City Center Week 3

[Colleen Boresta]

Am I the only person who attended ABT's third week at City Center? I went to the November 7th matinee. I think Mary Cargill in the online edition of "Dance View Times" has described this performance much better than I ever could. (And I am very grateful to Mary for all her wonderful reviews.) I just want to add a few points. I loved "Mozartiana" though I don't think the City Center audience appreciated it as much as I did. Veronica Part was just perfect, and Maxim B. was wonderful - he was really into the ballet. It was a joy to watch him. I wasn't too impressed with Carlos Lopez in the Gigue role (is that how you spell it? I'm not sure where my program is right now.) But to be honest, I am rarely impressed with Lopez's dancing. And last Spring when ABT performed "Mozartiana" at the Met, I saw Herman Cornejo in the role. I don't think I need to say any more.

Speaking of Cornejo, he was absolutely outstanding in "La Spectre de la Rose." His dancing in that role has already been reviewed by several Ballet Alert posters, and they did a much better job than I could ever do. I was also very impressed by Maria Riccietto in "La Spectre". She was the perfect romantic young girl in the part. And this may sound trite, but it must be very hard to dance with your eyes closed. When she finally opened her eyes, the look of wonder on her face was beautiful to see.

The next two pas de deux really got my heart racing - they were that exciting (IMO

anyway). I knew Paloma Herrera would be good in the "Black Swan pas de deux" - it's her kind of part - balances, fouettes, etc., but it was Marcelo Gomes who really wowed me. I haven't seen Gomes nearly as much as I've seen other ABT male dancers, and I always thought of him as a princely sort of danseur. But this performance showed me that Gomes can do pyrotechnics as well as anyone at ABT (if not better). Also Gomes was so charismatic he practically set the stage on fire.

This was the third time I've seen Corella dance the pas de deux from "Le Corsaire". His dancing on Sunday was just as spectactular if not more so. But I really could have done without the overacting. He seemed to be think he was Rudolph Valentino playing the Sheik during the silent movie era. Maybe I just noticed the overacting at City Center because it's a more intimate theater than the Met. Gillian Murphy was absolutely magnificent in this pas de deux. She's probably the one ABT dancer who can upstage Corella in "Le Corsaire" and do it in a really professional way. Murphy's also has a great sense of humor. During one of the many curtain calls, Corella leaped onto the stage to take his bow. Murphy repeated that leap during her bow. It was great fum to see.

I really enjoyed "Sinfonietta" - especially the trumpets and all those great jetes. It was also wonderful to see so many ABT dancing their hearts out. I especially loved seeing Monique Meunier. I really wish ABT would give her the parts she deserves.

[Michael]

I was there too and I should also like to add something more about the three week ABT season at City Center in general.

Sunday Afternoon:

First, the audience was huge, much the biggest I saw in the three week season. And it had the atmosphere of one of ABT’s Met Opera House audiences, cheering, standing, throwing flowers. The company did not disappoint them.

“Spectre de la Rose”, as Coleen mentioned, had the Herman Cornejo Maria Ricetto cast. Oh the power of the Press. This was the first performance after Joan Accocella’s recent New Yorker feature, raving about Cornejo, appeared and the dancers received a delirious ovation. Greater than any of the other three performances I saw, although same cast as the past two. The couple in back of me became nearly apoplectic: Imagine an endearing and thick east European accent (like my father’s of blessed memory): “Ink-red-ahh-bull … Vat an ink-red-ahh-bull Dance-Air! … Ink-red-ahh-bull!!” And incredible in fact it was. Cornejo in his curtain calls, the soul of modesty, seemed a little bemused, even frightened by the response. He’s better get used to it.

Looking at “Spectre” over the three weeks time, Cornejo’s performances stayed the same. He is wonderful. His weakness, if any, is in his arms, which are somewhat dead and with which he attempts to do not much, and above the waist in general -- although he is very well placed there.

