Company survey: cross-country repertoire.

It was a watershed year--1965. The National for the Arts came into being, and two years before, the brilliantly controversial Ford Foundation grants to seven ballet companies had set the dance world to celebrating and criticizing. Back then a goodly number of the thirty-six ballet companies included in this survey either did not exist or were performing infrequently. Technically, quite a few were not yet able to dance the major works they yearned to have; for repertoire they depended strongly on their artistic directors.

Now, every one of those three dozen, which are at the heart of professional ballet across America, can tackle whatever they want. That might include George Balanchine's whirlwind Ballo della Regina, Peter Martins's Fearful Symmetries, or Choo-San Goh's Birds of Paradise. The only mitigating factor is the number of dancers they employ. It ranges from twenty to fifty.

New York City-based companies are not included in this study--no New York City Ballet, Dance Theatre of Harlem, or Feld Ballets/NY; no American Ballet Theatre, Joffrey Ballet (prior to its departure for Chicago), or Ballet Hispanico--although their influence shows up in those alumni who have gone on to direct regional companies and in the repertoire that sifts down from them. Instead, this is about companies that have made their homes and are spreading their own brand of influence far from Manhattan.

These companies are more varied structurally than they are aesthetically. A few, notably Boston Ballet, Houston Ballet, Pacific Northwest Ballet, and San Francisco Ballet, are organizations of national--even international--stature. Then there are the tautly made concert companies such as Dayton Ballet, Ohio Ballet, Richmond Ballet, and Washington Ballet. Some, such as Atlanta, Austin, Hartford, Oakland, and Sacramento, are strongly identified with their home communities, while others are in transition, gradually growing beyond their communities. Cleveland, Colorado, and Miami City are typical.

Who are the artistic directors of these companies? In this decade of unimpressive funding, when trustees tend to overvalue business acumen as they select artistic directors, it's reassuring to find that twenty-six of the directors surveyed still produce a healthy portion of their companies' choreographic output. This is all the more remarkable when one considers the range of administrative responsibility that is theirs. Evidently, despite trustee pressure, the artists are still in charge of their art.

If one were to draw a national family tree, one would find NYCB offspring such as Daniel Duell (Chicago), Paul Mejia (Dallas-Fort Worth), Bryan Pitts and Laura Flagg (Oklahoma City), Kent Stowell and Francia Russell (Seattle), Helgi Tomasson (San Francisco), and Patricia Wilde (Pittsburgh); until this year Robert Barnett (Atlanta) and Todd Bolender (Kansas City) would also have been included.

There are a few Royal Ballet and London Festival Ballet offspring, notably John Hart (Ballet West), Alun Jones (Louisville), and Ben Stevenson (Houston). ABT alumni include Bruce Marks (Boston), Dennis Nahat (Cleveland/San Jose), Kirk Peterson (Hartford), and Basil Thompson (Milwaukee). Dermot Burke (Dayton) and Michael Uthoff (Ballet Arizona) are former Joffrey dancers; and there is a cross section of directors with eclectic backgrounds.

This survey of the companies and their repertoires extends over five years. Of course, it starts with The Nutcracker. Of the entire group, Ohio Ballet stands alone in its refusal to engage in the universal Christmas ritual. Founding director Heinz Poll staunchly adheres to the chamber ballet identity of his ensemble. He also draws only on the twentieth century for his repertoire. Until the advent of Dermot Burke in 1993, Dayton Ballet was also a Nutcracker holdout.

The number of Nutcrackers performed by the other companies totals more than four times that of any other full-length ballet or combination of short works. There is absolutely no other ballet that approaches it in popularity, and Boston Ballet is the leader, with forty-eight performances per year.

After The Nutcracker, what are the most-performed full-length ballets? Most observers would automatically say the Petipa-Ivanov Swan Lake and the Petipa Sleeping Beauty, but this is simply not so. The strongest contender is Romeo and Juliet. Nineteen of the companies currently have productions of this ballet. While the Prokofiev score is universally used for the full-length version, most of the artistic directors devise their own choreography. (Only Pennsylvania Ballet has acquired the version originally staged in 1962 by John Cranko for Stuttgart Ballet.) Most of their productions are probably influenced by Leonid Lavrovsky's for the Bolshoi or by Kenneth MacMillan's Royal Ballet version, which was created in 1965 (probably with an eye on Cranko's).

Second in popularity to Romeo and Juliet is Cinderella, again in a variety of guises. Of the fifteen versions currently being danced, the most popular in America is Ben Stevenson's. He has set it not only on his own company but on four others.

With fourteen productions each, Giselle and A Midsummer Night's Dream are tied for fourth place; Swan Lake turns up in fifth, with thirteen productions. Here the choreographers usually share program credit with Petipa and Ivanov. Also in the top ten are Coppelia (twelve productions), The Sleeping Beauty (eight), Dracula (seven), Cannina Burana (five), Don Quixote (five), and Alice in Wonderland (four).

Occasionally an artistic director plans a full-length ballet as a daring departure, one that is all the more so when high production costs and extensive rehearsal time are factored in. Although I've seen only one of them, my personal choices in this category would be Boston's Abdallah (retitled Tales of the Arabian Nights), Bruce Wells's The Great Gatsby (staged for Pittsburgh), and Nahat's Celebrations and Ode, which embraces Beethoven's entire Seventh and Ninth symphonies.

Probably none of these productions can claim the power and originality of Martha Grabam's nearly forty-year-old Clytemnestra. One would have thought that by now a ballet choreographer would have been sufficiently intrigued by its unusual flashback structure to come up with something comparably daring in the classical idiom. Instead, most of the choreographers adhere to the nineteenth-century ballet d'action format, with its alternation of dramatic narrative and divertissements.

