Follow-up to Sugarplumgate

[Quiggin]

4 hours ago, BalanchineFan said:

Women's size, shape, and condition is often criticized by men to exert control over women ... Men have a long history of telling women how to look, how to dress and what women can and cannot do with their bodies

: James Stewart to Kim Novak in Vertigo

Men's bodies have also gone through a change in the past 20 years – though men are not particularly criticized or held down on this basis – and you see it in male dancers' builds. From swimmers' bodies and lightly toned bodies, the ideal has gone to bulked-up and surrealistically defined gym bodies. Muscle Beach, "Charles Atlas" bodies which used to be considered coarse are a model for men to aspire to. Perhaps they're kind of an analogue to the SUVs everyone drives now.

In a way both of these things – womens' thin bodies and mens' overly muscular bodies – are a function of the hyper visuality of our time – of how well they photograph to be posted on Instagram, how one's efforts to bulk up or stay thin can be visually quantified. 

I wonder if Justin Peck's choreography lends itself to a greater range of body types.

[Helene]

I've been attending the online San Francisco Dance Film Festival this week, and I didn't realize how much of a palpable relief I've felt watching the Ailey and Bill T. Jones documentaries and seeing such diversity, including in body types.

[griffie]

On 10/21/2021 at 11:50 AM, Helene said:

I cannot for the life of me remember the name of it or find this in searches, but there was a book on School of American Ballet -- maybe 30 years ago? -- that documented the damage along the way how many student bodies were damaged and left aside on the way to a professional career, similar to the book "Pretty Girls in Little Boxes" about figure skaters and gymnasts.  

Helene, was that book "Off Balance: The Real World of Ballet" by Suzanne Gordon? I remember it well. I had decided the year before it was published that I would not be pursuing a ballet career. I didn't feel I had the single-minded dedication it takes, or the ideal enough legs and feet, and I wanted to go to regular high school and have some fun instead of missing out on everything if I wasn't going to be a professional dancer. Reading that book really helped me feel that I had made the right decision. (That summer I was at SAB and bulimia was sadly very evident -  it's harder to hide than plain anorexia nervosa.)

[Helene]

That's it, @griffie .

 

 

[Balletwannabe]

5 hours ago, griffie said:

Helene, was that book "Off Balance: The Real World of Ballet" by Suzanne Gordon? I remember it well. I had decided the year before it was published that I would not be pursuing a ballet career. I didn't feel I had the single-minded dedication it takes, or the ideal enough legs and feet, and I wanted to go to regular high school and have some fun instead of missing out on everything if I wasn't going to be a professional dancer. Reading that book really helped me feel that I had made the right decision. (That summer I was at SAB and bulimia was sadly very evident -  it's harder to hide than plain anorexia nervosa.)

You'd be surprised at how easy it is to hide Anorexia.  Many ballet dancers can remain a very low weight but still be "healthy" because they're consuming large amounts of calories but also burning them.  You wouldn't know the difference between that type of dancer and someone who is Anorexic.  It can often be at a "manageable" level for years, unfortunately. Unless someone is near death, you wouldn't know who has Anorexia.  Nobody, and I mean not one person at the treatment center I went to "looked" severely underweight.  The movie depiction of young girls with bones protruding is not an accurate reflection of the vast majority of those with Anorexia.  You can also have atypical Anorexia and not be underweight at all.  Just wanted to explain that because I don't think people realize how big of a problem it is in the general population.  It's very easy to hide.  

Edited October 23, 2021 by Balletwannabe

[Helene]

I actually wouldn't be surprised at all.  

I think too much gets swept into "All dancers and athetes have some kinds of injuries all the time."  Plus having to deal with the "suck it up" attitude toward mental illness and the no-man's-land of illnesses that are the perfect storm of mental and physical issues, like anoexia and other eating disorders and disordered eating.

[Drew]

I didn't see the sugarplum gate performance, but when I DID see Ringer in Nutcracker she was, hands down, the best sugarplum fairy I ever saw. In my personal pantheon the best sugarplum fairy ever (allowing that Marilyn Burr in the National Ballet production has a special place since I saw her as a child). I even liked Ringer better than Farrell in that particular role and, come to think of it, better than Zakharova who, unlikely as it sounds, made a guest appearance in the NYCB Nutcracker and, as I remember, was quite charming too. 

Now to return to topic, I always loved Ringer whatever shape she was in, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't greatly prefer her in what I thought of as "ballet" shape. I put that sentence in past tense because "ballet shape" is just what people are rethinking and re-imagining nowadays (or at least, maybe we are) and I feel I should too. But @vipa seems to me to raise honest and important questions. That said, I don't think any slack should be cut whatsoever for someone capable of writing, as Macaulay has in his reflections, the equivalent of "some of my best friends are anorexic." Some passages almost read like deliberate self-parody -- I mean wow! he really answered the door for people who were overweight so they could meet with each other?! Award the guy a sugarplum....

