Drew

Thank you for the clarifications—that adds a whole other layer of meaning! The ultimate allusions still seem to me there. Why build a new great gate if not partly in hopes of building the connection between Hartmann’s Russian imperial present and the Medieval past? Hartmann also is a figure associated with Slavic and specifically Russian cultural revival. Presumably Ratmansky does not want anyone confusing his interest in this material with a Russia-centered version of Slavophile culture. Hence the appearance of the Ukrainian flag. It strikes an odd note to me, especially since I think Kandinsky is a very interesting mediating figure here. As some reading this probably remember, I am a huge Ratmansky fan (have been known to say a word in favor of The Tempest). And of course he has the right to change his works. This change sounds discordant to me, though @abatt suggests the impact is minimal. And I hope to see the ballet again soon and I will see what I think then. Ratmansky’s artistic and personal journey is what it is ... I have not forgotten Bright Stream: though not without irony, it is a delightful farce set in the era of a horrendous, Stalin-stoked famine in Ukraine. He would not make that ballet again today—at least I think not. I assume Marina Harss’s book will address some of these issues.

Its being a matinee may have been the main reason. Ratmansky’s support for Ukraine has largely cast him—to my eyes—in a highly sympathetic and admirable light, but this seems problematic to me. Much of his career has been spent both lovingly and critically exploring Russian culture and history. Pictures at an Exhibition is an example. It can’t retrospectively be turned into a tribute to Ukraine. Not convincingly anyway. When Mussorgsky celebrates an image of the great gate of Kiev, surely the reference is to Kievan Rus —heck according to Wikipedia the composer traced his roots to Kievan Rus—and like Kandinsky’s radicalism (though for different reasons) it has nothing to do with being a standard bearer for Ukrainian nationalism. And the whole spirit of Kandinsky’s abstractions and Ratmansky’s own witty, choreographically ‘colorful,’ abstract adaptations of the source material is undermined with the literalism of a flag. If the argument is that the folk traditions recalled in the ballet have Ukrainian provenance, not just Russian, then add a note in the program discussing the issue. That would be a fine idea. Ratmansky has created more recent work in which incorporating the Ukrainian flag might be appropriate and I would happily applaud if he carried a Ukrainian flag with him during a curtain call for any of his ballets, but the backdrop is no trivial part of this ballet and changing it at the end seems to me to change the ballet. Of course, it is his ballet and he can do with it what he will but, writing as an admirer of this ballet, I wish someone had talked him out of the idea. (No, I do not support Putin. I think he is a war criminal.)

Thank you @angelicaand @nysusan —it sounds like I will keep this seat for the pleasures of a closer look at the dancers without heads in front of me albeit maybe missing some sections of stage. If it were my only performance, then I would be more wary since I gather that it is a ballet with scenic effects and that Wheeldon makes full use of the stage, but I will stick with this seat.

Thank you! I have given it a try — unfortunately the views they show from seats closest to where I would be all show the stage with a scenic curtain down so it is harder to judge.

I seem to have bought a “partial view” seat for Like Water For Chocolate at the Met. I did this more or less by mistake (don’t ask) but I am thinking it may not be ALL bad as it would take me closer to the stage than I can usually risk in an orchestra seat. And in my distant youth I did sometimes enjoy oddball seats. Anyway, I would be in the front row of Parterre Box 7. Has anyone sat in that box (or 8 across the horseshoe)? Any impressions to share? I am prepared to buy another ticket if it sounds like am going to lose too much to enjoy the dancers. I am a little less concerned about scenic effects because I will be seeing the ballet from a much better seat at a different performance. I have this seat for a dancer I am particularly eager to see. How much of the stage gets sliced off? (I am familiar with much of ABT’s full length rep, so reference to it would be meaningful to me.) Thank you.

Im' curious about a number of those dancers and where they may end up. I wonder, too, if this means that Simkin will be seen more with ABT if only as a guest?

Deleted

The inclusion of a moment in which the whole nation is summoned to pledge allegiance to the monarch and his descendants did rather catch my attention. It's ostensibly meant as a democratizing gesture -- where the "peers" once plead allegiance, now the "people" will. From the BBC website: "The order of service will read: 'All who so desire, in the Abbey, and elsewhere, say together: I swear that I will pay true allegiance to Your Majesty, and to your heirs and successors according to law. So help me God' "It will be followed by the playing of a fanfare. "The Archbishop of Canterbury will then proclaim 'God save the King', with all asked to respond: 'God save King Charles. Long live King Charles. May the King live forever.' Link below: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-65435426

The solo in Square Dance was created for a dancer with "deep deep surrendering backbends" and a notable Melancholic in Four Temperaments--Bart Cook. Having seen Cook in the role--and also later, in a rather different performance, Peter Boal--it has always felt to me an incredibly important part of the ballet. I'm glad you got to see a performance that could bring that home to you--even if only as a one time event.

