Jump to content


Lucia Lacarra


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Lukayev

Lukayev

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts

Posted 21 October 2001 - 02:51 PM

Just yesterday evening, my mother and I went to see the 'Stars of the San Francisco Ballet' for a much publicized, one night only performance.

While I was not really :eek: impressed by the male principals (low demi-pointe in their turns and piques) and a certain female principal wearing totally worn-down, grotesque shoes that were frayed and visibly dirty from even the balcony.. I really enjoyed myself and felt extremely lucky to see such a gathering of professionals on one stage (they did a little number at the end to the music following Kitri's Wedding in Don Q.. it was so neat!) And of course, I should feel lucky that I was able to give the dancers leis, and after my brief two seconds on stage, my knees were about to give out from shock of being in such close proximity of stars!

During intermission, my friends and I gathered in the lobby to discuss how the first act went. (Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux, Spanish Song, Chaconne, Adagio for Strings, and Black Swan pdd). Everyone was just ecsatic about the super-duper high extensions that seemed to make up 99.9% of Adagio for Strings, with Lucia Lacarra and Cyril Pierre. Now, I was just as wowed as the person next to me from her hyperextended legs and liquid-like backbends, but after five minutes of acrobatics like that, I was feeling rather bored.

The second act (Two Bits, Sleeping Beauty pdd, revelation, Dying Swan [THE most beautiful solo, with Muriel Maffre], and Don Q. suite) was a little better. However, that annoying :D smile of Aurora's and constant showing off of 'Look, I am totally ignoring my partner and instead showing off my skills at scratching my head with my leg' was not exactly charming.

I'm just wondering, do most of her perfomances follow along these showy lines? She's a beatiful dancer, but.. I don't know, I'm young and I don't know much about professional performances. :P


--Luka

#2 linsusanr

linsusanr

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 52 posts

Posted 22 October 2001 - 11:59 AM

Hello! I am a subscriber to the San Francisco Ballet, so I have seen Ms. Lacarra quite a few times ... I have always enjoyed her fluidity, like you described. I've only really seen her in neoclassical and modern numbers, though. In these she is almost predatory, and very sensual. I can't take my eyes off her! It'd be very interesting to have seen her Aurora, though. When I saw Sleeping Beauty it was Joanna Berman who danced Aurora, and she seemed to have absorbed the role well.

#3 LMCtech

LMCtech

    Bronze Circle

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 310 posts

Posted 25 October 2001 - 07:31 AM

Although she has that incredible facility, I find her jumping and turning to be weak, and her acting to be one dimensional. I see why people call her sensual, but to me it is a put persona and not something that comes from within. I find her to be a surface dancer, which is fine, but if I'm going to see an emotionally charged piece, I want to see someone else.She did the lead in MacMillan's "The Invitation" a few seasons ago. She was very disappointing.

#4 BalletNut

BalletNut

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 573 posts

Posted 26 October 2001 - 09:39 PM

I've posted way too much already about my opinion of La Lacarra, but I am not a fan of hers, and that's putting it mildly. For me, being able to count a ballerina's vertebrae from the balcony without the aid of binoculars is definitely a turn-off.

linsusanr, I saw her Aurora last spring, and it was interesting alright. I even posted a little review on "Recent Performances" under SF Ballet: Sleeping Beauty. So did a lot of other people.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):