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by Drew

[dirac]

Quote

Yes, exactly. Who is the audience for comments about a dancer's weight? It's not as if the dancers aren't themselves acutely aware of what their bodies look like. "Huh. I had no idea I look fat!" said no ballerina ever after reading a review that commented on her weight.

Critics are there to tell us what they see. If a dancer is visibly heavy to the detriment of the dance in that critic's view, it's fair comment. There are plenty of ways to convey this without getting cute, as Macaulay did. 

That said, Ringer got some favorable publicity and a book deal, so it didn't turn out too badly. As for Macaulay, the adage about sleeping dogs comes to mind.

Quote

In a way both of these things – womens' thin bodies and mens' overly muscular bodies – are a function of the hyper visuality of our time – of how well they photograph to be posted on Instagram, how one's efforts to bulk up or stay thin can be visually quantified.

It seems to me that female bodies these days are frequently celebrated for their athleticism, as in the Copeland ad campaign for Under Armour. This strikes me as progress, although for ballet aesthetic questions arise. It's nice to see power and strength recognized as admirable qualities for a woman to demonstrate. 

The guys on the other hand, are taking a Good Thing way too far in my view.....

[canbelto]

I find that with AM it's not what he says, it's also how he says it. 

He comes across in this article as super-defensive, when sometimes a simple, straight explanation would do.

[Kathleen O'Connell]

10 hours ago, dirac said:

Critics are there to tell us what they see. If a dancer is visibly heavy to the detriment of the dance in that critic's view, it's fair comment. There are plenty of ways to convey this without getting cute, as Macaulay did. 

I think it's fair for a critic to comment on a dancer's physique if it's made clear why it's relevant to the performance. Simply saying that a dancer looked "out of shape" or whatever the euphemism du jour is isn't enough, imo. It's incumbent on the critic to say why it matters. Was the dancer's line so materially affected that it defeated their artistry or the choreographer's intent? Were they unable to move in a way that was ideally free and expressive? Etc. Otherwise it comes off as someone patrolling the boundaries of permissible body types rather than artistry.

[bluejean]

On 10/21/2021 at 8:04 AM, BalanchineFan said:

gynecology, (including gynecologists that wash their hands)

@BalanchineFan, I was wondering if you would clarify what you mean by this?

[Drew]

On 10/29/2021 at 10:16 AM, bluejean said:

@BalanchineFan, I was wondering if you would clarify what you mean by this?

I hope @BalanchineFandoesn't mind my jumping in about the fight to get gynecologists to wash their hands (see above post)--I'm not a historian, but loosely: in the early to mid 19th-century gynecologists (at that time all men and modern "professionals") started to replace midwives (women) in handling births etc.  It was a shift in terms of increasing male control of women's bodies--the topic being addressed in the earlier post. About mid 19th century, it was discovered that the male doctors had WORSE mortality rates among their patients giving birth than the old-fashioned midwives did. Eventually the difference was determined to involve hygiene -- Doctors were spreading infections to the women. (Unlike midwives they often treated women after treating other diseases or doing autopsies.) Getting the doctors to wash their hands before treating women made a difference but seems not to have happened without a fight. That is, it took a while to convince people this is what needed to be done. Here is a short, non-scholarly article that goes into more detail:

https://theconversation.com/ignaz-semmelweis-the-doctor-who-discovered-the-disease-fighting-power-of-hand-washing-in-1847-135528

 

Edited October 31, 2021 by Drew

[dirac]

On 10/25/2021 at 9:26 AM, Kathleen O'Connell said:

I think it's fair for a critic to comment on a dancer's physique if it's made clear why it's relevant to the performance. Simply saying that a dancer looked "out of shape" or whatever the euphemism du jour is isn't enough, imo. It's incumbent on the critic to say why it matters. Was the dancer's line so materially affected that it defeated their artistry or the choreographer's intent? Were they unable to move in a way that was ideally free and expressive? Etc. Otherwise it comes off as someone patrolling the boundaries of permissible body types rather than artistry.

I get you, but it seems to me a dancer can be too heavy and still not reach the bar of actually disfiguring the choreography or failing to get across artistically. That can leave the critic in a tight spot, and I can well understand resorting to the "euphemism du jour" in some circumstances and not risking the aggravation.

(In my experience I've tended to be uncomfortable watching very thin dancers and rarely if ever experienced the opposite sensation.)

[Kathleen O'Connell]

1 hour ago, dirac said:

a dancer can be too heavy and still not reach the bar of actually disfiguring the choreography or failing to get across artistically

Here's what I'm always wrestling with: what is "too heavy" (or too thin) and why? Or more to the point, why do I find myself tempted to make that assessment when looking at a ballet dancer, but rarely when I'm looking at dancers in other types of dance? 

