Well, most people's annual experience with this one is nearly done for this cycle, so I just thought I'd air some of my Loathings, Hates, Dislikings, and generally harrumphing about what I'm seeing in the Nutcracker productions today:

I LOATHE:

1. Pedophile Drosselmeyers. Enough said.

2. "Updated" productions. Nowadays, we are likely to see commentary by a choreographer on anything irrelevant to the general atmosphere of the work. If some idiot brings in the Wehrmacht and renames the family Stahlhelm, I bring out tomatoes.

3. Narrators - shoot them all. If your audience is so dull that they cannot comprehend stage action, or if your production is so esoteric that no one can tell what's going on, you have other problems!

4. Underproduced productions. See here, this is a spectacle! It's a ballet-féerie, which means enchantment ballet. If you can't afford all the magic, don't try it on the cheap. It doesn't work!

5. Pas de Deux to the Act I transformation music. Pavlova's been dead and gone a good many years now, and the Snow Queen/King (let them melt into oblivion) are only a memory of her vaudeville act set to this music. See the above Loathing. If you can't fill the transformation music with a transformation, don't do this ballet! Choreographers have to be told when to step back and let other stage artists work their magic!

I HATE:

1. Drosselmeyers who stay in after the transformation of the Nutcracker into the Nutcracker Prince. The toy is a doppelganger for Drosselmeyer himself, and when it transforms, Drossie should be gone!

2. Spontaneous renamings of characters. Anything German or French or Russian will do. If this tendency keeps up, Fritz will soon be Heinrich Himmler Stahlbaum!

3. Nephews - get rid of them. They are a distraction to the story.
The Nutcracker is (Nicholas!) Drosselmeyer's doppelganger, he doesn't need two!

4. Funereal tempi

5. Snow Queens and Kings as noted above.

6. Drosselmeyers who seem to be ready to burst into
Giselle at any given moment.

I DISLIKE:

1. Costumes in Act I that range all the way from the 1770s to the 1900s in the party scene. There are picture books, you designers out there! Look at a couple now and again, eh?

2. Arabian harem dancers as Coffee. I'm getting really tired of these supermarket houris. Can't anybody find anything else to say about the Levantine world than the obvious?

3. Adults taking parts which should be rightfully played by children.

HARRUMPH!

Little girls playing little boys.

Yes, most Drosselmeyers should be relegated to the 'dustbin' accompanied by the Joker of Swan Lake.

The "Nutcracker" is not high on my list of favorites and recent Drosselmeyers have pushed it way down--I come away feeling that a child protective agency should be notified.--Added to this is Paul Parish's recent musings on what Odette is really doing at the end of the Swan Lake Act II PDD when she is performing those petits battements!. Pretty soon I shall take Balanchine's advice---close my eyes and enjoy the music.

Mel said:
2. Arabian harem dancers as Coffee. I'm getting really tired of these supermarket houris. Can't anybody find anything else to say about the Levantine world than the obvious?

Next year, our company will be dressing the Arabian dancer in full burka/abaya/chador. At least, that is what my husband thinks; this year, the Arabian was danced by our daughter.

I'd much rather see Snow pas than any transformation scene I've been subjected to!!!

I wish Ashton's version could be revived -- it was only Snow and Sweets, no muss, no fuss, no mice, no party, no Drosselmeyer.

Then you haven't been subjected to the right transformation scenes. See Loathing #4 above.;)

I hesitate to ask, as I might not actually want to know the specifics, but what are they doing to Drosselmeyers out there in the big world?

One would think that in the current athmosphere the tendency would be paranoidicly away from anything even remotely resembling something that would warrant child protection officers...