What did make “Spectre” come into absolute focus and dramatic impact was substituting Maria Ricetto for Xiomara Reyes as the young girl. Ricetto had a wonderful three weeks, leaving an indelible mark on everything she danced, particularly in this and in Les Sylphides. I did not know what a finished dancer she could be.

And more, it is clear that the portrayal of the Young Girl is the dramatic key to “Spectre” – She is not only the main character, she is the “Only” character. It is the girl who dreams “Cornejo”, who awakes, who waltzes, whose intoxication is palpable. He remains the same, leaping about, jumping about, twirling about, while she on the other hand initiates and reacts, the sole human on stage. Ricetto, ethereal, slim, with long expressive feet, her hair descending in a romantic Empress Eugenie style, was superbly expressive in this and that made all the difference.

It was also good to see Mozartiana again on Sunday Afternoon. I have to respectfully disagree about Lopez in the Gigue. I loved him. But more about this later.

First as to Mozartiana, too much cannot be said about how good the small corps de ballet -- consisting of Sasha Dmochenko, Kristi Boone, Erica Fischbach and Sarawanee Tanatanit – were in this, perhaps the best I have ever seen a corps de ballet dance this ballet. (And I've seen it often enough). Especially Sasha Dmochenko, about whom more must be said. She not only projects very well, but dances Balanchine exquisitely. She is instantaneously quick with her feet, her emboittee steps in the (3d?) variation (the one for the four girls) were a joy to see, as were her landings in a beautiful tendu-pliee-front in which she at once makes a leg, as it were, to her companions, and gestures with her arms gracefully downward towards them. Her roll up onto point and roll down off of it, in which high demi point is almost a continuum with pointe, and then down off of it, and in which the foot is very strong, expressive and flexible, are the equal of those of any of NYCB trained dancers in Mozartiana. She is another surprise, to add to that of Ricetto, these past weeks: I remembered loving Dmochenko’s somewhat whacky “Three Virgins and a Devil” in last year’s season.

Yet another surprise was the continued strong and beautiful development of Kristi Boone, who danced a series of prominent roles

I found Carlos Lopez, as I indicated, especially good in the Gigue. After years of surfeiting upon Tom Gold and (say no more) upon Daniel Ulbricht in this Gigue at NYCB -- what I love about how both Lopez and Jesus Pastor approach this role is the quiet formality and gracefulness they impart to it, refusing to treat it as a demi character showpiece. (I also prefer them to Cornejo in this for that reason).

When the small corps dances as it did. And when Lopez or Pastor treat the Gigue as they do, it reveals something lovely, elegant, civilized, cool and formal about the choreography of much of Mozartiana – the affinity of this Ballet with portions of Divertimento # 15 (the minuet and the constant reverences of the dancers for each other) and of some of the women's corps work in Theme and Variations (particularly the 3d variation again, the one for all the women). Which is, I think appropriate. For "Mozartiana," as a musical score, is after all the tribute (or musings) of a great romantic composer on the more serene, composed, elegant, refined, civilized, formal and graceful world of the high Eighteenth Century.

I haven’t had the chance to see Veronika Part up close in many extended roles at ABT (nor has anyone else given the lack of casting). And the Numinous image of Kyra Nichols, and the Luminous image of Wendy Whelan, remain fixed forever in my mind in the principal female role in this Ballet -- But despite what I think might be some general weakness in Part’s beautiful and long feet (soft on point, a little wobbly when there, a little trouble in her relevees) her performance was very satisfying: open hearted, honest, beautiful, frank in how she gave herself to the audience. A totally open reading of this Ballet. Superior to Ananiashvili's dramatic reading last spring, though technically inferior.

And Part's strengths, besides the extraordinary beauty, are her amazing turn out, the expressive feet, the lush depth in her arabesques and in her developpees to the front as well. (When she gets to the pose – it’s what happens more particularly at the moment when she sets herself into motion, in order to get there, that can be problematic at times). And the most beautiful hands in the company, maybe in the West, this side of Svetlana Lunkina. I doubt she’s had many previous chances to dance this role and I would gladly see it again. So too for Beloserkofsky, who I think benefits greatly by being emancipated from Dvorovenko’s shadow.

