Ardis Krainik No. 04 [April 22, 1987]

Transcript (Download)

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if I can help you.

Are we ready? Here we go.

Do you remember, can you recall the very first time you met Ruth Page? Do you remember, can you recall the very first time you met Ruth Page? I first met Ruth Page in 1954.

She came into the Lyric Opera Offices where I was working as a clerk.

She came into the Lyric Opera Offices where I was working as a clerk.

She was the most glamorous artistic personality I had ever met.

As a matter of fact, she was probably the first glamorous artistic personality I had ever met.

I found her such a gemmelle type, scintillating and charming.

It didn't matter to her that any of us in the office were lowly clerk typists.

She loved all of us and was nice to all of us in a way that warms your heart.

To me, Ruth is one of the really great people of this world, not just for her artistic abilities, but for her humanness, her kindness, her sympathy to her, to everybody.

It's true.

She treats everybody the same.

She treats your secretary very much differently than she treats one of her dancers.

Her love for her dancers is always terrific.

Whenever there are parties, sometimes you invite the stars and you don't invite the little people.

Ruth invited everybody to her parties, invited the stars and the other people.

They were all exactly the same.

She loved them all and they all loved her.

It was a remarkable thing to witness and to observe.

That's what I liked about her.

A lot of Ruth's career was tied up in choreographing ballet sequences for the opera.

I don't think that people exactly understand that there's ballet in opera.

Can you sort of in a nutshell explain what the demands of or what ballet in opera is? Ballet in opera has a very interesting history.

Grand opera, really grand opera, must have ballet in it.

There must be a ballet sequence.

At the Opera in Paris, there was never an opera that didn't have a ballet.

If the composer hadn't written one, he was asked to write one so that the ballet could perform.

That's just sort of an anaside.

Now in our present day, things have changed and some of the music in opera that's written for ballet isn't performed by ballet anymore.

It's performed by the chorus or something else.

The styles have changed a little bit, but still there are some wonderful pieces that are written in ballets, in operas, just for the ballet to dance.

There are not long sequences.

Sometimes there are very short sequences.

But every opera company has to have a ballet company attached to it to do the ballet sequences in the operas.

The choreographer of opera ballet has different kinds of demands.

Could you describe? Ruth Page was for us both the choreographer and the ballet mistress.

She did the design of the choreography.

She did the steps.

She arranged, she was the stage director so to speak, but in ballet it's called a choreographer.

She made up the plays that the ballet was to follow.

In addition to that, as the ballet mistress for Lyric Opera of Chicago, she procured the ballet and put it together as a company and engaged the ballet dancers.

I worked with Ruth all those years as the person who was her so to speak right arm in the engagement of all of these dancers for the corps and for the soloists and the stars.

Now choreographing for opera is different than just going and making up a ballet for something else.

What kinds of elements would you say impinge on a choreographer who has to make up a ballet that has to fit into an opera? Well, I don't think that it has to be different for opera than it is for anything else.

The music is the motivating factor and the costuming is a motivating factor.

This year, for example, when we did Giaconda, there was some conversation about doing Giaconda in the manner in which it was done in San Francisco, which was not a classical ballet.

But we decided here in Chicago that we wanted to do a classical ballet.

And so there are many artistic decisions that are made that directly influence how the choreographer puts together a certain piece.

When we did Paradise Lost, we didn't have the music.

And it was choreographed without music for four minutes.

And the composer finally wrote two minutes of music.

And there were two minutes which were filled with a certain kind of sound, which was interesting.

And then a minute of silence as well.

So things happen in an artistic world in a very different sort of way.

But the piece itself, the music of the piece itself, is what dictates what the choreography should be.

Now every choreographer has a different idea.

He or she hears the music and thinks of what kind of steps, what sort of dance would be best for that.

And puts it into practice.

I don't know any better way of saying, A, what a choreographer is, or B, how he or she works in opera.

