re: modern & ballet a.k.a. whatever

Cynthia A. Roses (
Mon, 19 May 1997 23:49:38 -0400


Your point is well taken in regards to modern dance. Unfortunately I
don't know if the dance world can do without codifying and labeling. I
am currently writing critical essays for the "International Dictionary
of Modern Dance." It would probably be better to call it contemporary
dance as this seems to be more inclusive to different styles and less
stamped with visual images of past choreographers, but of course, no one
asked me.

Here in Sarasota, FL, which is where I am now experiencing the dance
world we have one company that is classically oriented. Now, I must say
when I interview the artistic director and ask him about his ballet
choreography he said he now is at a point where he can do whatever is in
his mind whether it is a ballet step or not, which I think is an
excellent way to work and develop your choreographic vocabulary. But
ballet is still not out of the fairy tale land and into the real world
here in Sarasota. If it doesn't wear a tutu they don't want to see it.
But I must say when Tharp and Momix were here they sold out.

Clement Crisp, the noted British ballet critic wrote in a recent music
magazine about the ballet world something to the effect that ballet
needs new choreographers to take it a step further. He cited Balanchine
and Ashton as taking the foundations of ballet and pushing them to new
limits creating hybrid techniques. I don't see anyone doing this today.
Maybe I'm blinded by living where I do and not seeing enough of what's
happening on the cutting edge. I hope so. I love the classics, but I
want to see the classics of the future being choreographed.

Cynthia Roses-Thema
DANCE Technique Newsletter