Final Three Week Thoughts:

As for the Season, when the company finally got it together ... When they found the money for this season, when the dancers finally got their contracts, when they were finally allowed to do what they do … it was a fine and exuberant three weeks. Say what you want about Killian and about the Forsythe performed here and about the McIntyre (none of whom appeared exactly heavyweight in these works), they were all optimistic and full of energy and joy and good vehicles for these dancers. Particularly Killian, who despite my prior view of him an angst ridden Nederlander, seems not to have a depressed bone in his body.

The foremost two words which must be spoken of these past weeks for a Balletomane are, however and nevertheless, David Hallberg. Hallberg, Hallberg and Hallberg. I really can’t do this subject justice. I doubt there are many who saw him these weeks who would disagree. The purest male classical dancer I may ever have seen. Only perhaps a couple of the men at the Paris Opera are now his equal and they really are a different type anyhow. I am happy Cornejo got the press. He deserves it. But Hallberg deserves and will deserve it more.

But oh what a fine time it’s been in general. It’s made me a ballet addict again and I’m going to miss them. I find I love this company, potentially love it even with prime allegiance, but only the way one loves what one cannot really have. (The “Oh toi que j’eusse aimee” sydnrome). Because in the end we know here in NY that we are really married to City Ballet and only have the chance for a brief fling with this company for a few weeks in the fall and a couple of months in the Spring. And now it’s back to Nutcracker Season.

[Leigh Witchel]

Thank you both for the reports! Interesting to note Acocella's rapture over Cornejo. I like him as well; he's strong, honest and clean - but to anyone else does this sound a little like Croce on Baryshnikov? Both have a clear, important place in the repertory, and it isn't in all roles. I don't quite get the idolization.

[liebs]

And I was not as impressed as some by the company in the pieces I saw. The problem I have at ABT now is their casting - with no regard for emploi.

Ricietto, for all her gifts, is not right for Mozartiana. She's a small, careful soloist in a part created for a tallish, daring ballerina. Her performance was a shadow of what we've seen from Farrell, Calegari, etc. But how could she be great - she's miscast and with Corella this is like Mozartiana for midgets. Corella is a great virtuoso but his Mozartiana was danced without regard for the small steps and transitions, which make this choreography great. I enjoyed him much more in Corsaire when it did not matter that he wasn't really on the music. The corps ladies looked good, I agree.

And I thought they looked fine in Les Sylphides as well. But this production is kind of dead, the dancers don't really seem to be connected to the work.

I enjoy Cornejo and I'll even buy him in Spectre but I can not see him as a prince. Although, I'm sure his Albrecht and Siegfried (with Reyes) as his partner are in our future. There are plenty of roles for him like Prodigal and Mercutio that don't completely destroy all of the tradition of emploi that has been the foundation of classical ballet for centuries. Not that ABT cares, a company that casts Nina A in Fille and Irina as Giselle has given up on this concept long ago.

[Michael]

[A]ll of the tradition of emploi that has been the foundation of classical ballet for centuries.

Such as casting Joaquin de Luz as Oberon in a "Midsummer Night's Dream."

Actually I agree with you, but the only thing that seems to limit these travestis to the West Side of the Lincoln Center Plaza is the fact that emploi in the Balanchine repertory is so much subtler and more specialized. If, however, you look at the Balanchine emploi, City Ballet is guilty of the same level of atrocities.

[Leigh Witchel]

I don't necessarily disagree that there are problems with casting de Luz as Oberon (haven't seen de Luz yet in the role) but are the problems with the dancer or with miscasting by type? Is de Luz as Oberon that huge a departure in physical type from the original casting - Edward Villella?

[Thalictum]

Leigh I couldn't agree with you more, and thanks for being a voice of moderation and sanity. Certainly Cornejo is a talented and appealing performer, but at a very vulnerable point where he can easily get so full of himself that he does not realize he still has a great deal of work to do, and yes, his height can limit him and this is not necessarily a bad thing.

