miliosr

Here's a small (but not comprehensive) history about Antony Tudor's Continuo: Tudor created it in May 1971 for the Juilliard Dance Ensemble. Syracuse Ballet Theatre gave the first professional performance in February 1976. Rudolf Nureyev programmed it as part of the Paris Opera Ballet's all-Tudor program in February 1985. The American Ballet Theatre (ABT) Studio Company presented it in April 2003. ABT itself performed it in October 2008 as part of a Tudor Centennial Celebration. ABT's affiliated Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis school showed it in April 2020. Continuo has a pedigree of sorts but it's mostly performed by small companies or students. So, it's ideal for the Paris Opera Ballet School.

I received an e-mail notice from San Francisco Ballet on Monday: Swan Lake Returns April 30–May 5 Due to popular demand, Swan Lake returns with world-renowned guest stars who will partner with SF Ballet principal dancers in the iconic roles of Odette-Odile and Prince Siegfried. Experience ballet's greatest love story with a whole new perspective. Casting will be announced closer to performance dates. The "world-renowned guest stars" will be Natalia Osipova (Royal Ballet), Daniel Camargo (American Ballet Theatre) and Jacopo Tissi (Dutch National Ballet).

The $10 million for day-to-day operations pleases me as much as (or perhaps more than) the $50 million for new works. In a country like the United States, where generous state subsidies for the arts are not available, it can be a real slog to raise funds for something as "unsexy" as operations. I give credit to the donor for recognizing the importance of operations funding.

Forum members have mentioned the surviving Bejart pieces most regularly revived outside of the Bejart Ballet Lausanne - The Rite of Spring, Bolero, L'oiseau de Feu, Song of the Wayfarer . . . The mega-spectaculars Bejart made for the Ballet of the 20th Century (his then-company) during the 1970s - Nijinsky, clown de dieu, I Trionfi, Notre Faust, Le Moliere imaginaire - are seen infrequently (if at all). The enormous cost it would take to revive them would be prohibitive for most companies. Also, the Ballet of the 20th Century as it existed in the 1970s had a high degree of personality, which would be difficult to recapture with today's dancers. Suzanne Farrell, while closely associated with George Balanchine and the New York City Ballet, spent four years (1970-74) with Bejart and the Ballet of the 20th Century after she and Balanchine had their schism in 1969, and she remained intensely loyal to Bejart for the rest of his life. (See the Farrell documentary Elusive Muse.) Bejart had the misfortune of bringing the Ballet of the 20th Century to New York (early 1971) when the New York dance world mantra of "dance has no subject but dance" was at or nearing its high-water mark. You might say that Bejart found himself caught between the twin pincers of Merce Cunningham (and the postmodernists) on his left and George Balanchine on his right. That Bejart was asking dance to speak to philosophy or religion riled the New York dance critics. Clive Barnes at the New York Times was the most vocal member of the anti-Bejart critical faction but Arlene Croce, from her perches at Ballet Review and The New Yorker, was probably the most influential in terms of shaping the anti-Bejart sentiment which persists among United States-based dance critics to this very day.

San Francisco Ballet has announced on its Instagram account that principal Luke Ingham will be leaving the company: "Bittersweet News Alert: Principal Dancer Luke Ingham will be moving to Portland to be with his wife, choreographer and Artistic Director Danielle Rowe and celebrate the growth of their two children together. Luke is a beloved Company member who has brought much joy both on and off the stage over the past 12 years. Join us in celebrating this wonderful dancer!" No indication of how soon he will be departing (effective immediately?) but his departure reduces the roster of principal males from 7 to 6.

