Sarah Kaufman of The Washington Post went fiercely on-record today to say America’s love affair with Balanchine must end: Discuss.
(I’ll kick things off by calling bullshit on Kaufman’s insistence that Balanchine “cared little for épaulement,” and offering up Xiomara Reyes as an example of one who does is even weirder. On the other hand, Tudor Estate trustee Sally Brayley Bliss’s observance that Balachinism metastasized in the U.S. in large part because “it was easier to copy him than to copy Ashton, Tudor and Robbins” is spot-on.)
trailerpilot 
Agreed. The epaulement thing is very wrong.
Every once in a while a critic gets a big page to fill. Why they almost invariably use it to cry foul on the larger scene is beyond me.
By: Natalie on 05:13::2009
at 21:44