Roger Copeland
THE MORALITY OF BALLET
We often picture the balletomane as a dandy or an aes–
thete, a well-bred (perhaps overbred) man ofleisure who values style
above all else and who is apt to argue that "beauty" is essentially an
amoral, if not immoral, phenomenon .
If
forced to choose between
virtue and virtuosity, the balletomane will always opt for the latter.
That at least is the popular stereotype. But when one examines the
actual writings of the great balletomanes - Andre Levinson, A. K.
Volinsky , Adrian Stokes, Rayner Heppenstall, Lincoln Kirstein - it
soon becomes evident that ballet appeals to them for reasons that
have as much or perhaps more to do with ethics as with aesthetics.
This, no doubt, will corne as a surprise to many people, espe–
cially those familiar with and perhaps sympathetic to the sort of
moral indignation that led the early modern dancers to reject classi–
cal ballet. To them, classical ballet remained an "aristocratic" form
of entertainment unsuited to the needs of a modern democracy; it
lacked "sincerity," had nothing to do with the "real" world, and con–
sisted of little more than a hollow, decorative, arbitrary display of
technique. Or else it was said to deform the anatomy in ways that
were particularly injurious to women. Contemporary feminism (and
health consciousness) have revived many of such concerns: the body
image favored by classical ballet is said to encourage - perhaps even
necessitate - anorexia nervosa and bulimia. Consider the com–
bativeness of ballet's arch-enemy Isadora Duncan:
To those who still enjoy [balletic] movements for historical or
choreographic or whatever the reasons, to those I answer: They
see no further than the skirts and tricots. But look - under the
skirts, under the tricots are dancing deformed muscles. Look still
further - underneath the muscles are deformed bones. A de–
formed skeleton is dancing before you. This deformation through
incorrect dress and incorrect movement is the result of the train–
ing necessary to the ballet. The ballet condemns itself by enforc–
ing the deformation of the beautiful woman's body! No his–
torical, no choreographic reasons can prevail against that!
Today, most of us readily recognize the grossly exaggerated
nature of this broadside against ballet, but we're still apt to believe