I've rewatched Medusa this week on DVD - admittedly, not your typical holiday fare! When I first saw Medusa in June 2019 at a cinema broadcast, I wrote this (elsewhere) about it: "Enjoyment of Medusa probably depends on how much you can stomach of old-school American modern dance, particularly the "Greek" period of Martha Graham. Medusa is like a full-blown tribute to Graham from its costumes for the women (Graham "Greece" rather than ancient Greece "Greece" or Isadora "Greece") to its prodigious use of fabric to Athena's hair, which boldly co-opts Graham's own hair style from her later years." I still stand by that analysis. But what puzzled me at the time of the broadcast and continues to puzzle me is the long solo for Osipova after the stage action has reached its dramatic peak with Medusa's beheading. To me, the solo seems disconnected (pun intended!) from what had come before and works solely as an excuse to show off Natalia Osipova. The American dance critic Arlene Croce wrote (in 1974) of Graham dance theater: "No Graham heroine dies unillumined. The difference between her and the fated heroines of nineteenth-century ballet - a Giselle or an Odette - is that the Graham heroine possesses, herself, the key to her mystery. She does not entrust it to the hero [note: my emphasis]; she herself must unlock the inner door." What I think Sidi Larbi Cherkaoui wanted to show (and his comments in the booklet accompanying the DVD would appear to confirm this) was Medusa taking hold of her own fate (that moment of illumination found in Graham theater) by allowing Perseus (Matthew Ball) to behead her. The ensuing solo was then meant to act as Medusa's celebration of her physical and spiritual freedom, which stemmed from her own act. The problem with all this is that the moment of illumination - the moment when Medusa achieves agency (choosing to die) and thereby gains freedom - is by no means self-evident in either dance or mime terms. The beheading occurs but without any clear depiction that the heroine instigated the hero into giving her release. (There's no sin in this. Croce noted that this same problem occurs in some of Graham's works.) I think Medusa has merit and I hope Cherkaoui doesn't consign it to the scrap heap. Shorn (pun intended!) of its excessive length and tightened in terms of actually showing clearly Medusa's command of her own fate, it could be a work worth keeping. That being said, Medusa's true home probably isn't with the Royal Ballet (where it would always be a real outlier) but with the Graham company itself.

For the Royal Ballet (Homage to Rudolf Nureyev): La Bayadere, Act III, The Kingdom of the Shades (Nureyev, after Marius Petipa) Songs of a Wayfarer (Maurice Bejart) Marguerite and Armand (Frederick Ashton) For American Ballet Theatre (Shakespeare theme): The Dream (Frederick Ashton) The Moor's Pavane (Jose Limon) The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet (Antony Tudor) For San Francisco Ballet (All Stravinsky): L'Oiseau de feu (Maurice Bejart) Rubies (George Balanchine) Le Sacre du printemps (Pina Bausch)

The situation is equally deplorable at American Ballet Theatre (ABT) and arguably more so given how ABT is supposed to be the steward of Tudor's repertory. ABT will occasionally program Jardin aux Lilas (1936) and Pillar of Fire (1942) but that's about the extent of it. (The only Tudor they are performing during their upcoming New York season is an extract from The Leaves Are Fading (1975) at the fall gala.) This is pretty thin gruel when you consider that Tudor brought Jardin, Dark Elegies (1937), Gala Performance (1938) and Judgment of Paris (1938) to ABT when he emigrated to the United States. He then proceeded to create Pillar, Dim Lustre (1943), his one-act Romeo & Juliet (1943) and Undertow (1945) specifically for them. Finally, there's Offenbach in the Underworld (1954/55), Echoing of Trumpets (1963) and Shadowplay (1967) - all created elsewhere and all imported by ABT at one time or another. I took a look back at Mikhail Baryshnikov's directorship (1980-89) and though Baryshnikov would never be considered a 'Tudor dancer,' he regularly rotated the Tudor works. Jardin never left repertory for the entire decade, and Pillar and The Leaves Are Fading were also repertory stalwarts. Dark Elegies, Dim Lustre and Gala Performance also made periodic appearances. My biggest regret is that Tudor's Romeo & Juliet may never see the light of day again. Everyone who saw it thought it was extraordinary - George Balanchine is reputed to have said it was the best version of Romeo & Juliet he ever saw. But it hasn't been seen since 1976-77, which was 45 years ago. In the 1990s, Kevin McKenzie talked about reviving it on an all-Shakespeare bill with Frederick Ashton's The Dream and Jose Limon's The Moor's Pavane. But nothing ever came of it; reputedly due to what it would cost to revive. (This aggravates me to no end given what ABT did spend money on during the past three decades.)