During the past five years, 140 guest or resident choreographers have been kept busy creating or re-creating their works. Peter Anastos heads the list with twenty assignments. One of the reasons he is so much in demand is that he is able to come up with that dance rarity--the comic, or at least lighthearted, ballet. His Yes, Virginia, Another Piano Ballet graces several repertoires, as does Lisa de Ribere's The Mighty Casey. Lynne Taylor-Corbett, with thirteen, is sought after for her soundly structured works. His engaging Company B has helped Paul Taylor move into a tie with her. Val Caniparoli, with ten, is in demand, particularly on the West Coast; William Soleau, whose works often appear in the Richmond Ballet repertoire, follows with eight.

Other guest choreographers with great mileage are Monica Levy, David Bintley, Graham Lustig, and James Kudelka. The entire list is a veritable cornucopia, ranging from choreographers such as Lew Christensen, Agnes de Mille, Eugene Loring, and Antony Tudor--who are all deceased, but whose ballets, particularly Tudor's Lilac Garden, de Mille's Rodeo, and Loring's Billy the Kid, continue in steady demand--to essentially modem dance choreographers such as Donald Byrd, Laura Dean, Ulysses Dove, Bill T. Jones, Donald McKayle, Bebe Miller, Elisa Monte, Charles Moulton, David Parsons, Eleo Pomare, Peter Pucci, and Doug Varone.

Despite this last group of names, the choices are predominantly conservative, even among the smaller companies, whose lower budgets permit a certain amount of leeway. The drop in federal and state funding has a lot to do with this. It's no surprise that financial instability means choosing works with assured popular appeal.

I have always thought it more productive for free-lance choreographers to become attached to established companies. This gives them security and enables them to improve their skills without assuming the responsibilities of the artistic directors. It also provides a chance to work on a consistent body of dancers. But relatively few companies currently have resident choreographers. The most notable exception is Washington Ballet, which has always given them a nest. The most recent incumbents are company dancer John Goding and former company dancer Lynn Cote. The late Choo-San Goh also established his career in Washington.

Before his resignation this year, Bruce Wells was a bulwark of Pittsburgh Ballet Theatre. Other residents include Jill Eathorne Bahr (Charleston Ballet Theatre), Val Caniparoli (Oakland), Jimmy Gamonet de los Heros (Miami City), Trey McIntyre (Houston), Daniel Pelzig (Boston), and Thor Sutowski (Ballet South).

Some companies, particularly Fort Worth Dallas, Miami City, and Pacific Northwest, rely on such a substantial core of works by Balanchine that he has almost assumed the identity of resident choreographer. That was not so during his lifetime. Before he died in 1983, he literally gave his works to a handful of friends. Artistic directors such as Lew Christensen (San Francisco), Barbara Weisberger (Pennsylvania), and E. Virginia Williams (Boston) did not have to pay for their acquisitions. But the spread was not wide. Balanchine distributed about five ballets per year. Forty-one of his works are now circulating in this country alone. As expected, two vintage works, Serenade (nineteen companies) and Concerto Barocco (seventeen) head the list. They are followed by Allegro Brillante (fifteen), Who Cares? (thirteen), the "Rubies" section of Jewels twelve), The Four Temperaments (twelve), Apollo (ten), Theme and Variations (ten), Square Dance (eight), and Agon (eight).

While royalties on specific ballets go to people designated in Balanchine's will, most of the ballets have been placed under the watchful eye of Barbara Horgan. Assisted by Beth Barbre, she heads the Balanchine Trust. Horgan, a warm and attractive woman, began as assistant manager of NYCB in 1953. In 1963 she became Balanchine's personal assistant, and is today one of very few people who refer to him as "George" rather than as "Mr. B." Horgan knows and loves Balanchine's works. More important, she has become thoroughly acquainted with the companies requesting them. She also listens carefully to what the repetiteurs have to say when they return from their assignments. Her research is mixed with a generous dose of what used to be called "feminine intuition." For example, when she dispatches someone to a company, she seems to sense which repetiteur will collaborate most harmoniously with a given artistic director. Her current stable of those setting ballets contains Paul Boos, Elyse Borne, John Clifford, Suzanne Farrell, Susan Hendl, Patricia Neary, Victoria Simon, Richard Tanner, and Karin von Aroldingen. A contract to perform a given ballet usually lasts two years. If a company wishes to renew the contract, Horgan sends someone to check on the ballet's condition.

What does it cost to acquire a Balanchine ballet? The fee is set in accordance with the company's budget. Horgan also takes other things into consideration. If the company has gone all out by hiring two costly guest choreographers for a given program, she suggests a relatively modest Balanchine work to round out the evening.

Because Balanchine created ballets for all sorts of circumstances, Horgan draws upon this flexibility in disseminating his works. Wisely, she feels that it is the trust's responsibility to expose dancers and their audiences to as broad a range as possible. She knows that all of the ballets, complicated or casual, are models of structure and musical sensitivity. Although she runs the Balanchine Trust in a businesslike way, it is really a mission to her. This wide distribution of Balanchine ballets is challenging dancers and inspiring emerging choreographers. It is a fine influence, but is it enough?

The past three decades have brought a heady increase in the technical and theatrical level of America's cross-country ballet companies. Now they are ready for the next step. It's time for them to come forth with indigenous choreography of their own. In other words, there is need for a creative tsunami, a tidal wave that will make each company's repertoire more individual and that will incite more boldness of taste in the American audience. The twentieth century in American ballet should end with a bang. Instead, there are hints of a well-polished whimper.