Jaana, it relates to the adults doing children's parts and D. not disappearing when he ought to issues. Many productions have a Drosselmeyer hovering, hovering about the Nutcracker Prince and Clara/Marie/Masha/whatzerface. Productions where he actually is inserted into the pas de deux for the "kids" make me especially squeamish! Some versions have him actually barring the girl from getting to the "nephew" and sets up an uncomfortable, "why doesn't he want them together?" state of mind. Both the Baryshnikov and the Peter Wright RB production are particularly icky in this regard. Yes, he SHOULD hug the kids in the party scene, but they should be kids, and he should be on his best avuncular behavior. After all, he's the Hero of the ballet, he just gets transformed (back) into a kid, if you follow the original libretto, and some of the background literature to it.

If you eliminate the nephew (unlike the NYCB version) -- How does the action proceed through the rest of Act I after the party scene? I must say this is a fascinating subject, for I haven't seen many Nutcrackers besides numerous at NYCB and in that version the Nephew is quite integral to the action and theme.

Eliminating the Nephew would clearly change the entire feel of production. In the NYCB version, where the Nephew is a protagonist, almost a miniature version of Sleeping Beauty is set up, and a Theme is suggested of the sublimation of Marie's growing awareness of a dark and almost erotic world through Romantic Love in the person of the Nephew. Thus, the unmasking of the Nutcracker reveals the Prince/Nephew, and thereupon (and only therupon) can the young couple proceed to the land of Snow, ultimate symbol of purity.

Further, by preserving the Nephew and Marie's childish "falling in love," the Act II pdd, with its grand "tragic" musical theme, works well in the work. Criicisms of the Tschaikovsy score that the tragic music in Act II is out of place are deprived of a basis. With the Sugarplum and her Cavalier a romantic couple writ large at least they fit in somehow to the production, and even Candyland begins to make some Toy Thematic sense, sort of a childish Aurora's wedding.

In the NYCB production it isn't SO bad, but still maybe in the harrumph category.

In talking to several people who were there at the time, I learned that part of the reason Balanchine chose to have a nephew in there was to showcase the talent of a wonderful child dancer/actor named Paul "Rusty" Nickel (later soloist, ABT). He padded the Nutcracker part to create a cognate in the "real world" of the party, but if you cut that part out, and the interpolated entr'acte from Sleeping Beauty, very little, in fact nothing, would be lost from the original intent of the libretto. Another part of the reason for the addenda was that Balanchine also wanted something more for his original Drosselmeyer, Mischa Arshansky, to do. While this is a part of the usually-execrable practice of "making sense" of a fairy tale (who are the Grinches who thought this trend up?), it was much less offensive when done by Balanchine. And what tragic music? It's a descending G scale! Furthermore, they're mice, not rats.

I don't care what the book "calls" for but, as for the ones at the New York State Theater, as an old farmer neighbor in Maine once pointed out, "If it has a tail longer than its body it ain't no mouse."

Accident (Costumer ignorant of zooloogy) or private joke on "Les Petits Rats de l'Opera" and Mr. B's alleged nickname as a child at the Maryinsky theater?

I can't speak for how they are in Maine, but let an old farmboy from Orange County, NY tell you that the tail longer than the body holds true for a Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), but a Black rat (Rattus rattus) has a tail the same length as its body, that being one of its field marks - and if you see one, call the County Agricultural Agent - they're the ones that carry Yersinia pestis (plague)! Now while I can certainly speak about Rats of America, I have no idea what the Mice of Russia look like.

Anyway "Les Petit Rats" is part of the Paris Opéra School tradition, but I never heard of it being transferred to the Mariinsky. Anybody? Balanchine was "monkey" or even "Jocko" for awhile, after he played one in La Fille du Pharaon. Could be a Karinska joke, though. She knew the Opéra.

I believe Francis Mason's book mentions Rat as a nickname for Balanchine.

He was apparently called this as a young boy at the Imperial School, because of his teeth and the fact that he sniffed a lot.

Girls as Party Boys is necessitated by the lack of boys in ballet.

I suppose it could be changed so that all the families in attendance at the party happened to only have girls, and then we could have tomboy girls (with horns/guns/drums, whatever) chasing the girly girls (with their dolls).

Please.