I was disquieted by the absolutist tone of Acocella's review and her hectoring of ABT's administration about what roles he should, nay, MUST be cast in forthwith.

This is redolent of Croce at her worst.

[Michael]

You are right that the problem is more with De Luz in that role than with his type. (And many may not even agree there is a problem, it's somewhat subjective). How about Nilas Martins as Siegfried in Swan Lake as an alternative example? Though what type is Nilas anyway? (You might have to invent a new one). The point is that ABT hardly has a monopoly on misemploying dancers vis a vis roles.

I also couldn't agree more that the last thing I want to see is Cornejo cast as Albrecht or Siegfried. Perhaps we will be spared those experiences.

Re Acocella, the trouble is she even cites Baryshnikov as a good precedent for breaking emploi. It's as if she thinks the glamour of his name alone will justify what she proposes.

But re Acocella in more general terms -- Another thing that rankles is the dumbed down prose in her descriptions of the art form as she sets up her reviews. As in,

for example, "... [A] perfect attitude (That means ... Sticking the other leg out, angled in an elegant way[.])"

It should be possible to discuss dance in the New Yorker without implying that the whole thing is a recondite, or arcane, or worse, a pansy-ass art form which needs to be translated into good working class H.L. Mencken Americanese to be handled critically. She assumes the lowest general knowledge level in her readers and this is a repudiation of what the New Yorker above all has stood for over the years. None of the other critics, Peter Schejdal for instance on painting, no matter how arcane the matter he is discussing, feel the need to do this kind of thing. It's a bad canary in the mine for Ballet in general.

[Dale]

Michael, Acocella's having to "dumb down" ballet steps might have more to do with the editors and less on the writer. I don't know if she has the same editor for every piece or different ones over time. But some editors, especially if they themselves don't know what a phrase or technical word might mean, decide that it has to be spelled out for the reader. "Jargon" one of my editors used to snear at me if I used a very every day sort of tennis term, to which I always thought in my head "'He hit a home run (meaning the batter smacked a pitched ball with a wooden bat over the wall or fence of the park and then runs to touch all of the bases placed in a diamond shape, therefore scoring a run).'" But the New Yorker is a general reader magazine. I do read it every week but I haven't thought to look whether they make every writer avoid or spell out "jargon."

[Michael]

Dale, this is way off topic and I promise to stop after this but:

It's the New Yorker for G-d's sake. Croce, at her worst or best, never did it. None of the other critics do it, in areas riddled with jargon and far more arcane than this. I think it's Acoccella herself because in her literary criticism she adopts the same condescending (to her material) tone.

And if it is the editors, shame on them. Anti intellectualism in the USA has a long lineage which (recently) leads from Joe McCarthy to Bill O'Reilly (who looks alot like Uncle Joe, as a matter of fact) to our current Prez.

[cargill]

I was struck by the New Yorker tone, as well. I really don't think a critic should tell a company do this and do that. It is one thing to say that the critic would enjoy seeing so and so, or to wonder why so and so is or is not cast, but I thought this article was a bit beyond that. Plus the example of Baryishnikov was not exactly proving her point, since, at least for me, even his Albrecht was a stretch, and Siegfried was way off base. Life isn't fair, and there is no way I can see Cornejo, with that body and that face, as a prince, though I think he is an absolutely wonderful dancer, and I think the definitive Puck in the Dream, and his Mozartiana was stunning. Now if she had gone on and on about Hallberg as a prince, I could see her point! Mary

[Thalictum]

I recently watched Baryshnikov's 1977 Giselle with Makarova again, and was struck how wrong he was for the role -- he almost makes it demi-caractere, and over-acts his way through the entire ballet. His act 2 solo is phenomenal, of course.

[liebs]

What I'd like to see is some good, new choreography for Cornejo that further reveals his gifts or shows us something in him we haven't seen before.