Can you remember any specific instances, any anecdotes about Ruth working on an opera, working with you because you were of course involved, and some unusual, surprising or funny things that happened? Well, every time anybody asks me for an anecdote about opera, things flee out of my mind.

And I can only remember things I don't dare tell anybody.

But I remember the auditions that we held year after year, and Ruth's demand for beautiful people.

After all, you want to have beautiful dancers.

And her demand for beautiful legs, beautiful feet and ankles for the girls.

I can't think of any anecdotes about Ruth that were particularly funny offhand.

If I think of one as we're talking, I'll...

Okay, just throw it in.

Do you remember when Rudolf Nureyev came to dance? One of the most important things that Ruth Page did for dance in America, and certainly opera dance in America, was to persuade Rudolf Nureyev to come to dance with Lyric Opera of Chicago.

He had first made his American debut after he defected from Russia.

It was in 1963, and he danced in Brooklyn with Ruth.

It was Ruth who arranged all of this.

And Rudy was one of her favorite people, and still is of course to this day.

I saw him in Paris not so long ago, and he asked how Ruth was.

That was the first thing he asked me.

But soon after the Brooklyn engagement, he came to dance Prince Igor with Sonia Arova, and it was Ruth who brought him here.

He made a sensation in Prince Igor, because those are the very famous Polovtsian dances, and everyone has heard those.

He just went around the stage in a manner here to fore unseen in America.

And he danced, I wish I knew the names of the steps, but his leaps, he was poetry in motion, and it was the sensation of the 1963 season, and one of Ruth's great triumphs.

I've always wondered, when you come to the ballet segment of an opera, if there is ever a problem between the choreographer and the director of the ballet with the choreographer saying, we need more room, you've got to move the chorus back.

Does that ever happen? Or does the choreographer have to fit in the space that's allotted and that's it? The choreographer and the director are very often at odds, but the director is the boss in this case.

It depends on how much clout the choreographer has, I suppose, and some choreographers have decided they want to be stage directors of the opera so that they didn't have this problem.

There are other problems with the space in an opera house, and that is that the chorus can never see the conductor when the ballet is dancing in front of them.

That's one of the big problems that we hear more about.

But the choreographer must of course look out for his or her chickens to see that they have enough room to dance, and when the dance is going on, they are primary and everybody moves back and gives them the space that they need.

Usually the choreographer and the director of an opera, the stage director of an opera, get together early on to talk about the production, the demands of the production, and how the stage director conceives of it.

If it's to be done 20th century style, it's to be done 18th century style, then the choreography has to fit the stage director's conception of the opera.

Usually choreographers are very, very applyable, very cooperative, and very inventive and ingenious.

Indeed, Ruth was always one of those.

Now, what about working with the conductor? An opera conductor interprets the music and works of course with the singers.

Now, you know, I'm not familiar of course with the fact that dancers expect the tempi to be adjusted to them, and ballet conductors are used to this kind of thing.

What about opera conductors? Opera conductors are inclined, if I may say this, to be a little rigid about their ballet tempi.

They think the tempo should be so and so, many of them.

And the ballet mistress or the ballet choreographer is constantly begging the conductor to go a little faster here or a little faster there.

Some conductors are very thoughtful of the ballet, and some conductors are not.

They seem not to understand that the ballet has to dance to the music.

I've always felt that was a little short -sighted.

I could never understand a conductor who didn't have the real sense of what the ballet was doing, and that he should go along with them and accompany them, as indeed he does with many of the singers.

But I will not name any names as to who does what, but there are two sides to it.

And of course the choreographer.

I've heard Ruth say many times, well, maestro, couldn't we have it a little faster here? She was a great diplomat.

She usually got her way, but not always without a struggle.

I never heard her have any fights with anybody, and everybody loved her so much.

She always would call people, darling, and it was wonderful.

And she was always talking about stars.