This thread is, to my thinking, entirely too dyspeptic and critical for the subject at hand.

This is *Nutcracker*--a beautiful score to a holiday ballet. That's it.

I agree that years of over-analysis and let's-come-up-with-something-new have made it an easy target for curmudgeonly response.....

On the other hand:

This ballet is the only way that many companies/schools/dance studios can stay in business.

Whether or not you like a Snow Queen and King, it gives dancers performance experience, jobs, and a chance to change roles. It is beautiful music--many companies do not have the technical gimcrackery to catch your attention, so: they insert a pdd. Not a heinous thing.

Girls are often used in male roles because of the paucity of boys in ballet classes--what, the company is not supposed to do a party because there are no boys available? Girls often do not like being cast in the boys' roles, but sometimes it is a chance for a child who is undergoing an unfortunate body stage to still dance and be part of a production.

Ditto for the mice/rats. (Who cares what they are? Really, now......)
It is *fun* to dance, *fun* to be part of a procuction, *fun* to tie a ribbon on your tail so your parents know which one you are (and hope that the Wardrobe mistress hasn't seen you.....) In professional companies the boys doing Mice have loads of fun--sometimes you need a lift when doing 35 performances of the same ballet in a month.....

This is supposed to be a holiday ballet which is beautful, makes children excited about the magic and the music and the overall festivity....They may not remember much about the perfrmance (my son remembered the red carpet in the theatre with great delight, even though Baryshnikov was dancing...)

Yes, there is a place for scholarly correctness. There is a place for historical exactness (good luck telling a director that half his costumes are inaccurate when they tell you they want more party dresses in a particular style. Ain't gonna happen.) I appreciate a beautiful production as much as the next person (alright, I'll be honest: I appreciiate a beautiful production *more* than the average person, given what I do.)

Some productions are gorgeous but they have stinky choreography. Some have a beautiful look and are historically correct, but no one dances much. Some are obviously a product of Too Much Time on the Analyst's Couch. Some are just the best a company or studio can do given their resources and you know, I say hats off to them! They are introducing children to performing, they are giving audiences a respite from care, they are bringing something beautiful to people who might need that lift, that night.

I understand the reason for dissatisfaction in some corners--I say enough, already. Don't go if you don't like it. Don't spoil people's joy in something that they are achieving. Give the dancers a break--they can't help if they are wearing Louis heels when they are supposed to be wearing flat dancing slippers.

Ballet has enough naysayers out there as it is. If you don't like a particular production or company or choreographer, stay home. Keep quiet. Find something that you love and let us know about it. I'd much rather read all the funny threads on this board---no one takes serious umbrage at the comical: dancers or audience or parents--than harumphing or grumbling about *Nutcracker,* of all things.

We will have the reputation of a board filled with dyspeptic, curmudgeonly old crocks.

Not my style. I did love the idea of Arabian being done in a burka!!!! Thanks!
;)

All of my objections, reductio ad absurdum, go back to one of the earliest lessons in Theater Production 101: If you can't produce it, don't do it! I like the burqa idea, too - sort of Martha Graham-y.

Oh, this discussion has made me smile. I have to agree with Mel on most of his comments -- (but sorry, I kinda' like a snow queen).
The mouse/rat commentary actually made me laugh.

Let's see... January 12th? I think some "Nuts" are only 10 months away.

I like the Vainonen snow pas--I'd much rather see that than a hospital bed with ruffles glued on to it rolling its dreary way around the stage to cymbal clashes--it reminds me of Tchaikovsky's overly dramatic music for those silly wooden pull toys in Act II of Swan Lake.

I also wonder if there is any Nutcracker in the world that lives up to all of those exacting specifications.

I could go on about what is/isn't in the book, whether or not they're mice or rats (who cares?), &c, but it would probably give me wrinkles and gray hair, which frankly I'm surprised I don't have already! ;)

Juliet, thank you for the balanced post!