Hello and Welcome. San Francisco looks to be doing some great ballets next year!

Stevenson's version was even danced by Margot Fonteyn back in the day. From an article by Anna Kisselgoff when ABT had the Stevenson version, briefly, in their repertory (link follows): "George Balanchine was especially taken with this version and had it restaged in the mid-1970's at the Geneva Ballet, where he was artistic adviser..." https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/19/arts/dance-the-man-behind-the-much-in-demand-cinderella.html

Wishing her great success...

Thanks for the heads up....

In addition to what's been recommended already, I'd also put in a good word for Balanchine V--Serenade; Orpheus; Theme and Variations. Serenade and Theme and Variations are two of Balanchine's greatest ballets --both set to Tchaikovsky who was one of the composers most important to him and yet very different from each other. Serenade was also, in a slightly different version, Balanchine's first ballet in the United States so it has a special place in ballet history. in my experience Serenade is also cast-proof. So if you haven't seen those ballets, then it's a great program. Orpheus is, in some ways, an unusual work in Balanchine's oeuvre and hard to pull off, but it is always super striking visually because of the Noguchi designs and at least gives an example of one of Balanchine's collaborations with Stravinsky. It's also a narrative work so that breaks up the program a bit ... I also like @volcanohunter's suggestions especially Program IV because both Concerto Barocco and Symphony in C are also "must see" ballets. And Prodigal Son is another work with designs by a major artist (Rouault) and also a narrative ballet sitting between two non-narrative ballets. The company seems to have designed the programs to feature variety across Balanchine's oeuvre--in some cases that makes certain programs a little too split personality for my taste, but I think both of these programs look great as programs.

That's a wow ! I have seen and admired PIckett's work, but Crime and Punishment is a heavy lift, and Pickett's work has not been much seen in New York, so she doesn't have an established reputation there. I think an ambitious commission of this kind is a risk worth taking.... but it is a risk. I will definitely try to see it!

Farrell and Martins were a great dance partnership. However, when Martins became director of the company, he did not keep many of Balanchine's past ballerinas/muses around to coach and lead rehearsals. Farrell was working with the company in a very limited capacity but shortly after an interview she gave the New Yorker indicating some of her frustrations with the situation, he fired her and she did not work again with the company until after his departure as Director. Since Martins appears to have not wanted other leading Balanchine dancers to work with NYCB or, at least, not often, I doubt the interview was the only issue. I have heard and read people defend Martins' reluctance to involve Balanchine's former leading dancers to continue working with the company (Not just Farrell but, say, Patricia McBride) on the grounds that different dancers remember different versions of the ballets; plus other issues arise with having former dancers around to coach -- everyone's Balanchine is different, personality issues; Martins' need to establish himself as the company's leader etc. etc. But I fear a lot of knowledge was lost to the company's traditions when dancers who had worked closely with Balanchine for years were not regularly working with the new generation of dancers after his death. When, after Martins' departure, McBride returned to coach the role she created in Rubies, dancers talked about how differently she 'counted' the music and how difficult it was to adapt...that's not trivial. Those of us who saw Farrell's now-defunct pick up company at Kennedy Center know what remarkable things she could do when staging ballets--even with dancers not always at the level of NYCB. Here is a link to a NYTImes article published at the time of Farrell's firing: https://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/04/arts/city-ballet-breaks-off-its-long-relationship-with-suzanne-farrell.html

Errante was the name of a ballet Balanchine created for Tilly Losch when he directed Les Ballets 1933 —the company that introduced Kirstein to Balanchine—so when I saw the name I wondered if someone was trying to reconstruct it. But such a project did seem very unlikely. A renamed Tzigane makes more sense and I understand the reasoning behind the name change. (The ballet is still what it is, but if the name change keeps it in the repertory, then ...). I hope Farrell will also be working with dancers on Diamonds and some of her other roles.

