Whenever I watch Sleeping Beauty I always think of how much better it is when Auroras can make the "crown" over their heads. When you watch Sleeping Beauty do you think it's necessary for Auroras to do that? I don't think it's absolutely necessary but I do enjoy the performance so much more when they can bring down the house with those long balances.

I don't think it's necessary for ballerinas to raise their arms to 3rd position between partners. The point, for me, is that they are supported by each prince in turn, with a secure, regal (however short the duration) balance in between.

I think it's part of her character -- she's going to be queen someday, she's got to be sovereign, able to stand on her own without collapsing -- it's a metaphor for that.

But she can't just go for it. She's also got to be gracious in the midst of all these difficulties; she can't just look "Excuse me can't you see I'm busy."

It's not necessary, and in fact it's kinda vulgar, to MILK the balances, make the conductor slow down, though the right dancer can work that to her advantage if she's being adorable in the process, and maybe just saves it for the last one. It's also OK if she is in transition from one to another -- she doesn't have to get the other arm all the way to high fifth (or 3rd as you call it Hans) every time, so long as her aplomb is solid through the torso and we aren't WORRIED about her, she can be using that hand to greet this guest from a far-flung land -- she MUST look intelligent, at least a little curious ("Have you come far?"), her eyes are at least as important in these moments as getting that arm en couronne.

I voted "don't care," not because I don't but because my idea of what Aurora should do wasn't there.

I think her eyes must meet each those of each suitor -- not the floor three feet behind him. She should appear calm and impervious, moving slowly. The worst thing an Aurora can do -- worse than falling -- is grab anxiously for the next guy's hand. If anyone should panic, it's not Aurora. She's a princess and nothing bad has ever happened to her (that she can recall), so why should gravity mess up her party? Aurora must be confident and serene.

I think I have seen this, even though not every guy's hand, and that gives the artificial quality--something like a test she's got to pass.

I also voted "don't care," and largely for carbro's reasons (though I could never have expressed them so clearly and cogently).

Nowadays the audience seems to approach and the balances as a kind of acrobatic test. This, rightly or wrongly, undercuts some of the larger metaphoric significance of this particular port de bras.

Paul's discussion of the different possibilities facing the ballerina makes a great deal sense and should be taped to dressing room mirrors wherever SB is being danced. Thanks, Paul.

For me, the "test" of "Sleeping Beauty" is how Aurora's Vision is danced.

I once saw an Aurora who had obviously been cast for the Vision Scene. The rest of the performance was one of the most nerve-wracking evenings I've ever spent in a theater.

Beautifully written


I still think of a clip of...someone, (BW so probs Fonteyn), whom I saw on television when I was about 10 or so. After the 3rd balance, she did not take the partner's hand, but just posed, smiling serenely at the 4th partner--it was as though they were having a conversation just via their eyes. She never once looked down at the floor, and it just seemed so natural that he would wait for he to finish, and then theywould go through the last pose together. So beautiful

Here's a 1955 clip of the early part of the passage which appears to be shot in a studio, for tv. It cuts off before the final balances.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmbI8azLrS8

It's not Fonteyn at her best, and the tv camera of the day does not flatter her, especially in one closeup shot of her legs. However, as the passage proceeds, Fonteyn does seems to become more secure -- and therefore radiant.

Although the quality of the picture doesn't allow you to look closely at her eyes, you can see that she is making eye contact with those around her. This is especially striking towards the end of the clip where, as she receives each rose, she actually LOOKS at it with delight as she transfers it to her other hand, and even appears to smell its perfurme. I've seen other Auroras who don't look at the flowers at all, possibly because they're so focused on performing the balance impressively.

It is in details like this, I think, that the viewer gets an impression of the character -- and the destiny -- of Aurora. More than any specific port de bras, this quality of being entirely engaged in the action, of paying close attention to what is going on, is what separates the best Auroras from the rest of the field.

And here is the rest of Fonteyn's Rose Adagio (apparently later in her career than the video Bart posted), including the balances at the end, which I think she does perfectly. The arm stays in 3rd long enough to tell us that she is perfectly on balance, it moves up and down calmly, without any desperate grasping, and she appears to always be looking at her partners' eyes, although it is a little bit difficult to tell given the film quality.