As Doris said, this discussion has been a treat. I haven't seen nearly enough Nutcrackers to complain, but to be dyspeptic for a moment just for fun ...

In general I loved the Royal Ballet's production as shown recently on PBS, and I’ll make it a point to catch Cojocura the next time she’s in D.C. But two things -- the wigs on the snowflakes make them look like my grandmother. And isn't Clara a little underdressed at the palace? Sure she's dreaming the whole thing, but she doesn’t just watch the performers, she dances with them. That nightgown jars.

And what's that "step" where the Sugar Fairy makes as if to plunge into arabesque but stops on a dime with both arms forward? It struck me as odd and wrong for the music.

I've always liked the Nutcracker productions that my dance school put on, but this year was a little different:
1. We had party girls, boys, guests, and then...teens. It's not like the teens really did anything, so I didn't care for them much.
2. This yeah one of the alumni came back and danced as Jack Frost. That was actually pretty cool, like he summoned the Snow Flurries and Snowflakes. And right before the intermission, at the end of the act, you saw him come back and blow a bunch of fake snow down before the lights went off.
3. The Spanish was a solo. It was probably the worst part, since I think she was suppossed to have a partner, but he wasn't strong enough.

And the night I went, a girl played Clara/Marie's brother(is it Michael?) but I know that a guy played him in another show. She was pretty good.
Also, as to the mouse/rat/ question, we always had mice AND rats. The mice were pretty much helpless, a whole crew of little things guarded by Mother Mouse, against Michael and the big, mean rats. (I think rats are cute, TOO. Why are they the bad guys?)
That's probably just what we did, though, so I don't know whether yours are mice or rats!

Actually the mouse/rat argument goes back to the original story, which is entitled "Der Nussknacker und der Mausekonig" by E.T.A. Hoffman, that's "The Nutcracker and the Mouse King". It doesn't mention rats anywhere in the story. But if your production had big mean rats chasing poor defenseless little mice, that's about the way it is in the natural world. If you have mice, you don't have rats, and vice versa, and if you have chipmunks, you don't have either one, but they don't have chipmunks in Germany.

Clara's brother is usually Fritz, but with the renaming frenzy that seems so popular nowadays, he could be called anything, and hardly anybody would notice.

Mel Johnson,

Rusty Nickel was my brother. As you may know, he died way too soon at the age of 33. I wanted to thank you for your comment about him. I showed it to our mother and it made her day, possibly her year. Thank you, Joan Nickel Craig

Thank YOU, Ms. Craig.

Rusty was a light that failed too soon, and I still remember him with fondness. I had the sad honor of receiving your father's phone call to Joffrey to inform Basil Thompson that Rusty had died, and word of it was all over the company then. He had touched many of our dancers' lives and made them better.

Wow...this is an old thread, but i just can't stop reading it...Well. i guess i really have a totally different vision of the "Nutcracker" from national Ballet of Cuba. First, over there is not a seasonal ballet, hence it is performed as a regular ballet with productions off december, as there is not official acknowledment of Christmas. Then, there are no children involved in the production... all the characters are played by adults, "a la" 80's Bolshoi style. Also, no dark designed Drosselmayers. He is just a respectful old uncle without any complex freudian characterization. Finally, no "love story" feeling among characters whatsoever :(Clara/cousin, Clara/Nutcracker and so on) .So, straight to the point, the public's whole expectation from a Nutcracker performance is to go see 2 technically superb Fokine-based PDD, the"Sugar Plum Fairy" and the "Snow Queen/King".

Thanks for rediscovering this thread, cubanmiamiboy -- even if it is (for North America) a bit out of season. I love Mel's mock bah-humbug! introduction, though I also understand where Juliet, in her long post defending the institution that Nutcracker has become, is coming from.

For me the balance works out like this:

Best : the score; the rising, pulsating Christmas tree (Balanchine); the snow and music in the Snow-flake scene; the Sugar Plum pas de deux.

