Cathy, I think that the general consensus on the subject, in the French thread, was that we all agreed that gratuitious nudity wasn't necessary... But I noticed also, that amongst all posters, those who were dancers were a majority to say 'why not?' when it's justified... A bigger number of posters who were against were not dancers. Does it make a difference? I'm not sure, but I often notice that dancers are less scared (or more ready) to show themselves in their birthday suit!

I'm neither for nor against nudity on stage; what I am against is choreographers who make the cheap easy choices in lieu of reasoned thought and inspiration.

<small>[ 31 March 2003, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: salzberg ]</small>

The Metropolitan Opera used a nude dancer in Macbeth. They are an AGMA company. SF Opera also had a nude dancer in Turandot in 1977.

Perhaps dancers love nudity but very strangely they refuse to make Teshigawara ballet "Air" if he makes dance naked what it was his first choice. They were all dancers, and they all refused to participate to this ballet if he doesn't change it. It change it and they appear dressed.
I remember that Denard was boring to dance naked in Martyre de Saint sebastien from Bob Wilson and win to have a string and to not be nake on stage. All the POB dancer I know doesn't want to dance nake and I remember that in a dress rehearsal of Giselle, at the end, Kader Belarbi kept his string to appear on stage. I don't know but all these fact seems to show that at least POB dancer refuse to dance naked, or don't love it. For Bella Figura the two girls (Zusperreguy and Pujol) wait the all last minute to retire their dress before their naked passage and Pujol said she didn't love to be naked on stage.

Perhaps for modern dancer, it doesn't shock but for classical dancer they don't love to appear nake on stage.

<small>[ 31 March 2003, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: Cathy ]</small>

Cathy, in this instance generalising from POB could be misleading. Classically trained dancers from Northern Europe would in general have far less of a problem with nudity than their French counterparts I suspect.

Although I believe I agree with Cathy that a classical dancer would be more likely to object.

The Lock/Kylian performance at POB last year had some nudity in it, but I have to say it was fabulous on all levels. I think that there may be pieces that to show how beautiful dance is have to be done in the nude, and this may be one of the rare ones. The dancers were beautiful to watch, and it seemed to fit with the entire piece. Also, they looked comfortable on stage. Did any of them have issues with dancing this piece? After watching how effortlessly they danced, I just can't believe it.
That being said, I just don't see it being done ( and as well recieved ) at most American classical ballet companies.

I never saw Mike Smuin's Shinju, performed by the San Francisco Ballet, but I know it had some semi-nudity (topless female) in it. Can those of you who saw it (or were in it) give your impressions of the audience reaction?

Well, I have clarified this issue with my AGMA rep. He misinformed me as to the nudity issue. With our company, it is in the contract that nudity is not allowed, but that it is not a universal rule.

Someone earlier mentioned that men are less likely to dance nude because they need to keep that stuff out of the way, as a paraphrase.

But really, just the thought of dancing at all topless makes me cringe. Im not the most well endowed of women, for sure, but dancing without any support sounds just painful. Maybe im just a wuss!

Deborah Jowitt writes in the Village Voice about a performance by Daniel Léveillé's company:

There are certainly many here who know far more about ballet then myself... but let me add a couple of "mom" thoughts to the discussion.

My young one loves the ballet. This is not an exaggeration. She reads all she can on the subject, and can't get enough of the music, etc, works every day on balance, etc. I'm sure that all of the experienced dancers here can relate to that innocent, deep love for ballet. Seeing a yearly Nutcracker, or children's theater satisified her before, but no longer does.

When nudity enters the ballet, of course we cannot take her. And more to the point, when it seems gratitious eroticism is added, it completely closes off our segment of the audience.

I'm not talking about the advanced sophisticated student, but the young dancer who desires to put her heart into the art.

Ballet is a passionate art. But when we find ourselves in a position of watching Romeo caressing Juliet's breasts (Boston Ballet this season), I can't help but wonder if this is what Shakespeare intended. Does nudity or gratitious sexuality really have a place in classical ballet?

I'm just a mom of a student, as I said, not a person necessarily qualified to judge these things.

Thanks for letting me ramble... *smile*

Just of my own personal point of view, I really dont understand why nudity has to be such a bad thing...

It kind of upsets me that American society has gotten to the point that just the sight of a nude body has gotten sinful and perverted! In my view, there is nothing more natural than the human body and its definately not "dirty" and its nothing to be ashamed of. What about a body part could harm a child? As long as the dance was not perversely sexualized (in a kinky sort of way... i dont think a kid would be ready for that) i wouldnt hesitate to take my child to a ballet with nudity in it. There is a huge difference between a semi-nude pas de deux and penthouse!

I understand and completely agree abour your concerns about age appropriate programming, Mom. But I don't think all nudity in dance, or caressing in "Romeo and Juliet",for example, is, by defintion "gratuitous". To me gratuitous, means irrelevant to the theme of the choreograpy, or stuck in there for pruruient interest. Certainly, since Romeo and Juliet is about a life and death, overwhelming passion, a choreographer's interpretation of that theme gives them wide discretion, in my opinion. Again, it all depends on the theme of the work. If a work is focused on the body, or love, an artist uses their creative, imaginative capabilites to represent that. After all, the medium of dance STARTS with the human body.

<small>[ 07 May 2003, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: trina ]</small>

Trina said:
But I don't think all nudity in dance, or caressing in "Romeo and Juliet",for example, is, by defintion "gratuitous".

I COMPLETELY agree with this sentence.

There are dances where nudity may indeed be appropriate ..However these are not usually ambigious, and don't usually pop up in the classical ballet repetoire (unless I'm mistaken) I guess I'm just missing its application in classical ballet.

You have a point re: caressing. If some modern ballet performance would have had something like this, I would not be surprised. But Romeo and Juliet? Shakespeare? The classics?

seems to that Juliet allowing Romeo to do that, in that time, in that era of human history, from Shakespeare, would be as odd as...I don't know..a weak Odette.

<small>[ 07 May 2003, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Mom_of_dancer ]</small>