Edit: Ok, I just watched two of my favorite ballerinas (Zhanna Ayupova and a very young Larissa Lezhnina) dance the Rose Adagio, and I would really like to hear from someone who knows more about how this role is generally danced at the Mariinsky because while both ballerinas were extremely courteous with their partners throughout, they both distinctly looked away from them during the balances. Is it just a matter of different characterization?

'm pretty sure that color footage is only about 4 years later than the b&w tv footage, from 1959.

Wow! Thank you Hans! This is thrilling! Look how she takes that pique -- she steps INTO that atttitude like a diver in Acapulco taking off -- from then on, everything else is just finishing out the phrase! Unbelievable!

I'd seen this before, but not for years, and the black and white 50s one was more familiar. She's so musical -- and very different from the earlier interpretation, glorious in another way. Quite abstract, or Caroline Brown -- the Cunningham company had been there, this video is from the 60s, Ashton had made or was making Monotones in response to the Cunningham revelations.... It also looks more like Allegra kent, without of course Allegra's mannerisms, but more like Allegra's way of being musical, but still, more like a musical instrument than an actress, and less like a singer than like a violin. Of course, the camera angles tend in hte same direction, eschewing close-up details and emphasizing the perfection of the grand design -- but it IS perfect, and it IS grand, it is GRAND. Nobilissima visione.

Who was conducting? Is that Lambert?

All of the Maryinsky ballerinas that I've seen (live or canned), look away. My guess, (and I stress this), is that it's company tradition. Aurora is being presented to her court on the day of her coming of age, in that very old fashioned sense of the word "debutante." In that sense, the balances may be Aurora's 'curtsies' to each Prince. Consider the era in which this ballet was created: Debutante events were the norm for young women of royalty and high birth. As a debutante Princess it would have been considered forward or unseemly to look her suitors directly in the eye. So, my theory is that the balances are her
special display of both regal modesty and pride. MO.

I wondered if it's the costume too, because this is the only time I've ever seen Fonteyn look downright chunky.




It's wonderful, but since this has been singled out from the rest of the context of the ballet as the feat that it is, I wonder if anyone has ever seem the arm really move calmly, i.e., I agree Fonteyn's doesn't seem at all grasping or desperate, but it does still move quite rapidly. I know this sounds a bit too much 'sports' to talk about it like this, but there might be other (and even lesser artists, of course) ballerinas who have managed to get the balances and let the arm float down a bit more relaxedly still; I can see it having a very wonderful imperious quality to it if it worked. I'm not sure I've ever seen that, but somebody must have; and to be able to do so would, I would think, completely remove all sense that there is some thought of the difficulty going on. What I really don't like is a ballerina who snatches the roses earlier, and that's not difficult not to do, because the best don't.

One might say that by looking down, the Auroras are expressing modesty. One might also say that it helps a person balance. Fixing on something stationary helps, because we orient visually as well as with the inner ear and the "feeling" of alignment.

If Odile starts skipping the 32 fouettees, and Aurora her balances, and all due to lack of technique...what's next...? We might as well start skipping pointwort and keep making changes, so maybe one of this days we will be able to see Britney Spears dancing the roles...why not!

Well, Plisetskaya didn't do the fouettés, and life went on. I don't think anyone's talking about removing the balances (équilibres), just doing them differently.

Cygnet and carbro, I was actually thinking it was probably an expression of modesty (as well as being much easier to balance that way). I notice even Fonteyn looks away during the promenades.

Papeetepatrick, in my opinion, the ballerina doesn't actually have to lower her arm slowly so much as calmly. One can be both calm and swift, and in addition to the practical concern of staying on pointe, there is also that of the music, which has to be slowed down if she is going to raise her arm to 3rd because it takes more time to get to that position, and also she will need more time to prepare for each balance. If we add to that the prescription that the arm must move slowly up and down, the music would be a dirge! I do think that the ballerina with the calmest, most regal movement in this section is Sizova. Her movements are not really slow, but there is a secure regularity to them. The arm goes up, the arm goes down, without any hint of either insecurity or showing off. It is easy to find her rose adagio by searching "sizova rose". It includes her entrance and variation as well--and she doesn't snatch the roses, which I also can't stand.

By the way, to watch a few ballerinas who do not raise the arm all the way, Lezhnina's and Ayupova's performances are online. Certainly no one can say they lack technique, and I definitely prefer their restrained performances to that of some other ballerinas who bite off more than they can chew.