Worst: All versions I've seen of the mouse/rat battle; Maries/Claras who are too old for the part; all Freudian influences, or attempts to over-darken the Drosselmeyer character; those characters who just sit around the edges of the stage looking bored during the Act II divertissement.

Most fascinating viewing offstage: watching the faces and body language of first-time kids in the audience; also, watching the way the sit-up-in-your-seat excitement that most kids bring to Act I slowly fades as the very long (for kids) afternoon or evening proceeds.

i most admit that, although having a different opinion about the Snow PDD and the children, i couldn't stop laughing...!!
That was great, Mel!

I often remember and laugh at a reaction I never saw but only read about in an Anna Kisselgoff NYCB review: a little girl yelling to the Mouse King, "go home!"

Admittedly, it can't be easy to make a battle between giant vermin and mechanical toys look exciting...

Have you seen the new lighting in the Ballet San Jose version? It was an awesome sight. The costumes, lighting, staging- And comedy to boot... the snow flake dancers were floating on stage. It was enlightening to see all the adults and children enjoying such a tradition. The company dancers are truly professional bravo- to Ballet San Jose!

Another, reported by Jennifer Dunning:

To Ms. Dunning's credit, these were the final words of her review.
(This was at Monique Meunier's debut as Dewdrop, December 26, 1993.)

Gee, Mel...Bah, Humbug...

...and even out ot the Nut "season" i just discovered that the version of the Royal Ballet with Anthony Dowel and Leslie Collier is almost identical from the Ballet Nacional de Cuba one...

Not terribly surprising, as the RB version dips deep into the corporate memory of the company, and their first production was done by Sergeyev at the Old Vic Theatre, which had a TINY stage (not as small as the Mercury, but almost). I've seen a photo of the company onstage at the Vic and it was a large crowd in a cramped frame. Now, the NBCuba production was based on the Fedorova version, so SHE was trying to do what Pavlova did, and kept the Snow Queen and King in. After all, the transformation music and Snow Scene was Pavlova's "big ballet" for much of her career. Sergeyev kept them in because he didn't have enough machinery backstage to work the Act I transformation, and besides his audience expected them.

Thank you Mel, as usual, for your valuable information. I found some considerations by Mme. Alonso on the subject in an old program of the Cuban "Nutcracker" back from my days in Havana. I tried to do my best doing the translation, thinking that it would be interesting to share it. I know, I'm a hardcore fan of her, but still, it's worth to read it...Please, forget my grammar mistakes. I'm still working on my english...