For 2023-2024 Atlanta Ballet's is co-producing with Hong Kong Ballet and Queensland ballet a full-length work by Annabelle Lopez Ochoa --Coco Chanel: The Life of a Fashion Icon. It actually has already premiered in Hong Kong -- I found one rather mixed review of the premier but most of the review was behind a paywall so I only read the opening paragraph. On Pointe Magazine also had a short feature article about the ballet a few weeks back that I read this evening. The author of the article seems to loathe Chanel, and that takes up a lot of space in the article, but I imagine this ballet will be a draw and I'm hoping it will be a reasonably substantial work that also manages to garner a lot of publicity. (Atlanta Ballet danced Requiem for a Rose by Lopez Ochoa during McFall's tenure.) I'll put the link to the On Pointe article below along with a link to a Hong Kong Vogue feature that talks more about the ballet itself and a video feature with Lopez Ochoa that was posted on Hong Kong Ballet's youtube channel, but here is one interesting bit for Atlanta audiences. "When Atlanta Ballet produces the work next February, the company will partner with the William Breman Jewish Heritage Museum to explore the harmful impact of Chanel’s antisemitism and collaboration with Nazis, while providing educational resources and hosting discussions on combating antisemitism today...." (I support this idea.) https://pointemagazine.com/coco-chanel-ballet/ https://www.voguehk.com/en/article/art-lifestyle/coco-chanel-hk-ballet-interview/

Completely on board with the Balanchine/Danilova Coppelia, but the idea of a traditional NYCB Giselle just depresses me. Too much like a final nail in the Balanchine coffin. Maybe the Akram Khan Giselle could be an interesting option.

He had a long, rich life...may he rest in peace.

How very, very sad. She made a difference in the lives of so many critics, scholars, and fans of ballet. Deeply knowledgeable and caring about ballet history—always very kind to me personally, even when we were debating things! May her memory be for a blessing.....

That Bayadere in D.C. was stunning. I felt the same about Kim's Ali in Corsaire which I also saw live. I've seen video of him in Legend of Love that I find pretty jaw dropping too.... It would have been hard for him to leave Russia I imagine since he has a Russian wife and has lived there a long time (over a decade), and he has spoken about his close, quasi-familial relation with his coaches. (Nagahisa's situation was very different.) But other non-Russian dancers in a similar situation--I'm thinking of Parish--did leave. The fine details of Kim's situation, as you say, we can't know. But a dancing career outside of Russia was waiting for him, indeed probably a bigger one than awaited Parish. I can't get inside his head or heart and I'm sorry I won't see him dance again--at least it's unlikely--but, yes, his choices.

Yes, I suppose it must look like a retreat--and likely, too, feel like one on a visceral level. I think the ballet should be a revered classics, but ... uh...fans don't get a vote. Let alone U.S. fans! (A rather hokey artifact I used to wish the Bolshoi would revive is the Messerer Class Concert. If they lose the rights to Etudes, then I suppose that might happen now. I realize this makes me sound awfully reactionary --but the video record suggests that they were rip-roaring in that ballet.)

I'm aware that the Mariinsky dances the Lavrosky Romeo and Juliet. I still think it's a ballet that has a place in the Bolshoi repertory--not least because of its history with the company.

The problems for these companies are serious. But a return to the Lavrosky Romeo and Juliet at the Bolshoi? That's one of the best possible ideas on offer. To clarify: the article @volcanohunter cited above said the Bolshoi was going to return to the Lavrosky Romeo and Juliet now that it won't be dancing Ratmansky's. I saw them do it a little over two decades ago. (I had only just discovered Ballet Alert. Some of my earliest posts here were about attending that performance.) The cast was Stepanenko and Filin with Tsiskaridze as Mercutio. Seeing it in the theater I found it a genuinely great ballet--and, full of a richness of dramatic layering often lacking in Western productions. Stunning designs as well. And it's not as if Socialist Realism gave us a slew of great ballets. Lavrosky's R&J also played a huge role in the company's history and had an influence in the West. I am much happier to see the company to return to that production than to Grigorovich's. I have only seen Ratmansky's version as a Bolshoi HD broadcast. I more or less enjoyed it as a somewhat fresh, though still fairly recognizable take on the Prokofiev score. But if ever there were a case to be made for the Bolshoi to preserve a Soviet Classic in its repertory, Lavrosky's Romeo and Juliet is it. Re @California 's question. Well, it's just guessing about, but I tend to think that when the war is over--(assuming it has not turned into a wider conflict in the meanwhile)--and especially if there were to be a peace treaty and not just an armistice, then some western impresarios will think it worth the risk to wrangle some Bolshoi tours. Maybe Mariinsky tours, too, but the Bolshoi is the splashier name for the general public and the Gergiev issue has already been raised above. On the Russian end they will likely want to support having their dancers out in the world shoring up Russian prestige. If the government leadership changes in Russia, then future tours seem especially likely. But I don't think any of these things are likely to happen soon--and I imagine that those performances would face picketers, audience protests, and controversy as well. (As indeed did some tours during the cold war.)