Thank you, Hans, for that Link. These are indeed very serene and secure balances. The camera angle (shooting from above) seems to heighten the appearance of difficulty, or even peril, and create an intrusive feeling of suspense. The look is, to me, awkward and distracting.

In your post you mentioned tempo. It seems to me -- though I don't have a metronome -- that the tempi in parts of this were very languid indeed. Fonteyn's speed created a sense of adolescent excitement. I'm not sure exactly what the tempi here are meant to convey.

As for the roses, Sizova seems to accept them with equanimity, as her due, and registers no response. The problem of what to do with them in the end is resolved in an interesting fashion, I think. She tosses them gently at her mother's feet and we see a young page pick them up and present them quite gallantly to the Queen. Unfortunately, this requires the camera to cut away from Aurora.

A question: What's with that long, excruciatingly slow harp passage? Is this telling us something about Aurora? about Tchaikovsky? or about Soviet taste when filming ballet for the general public?

I recall reading that Petipa asked Tchaikovsky to insert that harp passage, but I don't know if that is 100% true. I don't really like it, to be honest, although it does give Aurora a moment to express her shyness--she walks to the center of the stage, poses in preparation, then gets nervous and runs over to her mother for encouragement.

Different ballerinas do different things with the roses--the original production, I recall reading, had Aurora throw them onto the ground. I like what Sizova does, and Asylmuratova is particularly gracious, actually kneeling (or coming close to it) and carefully spreading the flowers at her mother's feet.

Re: tempo, yes, the Mariinsky is never exactly perky at this point, which is why I'm concerned that if it slowed down any more, I'm afraid some of the wind instrument players would faint!

Regarding the looking at suitors thing, in Asylmuratova's Rose Adagio (she does the crowns beautifully), she looks down initially but as she releases the hand she looks back up as if to say, "Oh, hi, thank you."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vCbuAySpu4

I'm having a lot of fun watching these videos all you "oh-so-well-informed" BT'ers are posting. Lately I've been trying to educate myself on some of the great dancers of the past, so these videos fit me to a tee.

One small thing that has struck me is how the suitors costumes have become less and less cumbersome over the years. In one of the oldest clips given in posts above I simply couldn't believe that the production folks would have put those male dancers in such huge costumes (they nearly looked like a bunch of firefighters in asbestos suits.....OK, I exaggerate ). Even though the suitors don't dance per se, I would have thought such costumes would be in Aurora's way during the Rose Adagio.

Interesting how aesthetics change over time.

Oh, what a lovely continuation of an already beautiful autumn day, Hans! (I hope it's nice there too). Not that I watched it on the clip yet, but this gives me the right to watch the regal Sizova movement yet again. Or anyway, I'm going to look at it that way. I'm not going to watch the clip because now I'm going to get the movie out and watch it again and enjoy the aniticipation within the context of the whole movie. Oh, what license and indulgence--yes, I always like what you say about Sizova, and when I first saw the movie I'd never seen a more enchanting ballerina. And I still haven't. But now I get to watch the whole thing again because I must see these regal movements in context...it would simply be unseemly any other way...

Oh, well, Sizova, hands down, please. A while ago, before ABT came over with their Beauty, i asked some advice to BT'rs on who to watch to get some comparison, being the Soloviev/Sizova film the only SB that i ever owned-(which i have memorized from the thousand times I've seen it). Taking some advices, I did some digging around Youtube-(Durante, Bussell, Zakharova, and some others)-just to reaffirm my total devotion to those glorious soviets Aurora/Desire.

THough I actually prefer Fonteyn in the adagio, there's NOBODY who can do Aurora's first solo like SIzova -- that is the most beautiful, thrilling, , unbelievably light performance of those leaps and turns I can imagine -- the amplitude,the timing is unbelievable. Unbelievable nautural gift.

Another thing I've noticed in the color video is how Margot Fonteyn allows her cavaliers to stay 2 steps away from her when she does the "crown" pose. All the other ballerinas I've seen in the videos have the cavaliers stand in such a way that the hand of the previous cavalier and of the next cavelier are immediately next to each other (within inches), so that when Aurora needs to switch hands, she can do so almost instantly. Fonteyn, OTOH, allows her next cavalier to be but a short distance away so that she must hold the balance without the parachute of the next cavalier's hand in close proximity. I'm impressed.

P.S.. Thank you for the reference to Sizova......I didn't know.....what a gift.

Sandy, check out "sizova" on the Ballet Talk search engine. You'll find entriy points leading you to a number of very illuminating discussions. She's also mentioned several times on the "most beautiful ballerina" thread.