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE "NUTCRACKER"
BY PRIMA BALLERINA ASSOLUTA MME. ALICIA ALONSO

"Although during some years the National Ballet of Cuba did not maintain in its repertoire the complete version of the Nutcracker, there have been interpreted frequently, in assemblies made by me, important fragments of the work, like the Grand pas of deux of the Sugar Plum Fairy of the second act, as well as the Snow Scene of the first act, the Trepak/Russian Dance (inserted in our extract of the Sleeping Beauty as Aurora's Wedding) and the Waltz of the Flowers.
.The complete version that I presented, with the happy coincidence of the fiftieth anniversary of the National Ballet of Cuba, I conceived it in the first place with the greater possible fidelity to the original style of the work established by Ivánov , who contributed with his own ideas within the inheritance of Petipa's style, which I also respected and followed as the choreographic original pattern. As far as the dramatic art, without harming the conventions of the style and the theater practices of the time, it happens like with other works of XIX century ; I had to rework it obtaining the synthesis and the logic that the today public demands, but in the most authentic representation of the classic inheritance.
Essentially I confer a great importance to the Grand Pas de Deux of the second act, and to a certain extent I have taken it as a stylistic base or starting point for the assembly of all the whole work. For that, it seemed to me useful to emphasize and to establish some important precisions on this PDD, given its model character inside the classical tradition and because besides, happily, the version that we present with the National Ballet of Cuba corresponds faithfully to the original one created by Ivánov, from both choreographically and stylistic point of view. The PDD of the second act of Nutcracker was, during decades, an important number in my repertoire. I included it frequently in concerts and even almost until my retirement I continued dancing its beautiful Grand Adagio. To give the well deserved historic importance of this PDD within the ballet, I have placed special care in the purity of the style and the strict respect to what is conserved of the choreography thought by Ivánov. In this days, different versions can be seen around the world, not always fortunate in their choreographic conception and style. When in the middle of the 40's i was getting prepared to dance for the first time this famous classical duet, I basically followed the choreography that Alicia Márkova and Anton Dolin taught me. The version of Márkova was very loyal to the Imperial one , since she had been fallowing the first one that was being done out of the Russian environment, carried out in England by Nikolai Serguéiev in the beginning of the 30's. This was very important, for which the choreography of Ivánov had started being forgotten. During the 20's, Fiodor Lopukov had done an entirely new version of Nutcracker for the Kirov , and at the same time that Serguéiev staged the Nutcracker of Ivánov in London, Vasili Vainonen premiered his new version at the Kirov. As for the Bolshoi , since many years before, Alexander Gorski had carried out his own version, which was substituted later on by that of Vainonen. Although I only knew the PDD just as had been carried to London by Serguéiev, i investigated and analyzed everything that was possible, trying to achieve, choreographically ,the greatest accuracy and stylistic purity according to the original one of Ivánov, and for that I had the invaluable aid of Alexandra Fedórova, who had been one of the most influential teachers in my formation. Fedórova, sister-in-law of Mikhail Fokine, had graduated at the beginning of the century in the Imperial School of San Petersburg, and then became a noticeable soloist at the Marinsky, where she belonged for many years. She was also a person of great balletic culture, and possessed an extraordinary choreographic memory, which permitted her to mount with success in 1928 the original complete version of Ivánov for the Ballet of the Opera of Riga, where she worked for a long time; and in 1940, to carry that version to the Russian Ballet of Montecarlo, where i learned and interpreted in 1957.

I had then the opportunity to compare the Serguéiev version with the version recalled by Fedórova, and I found that, in reference to the second act PDD,the choreographies were essentially identical. Still, one should understand that interpreting a classical work with stylistic and choreographic fidelity does not mean to dance it exactly the same as in its premiere. The technique and the scenic behavior are not maintained frozen in time, but they evolve. The technique is done more refined and the expressive point of view goes to a greater simplicity, to a synthesis. The talent of the artist will be shown if he or she is capable of getting to the spectator of today and corresponding to this days psychology and culture, without betraying the choreography neither the style.

In the interpretation of the SPF PDD of Nutcracker it should not be forgotten that, although is a purely academic PDD, its spirit and profusion of details make it ,within the classical style, a work totally different from other PDD's-( like that of the third act of The Sleeping Beauty for example)-. The characters of the Nutcracker PDD -(in the English speaking countries the female role is known as The Sugar-Plum Fairy, and in France as The Fee Dragée)- belong to a world of fantasy. In this they coincide with Princess Aurora and Prince Desire of Sleeping Beauty . But Aurora and Desire are, within the story,within the fantasy, "real" characters. And as such, their elegance is more "courteous" and the dynamics of their movements more "human"; the mechanics of the academicism is shown a little more conscious or accentuated. Aurora and Desire seek in a more evident way the line and the elegance, the noble or aristocratic gestures. While, in Nutcracker, the characters of the Sugar Plum Fairy and her Cavalier are the quintessence of the fantasy: they belong to an impossible country of candies and dazzling fantasies, conceived in the dream of a girl. This dream world is declared in a fabulously exquisite way, so much like the illusions of the infancy are capable of creating. Therefore, even being a classical duet, in every moment the dance express certain dazzling romanticism . It's like a sweetness with sparkles, inside the classical sobriety. On the other hand the Cavalier is a gentleman , a fantasy soldier that, without stop being classic, has certain demicaractère tone. That is expressed in a certain mood, certain martial mannerisms in his positions, and in the musical accents of his dance, a little more marked or "cutting". The female dancer, that in this case is a fairy shows, within the romantic majesty, a lot of femininity and modesty. Her dance should be light, airy, of great delicacy, with the accent very markedly up. It is a sensation that recalls a romantic ballet, (like the second act of Giselle, for example), but this is an effect that,achieved within the specific form in which the technique in the classical way is used within this "Pseudo-romantic" style, makes it different from Giselle. It is not easy, of course, to meet this so extensive range of elements in a PDD that imposes large technical demands. These differences that i have indicated, illustrated with the comparison of this two different PDD's-(Sleeping Beauty vs. Nutcracker)- are very importance. It is a matter of "accents", of different views within the surreal world, that allows to differentiate the essence of these two works at first sight very clearly. In general, if we fail to qualify our dance and our interpretation, to give different tones and colors to a technique whose base is the same one, all we dance can look the same , because a deficient interpretation can dangerously impoverish the art of the ballet in a very dramatic way.