On the theme of Les Noces . . . Having seen the Ballet West revival in Salt Lake City in spring 2023, I can say that Les Noces is more modern - after a century - than many of the self-consciously "modern" works premiered these days. The Ballet West production proved that Les Noces is perfectly revivable. Now, if the Royal Ballet were to consider reviving it, they might have to admit weakness and go outside the house walls to find someone to stage it. This was the greatest flaw in the Ballet West production. The parents were cast with dancers who were in the same age bracket as the bride and groom. So, the story point was lost because the parents and the bridal couple all looked like siblings. The revival of Les Noces at the Royal Ballet in the 1960s was major event in the Ashton directorship, in the company's history and in classical dance more generally. On those grounds alone, it was worth reviving at the Royal Ballet in its centennial year. But then this gets back to FLOSS's original point - that the O'Hare directorship is heedless of the past.

No need to apologize. The State of Utah has long been the central home of Mormonism, which - historically - has been conservative in its cultural outlook. But, truth be told, there's never been any problem with ballet in Utah. William Christensen founded Ballet West in 1963 (as the Utah Civic Ballet) and the company is now 60 years old. Frankly, I think most state residents, whether they adhere to Mormonism or not, take pride in having a cultural institution of Ballet West's stature. As for Salt Lake City, it is virtually indistinguishable from any other major US metropolis. You won't have any problems finding a hipster coffee shop if you go looking for one!

I think of the Ailey company as a contemporary dance company in the truest sense - they draw on a wide range of stylistic and technical influences (including ballet but far from limited to it) and then synthesize those influences into something new. I would say that Ballet West has made all the right decisions and Los Angeles Ballet has made all the wrong ones. As I scan the list again (and especially the Top 20), what comes to mind is that the 'Balanchine company' phenomenon isn't as strong as it used to be. (By 'Balanchine company' I mean a company headed by a former New York City Ballet dancer and at which the Balanchine repertory takes pride of precedence.) In the Top 20, I would say only the following are Balanchine companies: #1 New York City Ballet (obviously) - Jonathan Stafford and Wendy Whelan, directors #7 Pacific Northwest Ballet - Peter Boal, director #8 Miami City Ballet - Lourdes Lopez, director #17 Ballet Arizona - Ib Andersen, director (Has announced his retirement.)

Some of the included 'classical' companies are peculiar choices - Alvin Ailey American Dance Theatre (#4) and LA Dance Project (#42). I don't think of either company as a classical one. (The Ailey company also appears on Dance Data Project's list of the Largest U.S. Contemporary & Modern Companies, which makes their inclusion on this list even more confusing.) That being said, the companies in the Top Ten are about what you would expect. The rising star would be Ballet West in Salt Lake City, which has clawed its way into the Top Ten. Interesting to see that three of the Top Ten are companies residing west of the Rocky Mountains - San Francisco Ballet, Pacific Northwest Ballet and Ballet West. Sad to see Los Angeles Ballet slide all the way to #66 but then it has had no artistic or community profile. Small wonder that the board made the decision to oust the old leadership and hire Melissa Barak as the new artistic director.

San Francisco Ballet has announced its roster for the 2023-24 season: SAN FRANCISCO BALLET ANNOUNCES COMPANY ROSTER FOR 2023–24 SEASON - San Francisco Ballet (sfballet.org) Not much in the way of changes beyond what was previously announced. Probably the most interesting news is at the Character Artists level.

Principal dancer Mathilde Froustey announced on Instagram today that she is leaving the San Francisco Ballet to join the ballet troupe in Bordeaux as an etoile. She's from Bordeaux originally so this is a return for her. The troupe doesn't perform a lot but this may work for her given that she has a young son.

Clark Tippet created Bruch Violin Concerto No. 1 for ABT: American Ballet Theatre - Bruch Violin Concerto No. 1 (abt.org) Bruch Violin Concerto was in-and-out of the repertory rotation during the 1990s so it stands to reason that the company took it with them on tours. (The third section of Bruch Violin Concerto was the closing performance on the American Ballet Theatre Now DVD, which was filmed in the latter half of the 1990s. It's also readily available on YouTube.) The real mystery is why we haven't seen it at ABT in at least a dozen years. Colorado Ballet has staged it at least four times and the now-defunct Ballet San Jose and Barcelona Ballet both presented it while they were still operational. ABT still performs Tippet's Some Assembly Required. (In fact, they performed it in Chicago in April!) Whatever the problem is with ABT programming Bruch Violin Concerto, I can only hope that new artistic director Susan Jaffe can resolve the matter. Jaffe, after all, was part of the original 1980s cast.