Hans, do you know anything about that great clip?

I understand it was filmed by Keith Money. Wonder what the date would be.

the following credits likely come for the film in question here:

Margot Fonteyn / a Degamo production ; directed and written by Keith Money ; produced by Adrian Gaye and Keith Money. [1970]

i was taken to a small-scale screening of this film, as a film, on my first ever trip to London, to see the Kirov Ballet, by a member of London Ballet Circle in July of '70.
british television (BBC?) restored the film not that long ago for a program called THE SLEEPING BEAUTY REDISCOVERED (if i've got the program's title correctly), and framed it with commentary by the such british writers as Judith Macrell and other black-and-white footage the Messel production when it re-opened the Royal Opera House after the war.
very likely british BT members can expand on or correct what i'm posting here.
if mem. serves Money hoped to film the complete ballet but his act was all he got to do.

I don't have anything to add regarding the clip, unfortunately--I just wanted to see the rest of Fonteyn's Rose Adagio, and it came up in the search results. The youtube member who posted it might have some information.

I did find this posting from Jane Simpson in February 2003, when this subject had come up in a previous posting. I didn't know how to "quote" it here, so I just cut and pasted it if that is all right:

rg is right about it being Keith Money's film; it was made when Fonteyn was 50, and she's dancing with the touring section of the RB (the first Prince is David Wall) - on a Sunday in Bournemouth, if I remember rightly - and Money never found the cash to film the rest of the production. The film was forgotten about and he found it in his barn, years later.

(Posting at the same time as pmeja - slightly different from what I said before so I'll leave it here!)

I voted "no" for two reasons: 1) I gather I am the only person on the planet who feels this way, but I just don't care much for those balances as choreography and 2) I'd much rather see a ballerina who flubs the balances but can do full justice to the Vision Scene than the other way around. Like Odile's fouettés, Aurora's balances seem to me prone to devolve into a sort of graded exercise -- or worse, a circus trick -- where execution is more important than expressiveness and whole performances are reduced to whether or not they were held for the required number of seconds. (Let me hasten to add that none of the contributors to this thread are at all guilty of that -- the comments thus far have been uniformly thoughtful and enlightening.)

I've only seen one performance in which the Aurora looked genuinely radiant executing her balances; since I find the radiance more important than the balances, I'd be perfectly happy to see them replaced with something more-or-less equivalent that the ballerina and her Cavaliers could execute radiantly. (By "more-or-less equivalent" I mean something that would have the same narrative and expressive effect, but that sn't a walk in the park either, of course.) Ditto for Odile's fouettés: Odile is all about seductive glitter and there are surely other ways to convey that than 32 fouettés.

I am a total hypocrite when it comes to the fish dives in the wedding pas de deux, however -- leave those out, and I'm going to march right down to the box office and demand my money back!

No! There are NO other ways. The 32 fouettes are lodged in my brain and I'm going to leave them there. Basically, I also feel that way about the balances, and want them

. With all this new technique from gymnastic types 'ruining ballet', the least we can expect is new specimens who are 'good at the balances and radiance' in brand new brave-new-world wonderful ways! Maybe the problem is ballerinas not knowing how to do the 'seductive glitter PLUS the 32' and the 'radiance PLUS balances', because there is no dearth of athletic ballerinas able to execute the difficult technical feats. It's like in opera, Kathleen--there are NOT any Maria Callases anymore, and we ought to figure out why this is, not, say, why bel canto florid writing ought to be simplified. In other words, the problem is not a scarcity of fouette- and balance-doers, it is a scarcity of radiance- and seductive-glitter doers. More FIRE and passion, not less ridiculous technical demands!

Now, I originally voted that I didn't care either way, but I have changed my mind, and think all Auroras must strive to do radiance PLUS all the balances. I realize this vote change causes a difficulty for Diebold Voting Machine vote-fixing and hanging chads, but there it is...

I think it's important to keep in mind that even if the ballerina simply transfers her hand from one partner to the other (which, if I have this right, is how Brianza did it originally--can anyone confirm whether that's correct?) she still has to balance, so the balancing is not going anywhere no matter what.

And why is that not all the Auroras turn around in Promenades by the Suitors, but rather stand still during the balances...? (Fonteyn does it in the color clip, as well as Sizova, but not the totality of ballerinas I've seen)

This thread, and especially Kathleen's comment, reminds me of Darci Kistler. She gave an unsteady Rose Adagio, but oh! What a Vision! Fresh, absolutely transcendent and very much her own.