Another very characteristic moment of the Nutcracker corresponds to the Snow Scene. Here the central focus is another important PDD, danced by the Snow Queen and her King. This is a duet that requires an extreme classicism, but with a completely unreal projection, that transmit the spectator the sense of the ephemeral thing, the dance of two ethereal beings made of snow, that can dissolve in any moment. Therefore they should be totally impersonal, cold and very airy, which makes them of very difficult interpretation, reason that explains why this PDD is eliminated of many versions. In this scene, the snowflakes Corps should have, similarly, the same con-substantial, ephemeral character as the royal snow couple. All this differentiates the Snow Scene —as for style and expressive form— of the so characteristic scenes of "ballet blancs" in other works of the great classical repertoire. "

Mme. Alicia Alonso

Now you can tell why do i take so seriously the "Nutcracker"...

At a performance of Festival Ballet Providence's Nutcracker last month, a little girl (maybe 3 years old) sat in her mother's lap across the aisle from me, positively enthralled by what was going on onstage. When the Mouse King appeared, however, she started screaming, and, visibly frightened, shouted "Get me out of here!!!!" (which her poor mother promptly did).

But for the incidence of fright, it reminded me of one of my own daughters' first Nutcracker. It was NYCB's in 1981 and my daughter was 3 years old. Whoever says that 3 year olds shouldn't go to the ballet does not know children like mine. My daughter was so completely, fascinatedly, drawn into the story that not a peep came from her the entire ballet, only wide-eyed amazement.

Parents who narrate the whole ballet, play-by-play, to their little ones can be irksome, especially when they get things wrong! On a different day this past season, this occurred in the seats directly behind mine, with the dad doing most of the talking. The ballet then became an interaction between him and his daughter, instead of between the daughter and the story on stage. Everything, but everything, got explained. Most annoying was the little girl repeatedly asking 'where's Clara?" whenever she didn't see her, of if Clara was offstage. By Act II, the repeated phrase was "I want to go home now".

Here's a lovely vintage-looking pic of the Cuban production during the Snow PDD. The King is recent defector Principal Miguel Angel Blanco.

http://www.danzahoy.com/pages/members/51_0.../critica/02.jpg

My husband and I staged our first production of Nutcracker this year for our school-the audience member that got the most attention was our three year old son. He seems to be sensitive to music; he cries in our car to opera, dramatic "big" symphonies, and certain sections of Nutcracker. He cried everyday to Snow, Chinese, Arabian, and Flowers while I listened and tried to think of ideas. (It wasn't very productive) Anyway, my parents brought him to the performance and besides him yelling "My Pappy!!!Paaaappppyyy" when my husband was onstage as Drosselmeyer and "Want to dance with Momma!"while I was Mrs. Stalhbaum, he cried on cue throughout (guess what) snow, chinese, arabian, flowers. My students began to recognize his cry....

