecture articles a month, and I hardly notice classical music reviewing anymore.

Maybe part of the problem is that in the past more compelling new works came out of the dance world, with Tharp and mid-sized companies more active. In the art world painting-painting has had a big revival and there are lots of ongoing rediscoveries, so reviewing reflects that (and of course all the auction and art fair activity). In the fifties and sixties there seemed to be a big crossover between art and dance via Cunningham, Elaine de Kooning, Edwin Denby, Frank O'Hara, Susan Sontag and Douglas Crimp – lots of bouncing back between art openings and City Ballet. Don't think that's the case anymore (except for the Gala).

With the exception of Balanchine, who had roots in the Soviet avant-garde and knew how to combine the traditional and radical, Ratmansky, who has a bit of this magic, the lesser but often good Peck, and the Cunningham revivals, I don't see much outside Vail and Jacob's Pillow clips that seem to catch my eye (though more a visual arts eye than dance one). Trey MacIntyre's work, Body/Poem seemed to translate downtown to the San Francisco Opera House stage quite well.

But much of what I see at SF Ballet is not dangerously "highbrow" but more sleepy "middlebrow" where a few downtown ideas are borrowed and softened with generic off-the-shelf semi balletic movements. The works seem fussy and overwrought and unclear. And I find myself less interested in boy-girl, or even retrofitted boy-boy, spurned love stories anymore (except, appropriately, in the 19c classics). I enjoyed Ratmansky's Seven Sonatas because it seemed to be more about a world and a community than about individual cases. McIntyre's work too came from another point of view, the second half of Body/Poem an intriguing dance monologue. (Balanchine I always read as a world, and the boy girl relations and solos – such as in Liebeslieder and Emeralds – not what they first appear.)

OT: interesting Schjeldahl review and Yau interview with the rediscovered Stanley Whitney, who easel-painted away, albeit sometimes on the floor with a mop, during the Pop and Minimalist 70s and 80 when it was totally unfashionable.

https://fireplacechats.wordpress.com/2015/08/12/stanley-whitneys-gorgeous-color-inventions-on-canvas/

I don't know if anyone reads the Brooklyn Rail but it seems to regularly cover the New York Dance scene, St Marks, perhaps a bit unevenly. Has a sponsor credit.

https://brooklynrail.org/

 

 

 

 

Edited July 3, 2019 by Quiggin

[angelica]

It seems to me that there are several (maybe more) members of BA who would be excellent ballet reviewers for the Times. I'm thinking of sandik, pherank, and Quiggin, since they most recently posted, among others. If anyone here would like to pitch themselves to the Times as the successor to AM, we would all certainly benefit. You probably get free tickets to performances, great seats, and maybe even a travel and entertainment expense account for interviews and travel abroad. Just a thought.....