(I too find dancers thin to the point of emaciation discomfiting.)

[cubanmiamiboy]

On 10/21/2021 at 12:31 PM, canbelto said:

One thing I've always been irked about is how the term "ballet body" is used to describe a certain type of extremely thin, leggy dancer. For instance, Maria Kowroski is a perfect example -- I heard over and over again how she had the best "ballet body" because of her legs and feet. But she herself has said many times that her super-long legs, arched feet, and flexible back made her prone to injuries. So "ballet body" is being used just to describe a certain aesthetic.

I was quite surprised at all this obsession with the "Wendy Wheelan look" when I came to the States, having grown up with the idea of a "ballet body" along the lines of Cynthia Gregory, Martine Van Hammel or Ashley Bouder. The first time I saw Wendy onstage I must confess I was shocked. It wasn't only how they looked. They also appeared -(to me)- weaker in jumps and turns.

[lmspear]

There's  one thing that's always surprised and even awed me about critics' and audience reactions to Tiler Peck.  I can't recall ever reading or hearing any reaction to the shape of her body, the focus is always on the marvel of the way she moves.  

[canbelto]

1 hour ago, lmspear said:

There's  one thing that's always surprised and even awed me about critics' and audience reactions to Tiler Peck.  I can't recall ever reading or hearing any reaction to the shape of her body, the focus is always on the marvel of the way she moves.  

I think:

1) Her dancing is simply so overwhelming

and

2) Tiler is a petite dynamo and cast in the allegro roles at NYCB. There's a long history of shorter, more compact dynamos in ballet. 

I think if Tiler were to dance Diamonds there might be comments ...

[volcanohunter]

On 10/31/2021 at 1:45 PM, dirac said:

it seems to me a dancer can be too heavy and still not reach the bar of actually disfiguring the choreography or failing to get across artistically

Perhaps this becomes a matter of aesthetic preference? In my experience, dancers who fail in putting across the choreography usually come from the other end of the spectrum: they are so thin that they lack the necessary strength. Not that I expect the very small and slight to be powerhouses, and that's okay with me, too. There's far too much razzle-dazzle in ballet for my taste anyway. (If I wanted that, I'd go to the circus or a sporting event.) Rather, the tension in their necks, their spiky fingers or general lack of centeredness make me acutely aware of their exertion, and that takes away my pleasure in watching.

I suspect there's a lot in the aesthetic of ballet that's simply learned. I know there's a great deal in it that I absorbed in childhood and continued to accept, until I thought about some of those elements and realized that objectively speaking, they weren't aesthetically pleasing. (Unfortunately for me, ADs the world over continue to fetishize qualities that I now perceive as distortions.)

Edited November 2, 2021 by volcanohunter

[cubanmiamiboy]

22 hours ago, canbelto said:

I think:

1) Her dancing is simply so overwhelming

and

2) Tiler is a petite dynamo and cast in the allegro roles at NYCB. There's a long history of shorter, more compact dynamos in ballet. 

I think if Tiler were to dance Diamonds there might be comments ...

I also think she has always held one "in the middle " type of body. Never too skinny....never too "not skinny".

[vipa]

23 hours ago, lmspear said:

There's  one thing that's always surprised and even awed me about critics' and audience reactions to Tiler Peck.  I can't recall ever reading or hearing any reaction to the shape of her body, the focus is always on the marvel of the way she moves.  

I'm actually interested in what you mean by the shape of her body. Her feet and legs are quite beautiful IMO. So do you mean her weight or some other aspect to her shape?

[Helene]

Kaori Nakamura, who surely is shorter than Tiler Peck, danced a splendid Diamonds in Seattle (partnered by Seth Orza), so if Tiler Peck were cast in "Diamonds," I would certainly want to see what she had to say in the role.

[vipa]

28 minutes ago, Helene said:

Kaori Nakamura, who surely is shorter than Tiler Peck, danced a splendid Diamonds in Seattle (partnered by Seth Orza), so if Tiler Peck were cast in "Diamonds," I would certainly want to see what she had to say in the role.

I so agree with this. I would rush to see Tiler Peck in Diamonds because I trust that she would have something to say musically and artistically. 

[volcanohunter]

Peck has a larger head than you'd see on the stereotypical Balanchine "pinhead." This alters the proportions of her body and makes her appear shorter than she actually is.

[Balletwannabe]

Is anyone at NYCB "stereotypical"?  All of the principal dancers have unique bodies & looks, from my perspective.  Which I love.

[cubanmiamiboy]

55 minutes ago, Balletwannabe said:

Is anyone at NYCB "stereotypical"?  All of the principal dancers have unique bodies & looks, from my perspective.  Which I love.

LeCrone