What do people think about reworkings of the Nutcracker?I'm thinking of Graham Murphy's Nutcracker. I found it moving in that it paid homage to those Dancers who came to Australia before the war and gave us a ballet tradition which had not existed. I also liked some of the reworking of the actual dances particularly the snow sequence although the flashbacks to the red army as rats was pretty horrible.

Unnaceptable. Productions to look at: Sir Peter Wright's and Mme. Alicia Alonso's.

I'm afraid I have to disagree. Not with the references to Wright and Alonso, but to the caveat about reworked Nutcrackers. I love what I know of the original choreography, but I don't have the same protective feeling about it that I do about other works from the classical canon like Sleeping Beauty and Swan Lake. Over time, Nut has become as much a 'holiday show' as a ballet, filling a large and varied footprint for many dance companies, and I have appreciated many different productions of it. I know that as a critic I don't treat it in the same way I do other performances, and my expectations of a new production are quite different. In some ways, Nut reminds me of alternate staging of Shakespeare, where you see Midsummer Night's Dream as a 50s sock-hop or Macbeth as a Western -- it's elastic enough to embrace a wide variety of alternatives.

Don't be afraid. It is totally acceptable

I do


Wrong way

I do, besides Wright and Alonso

It wasn't intended to be.
.

CHristian, what do you thinik of Balanchine's version? or Vainonen's?

I admire Balanchine's first act beyond anything. And Vainonen's is also wonderful, in a different way.

I think that at least in the US, the Balanchine has become the production of record. It doesn't reproduce the Ivanov choreography in any significant way, but it certainly keeps the spirit of the original libretto.

Given its film version and video distribution, it's spread fairly widely, and European and Asian students are familiar with it. They're surprised to learn how little motion-picture effect was used in the filming.

Balanchine's...well, as i said before, it lacks what i consider to be the stylistic heart of the work, the "Sugar Plum Fairy PDD". I beg pardon to the majority of this board...but i find this version mutilated.
Vainonen's i have it, and saw it only once, but honestly, i don't have too many memories of it...have to revisit it.

If you want to cause a riot, go see the Mihail Chemiakin/Kirill Simonov version done by the Kirov/Mariinsky Ballet that was released on Universal/Decca DVD late last year. Its very weird take on the Nutcracker story made me wonder did Quentin Tarantino or the Wachowski brothers had anything to do with it.

Oh, God...

Vainonen? I remember how deeply frustrated I was when I first saw it. There are six people in it. I'm a big fan of the Ivanov, and Balanchine's version frustrated me too, but not as much as the Vainonen. As presentational as pas de deux are, having other partners in there seems to spoil the intimacy of the work. I could never quite figure out why, in the Bonynge recording for "Art of the Prima Ballerina", he took the cut that he did, but it became more obvious to me after reading Wiley. He was working from Markova's performance cuts, and she had cut the music used for the "magic" effect of the little wagon under the chiffon.

Ok, so i just revisited my Vainonen's DVD, and Mel Johnson just perfectly described all that can be said about it. Way to many people in the PDD!...
There is also the Bolshoi's production, with Maximova and Vasiliev, which during the beggining of the Adagio are almost motionless, using some praying-like postures and too slow patterns...also a definitive turn off...

Vasiliev and Maximova are in the Grigorovich version. The Vainonen version is available on DVD with Larissa Lezhnina and Victor Baranov.
I actually like the Vainonen version very much, but I think that probably is because I grew up with it - you can't believe how many times I saw that video..

I agree 100%. It was the weirdest and strangely ugly ballet I've ever seen. I am almost beginning to contend that Chemiakin must have gotten some inspiration from Quentin Tarantino because its set and costume design was a major mockery of the other versions of the Nutcracker we all know and love.

Meanwhile, i propose to pay tribute to Tchaikowsky, Petipa, Pavlova, Sergueiev, Fokine, Mme. Fedorova Sir Peter Wright and Mme. Alonso for giving us balletomanes some beautiful hints of a truly classic who screams in desperation reclaiming the same royal treatment the others have.