And I think that people loved her so much that they always tried to accommodate what she wanted because she asked for it so nicely.

There was a lot of struggle that she was going through in terms of she did the opera during the season, and then she had her company that toured during the rest of the year and trying to get a company started.

Do you remember any of the struggles? Did she ever talk about those with you, what she was going through? Ruth's major struggles when she was at Lyric Opera of Chicago were finding boys to dance.

The ballet boy, the good ballet boy, is hard to find, and she took many trips to New York to bring them back.

I never thought of Ruth struggling.

She didn't talk about struggling.

And if she did, she didn't let on that she was having any kind of a struggle.

She had this wonderful sort of a positive feeling about it, but it wasn't a positive this way, it was a positive this way.

It was always smiling, always airy.

Everything was always wonderful.

And so things turned out for her, I think, because of the wonderful attitude she had about it.

And of course I knew about all any struggles that she was having, but not because she talked to me about them, because I knew.

And I always figured that Ruth had everything in hand and was going to always end in a wonderful position because she never took no for an answer.

She always moved ahead, and she formed her own company, she did a great deal of touring, she bought the Moose Lodge for her company, and has been a real fixture in Chicago, a beloved fixture for many, many years.

So you never saw her I wasn't the general manager then, it was Carol Fox.

I don't think that Ruth ever let on when she was depressed or unhappy.

I never saw her that way.

Maybe Carol did, but I never did.

And of course Ruth was the choreographer of Lyric Opera from 1954 through 1968.

And I didn't become general manager until 1981, so that was quite a few years after Ruth left as a regular member of the company.

As I'm sure you know, ballet had an enormous, opera had an enormous influence on the ballets that Ruth ultimately created.

She created a number of what is called, this will horrify you, in dance books, her work of opera into ballet ballets.

She did Carmen and the Merry Widow and Flater Mouse and something called Revenge, which is Trovatore.

Revenge, oh you know, yes, and the Barber of Seville, a number of them.

Were you aware, and those kind of happened simultaneously with her work at the Lyric, although she began when they were doing operas at Vigna.

I mean she'd been choreographing for opera since 1926, really.

Were you aware and can you, of how her work with the opera influenced those at all? Well, I think that Ruth Page's interest in opera began long before Lyric Opera.

And I think that Lyric Opera didn't necessarily influence what Ruth did, because she came to Lyric Opera always with a very important sense of the opera.

As a matter of fact, some of the first things that she did here were her Merry Widow Ballet, which was opera ballet, and opera made into ballet, and the Revenge, which she did here in 1955, which was the first time that Ruth's opera ballets sort of went hand in hand with Lyric Opera.

It all was sort of at the same time and seemed perfectly right, because Ruth always had a wonderful handle on what opera was all about, and she translated it into the ballet idiom, I think, very successfully.

Really, so that you, when you watch a ballet, you don't say, oh, this is a travesty, this is wrong.

No, I can make that, I can make a translation immediately from the opera into ballet and ballet back again.

I think that we have the right, all of us creative artists, to do what we want with the pieces.

No one said that you couldn't do a ballet from an opera, and I feel that that's a very creative kind of impulse, and we should be permitted that how is our art form going to grow unless we take different paths and avenues.

And this was Ruth's path and avenue, it was very successful, it was very successful with the public, and you know, Verdi always said, keep your eye on the box office, because it tells you how good you are, it tells you whether you're going over, and if we don't have a public for what we do, what good is our art form if nobody comes to see it? So I'm all for creativity, I'm all for taking chances and trying to do things in a different way, especially if you have a good idea that it's going to be a box office hit, that I think is important.

Sometimes you don't know, sometimes you just have to take the chance, and that we have to do in any art form, ballet, opera, symphony, anything has to, painting, everything has to burst its own bounds, peck its way out of its shell, and do a little fancy flying.

Do you know more about this item?
If you have more information about this item please contact us at info@chicagofilmarchives.com.