Mel? Were you there?
That's part of the building to a climax, much as in the adage of the Don Q Act III pas.

Cristian, there are two sets of balances in the Rose Adagio. One in the beginning, without promenades, and another toward the end with a promenade (a.k.a. 'tour lent') in between each balance.



Haha, I ought to have phrased that better. I meant to ask whether it's documented.

Of course in the best of all possible worlds every ballerina who danced Aurora could execute perfect radiant balances with both arms above her head every time and dance a rapturous vision scene to boot! (And they should strive for that -- life is short and I for one get cranky when I have to squander time and money on slackers.) But we don't live in that world, and so I am happy to accept honest alternatives; the whole ballet doesn't (and shouldn't) ride on 60 seconds of choreography -- but sometimes it seems that that's what ends up happening with these iconic passages. In any event, I'm certainly not suggesting that the choreography be dumbed-down to accommodate declining technical standards.

And yes, Maria Callas is indeed dead. Fortunately there are many excellent singers on our stages today who can do full justice to the bel canto rep, both in terms of technique and expressiveness -- more than there were when Callas was singing, I think -- so there's no need replace all the gruppetti with half notes just yet. Now if only we could unearth a few good Verdi baritones ...

You just have resumed the whole point. Good.

Actually, I could comment, if I'd been reviewing that part in the Sergeyev notations at Harvard, but my time was limited, so I stuck to the parts I knew best, the fairy variations and the various Act III pas de deux. Odds are, those notations would have instructions, in longhand, if not in the symbology.

No, I know about the two sets of balances-(as standard as they can be). My question was why is it that I've seen sometimes BOTH sets WITHOUT promenades...(or actually why is that they allow anyone to do so... )

I can't explain that--I've never seen the second set done without a promenade, and I've watched a lot of performances of SB.

I guess there's no explanation...just plain choreographic killing. (Actually I saw this happened in Festival, and it was strange to watch)

Hans! I got around to the pleasure of watching this again, and all three times are different. And it's as much the movement away from the suitor's hand as it is the often too anxious movement back. With Sizova, there is never the anxious movement back to the next hand, but on the first one, I thought that even she began with slightest nervousness as her hand left the first man (but it works when this only happens once!). Then with the second, she becomes more confident in both moving up and back, but it's the third which is so impeccably self-assured and at totally commanding ease that just knocks you out. And, although the Fonteyn you linked to a few weeks ago is no longer available, I didn't think she came even near what Sizova achieves here: The movement in a few seconds (perhaps twenty?) from slightly nervous to serenely confident is one of the most incredible achievements I've ever seen, because it works physically in such a way that there is no separation from the physical, the musical, and the dramatic. Paul had mentioned the 'she has to become the queen', and here you see her make the transformation in these three movements of the arm, which may themselves make the balance have three different and progressively stronger 'personalities', even though it is itself almost stationary (correct me on this, I imagine, there may be slight movement with each hand change, but it's hard to see on film), but it surely has had to grow in strength and confidence, and the arms may both lend strength to them and their growing strength also allows the arms to really flow. In fact, by the 3rd one, there is not even the slightest speeding of the 'dancer-music', because there doesn't need to be any further consideration given to security. So I agree Sizova's is by far the most regal, but I also think she really does not do them so much 'slowly', but does not speed against the music, and progressively becomes exactly bonded with it. It's really been worth it to concentrate on this single moment, because it's very brief the transformation Aurora makes, and the initial first slightly nervous move away makes the 3rd movement up and back this kind of miracle.

Edited to add: I just watched it yet again, and the 3rd time the hand comes back down, Sizova really does take a little extra time, a kind of leisure--and that has the effect of making you even forget that it's a balance going on. Oh, MAN!!! she had what it takes.

I just watched Sizova again, and you are right about the progression--and what's more, she does it during both sets of balances. Now that is technical security! And of course her entrance is unparalleled.

Well-done, Papeetepatrick! Bravo.

It's great to have film to confirm that instantaneous impression.

Once you've seen sovereignty in a gesture like this, you never forget it. The effect is as you say not just a technical achievement but a dramatically appropriate one -- and the communications made non-verbally like htis affect everyone. A cat would understand this and acknowledge her authority.