Jump to content


Don Quixote, Kennedy Center, June 22-26th


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#61 Alexandra

Alexandra

    Board Founder

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,246 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 11:18 AM

I think I've read that, too. Perhaps that was true when the ballet was created, but when Farrell left the company, Balanchine wanted to keep the ballet and so cast Kay Mazzo and Sara Leland in it. (That's merely an educated guess, of course.)

#62 dirac

dirac

    Diamonds Circle

  • Board Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,040 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 01:21 PM

I think as a general rule Farrell did not have understudies for any of her roles in the Sixties. If she could not dance it, another ballet would be substituted.

#63 Farrell Fan

Farrell Fan

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,930 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 01:41 PM

Well, I'm just back from Washington. Yes, BW, I was there and saw five of the seven performances. While there, I stayed away from computers, and a good thing, too, judging from some of what I've been reading here. I generally agreed with what John Rockwell and Alexandra had to say. As for the rest, yes, some of Don Q is boring, particularly in the first act, but audience members who leave at the end of the first act of a three-act ballet are not people you want to cite in a thoughtful review. Some of the music in the first scene of Act III, in the garden of the palace, IS gorgeous, there's no other word for it. The carping comments pointing out flaws in the production and performances fail to take into account the significance of the occasion. To think that the whole thing was pulled together in five weeks is truly amazing.

On the whole, I'd give Heather Ogden the edge over Sonia Rodriguez -- the risk-taking was clearer. And I was delighted to see her in yesterday's matinee after being dropped by the Merlin character toward the end of Saturday night's performance. I think Mladenov's Don grew in grandeur over the course of the week, and I liked Eric Ragan's Sancho Panza, particularly after sitting next to his mother on Saturday night. I can report that Sancho's mom is a nice woman from Texas. Anyhow, I had a great time. In the interests of full disclosure, I will reveal that apart from the ballet, the highlight of my week was at Suzanne's book signing on Saturday afternoon, when she blew me a kiss. :clapping:

#64 BW

BW

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,048 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 04:32 PM

Oh Farrell Fan, thank you sooooooo much for posting here. I've been awaiting your word on the production and the performances! :beg: :wub: I'm sorry I wasn't there with you to experience it and see a couple of other dancers whose parents I know thanks to Ballet Talk. :clapping: Your point about it all being put together in 5 weeks is a good one.

I'm touched by the blown kiss and very glad that you enjoyed yourself so much.

#65 Jack Reed

Jack Reed

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 06:18 PM

Looking back over the run from Monday's viewpoint with the help of some of the latest posts - leibling's especially, and Farrell Fan's - I'm moved all over again. It was a phenomenal week - the production's strengths were many and powerful.

Someone should mention Zack Brown's name - he's the scenic designer - because, thanks to a discussion with a friend from New York who came down for the weekend and who helped me remember more of the first setting than the few black-and-white pictures do, I think his work in this is really better than Esteban Frances's orginals. For example, there was a staircase at the left before, just hidden by a curtain; Brown's stair is enclosed in a giant book, which Marcela opens very early in the ballet - Sancho Panza makes his entrance down it - and, very late, when Don Quixote is on his deathbed, she slowly closes it: The Don's reading is over. Considering the role the Don's reading plays in the plot, this is wonderful, compared to a mere curtain.

And my friend recalled for us how dead Frances's Act II was, but while Brown and Holly Hynes have retained the dominent color scheme - black trimmed in gold - the scene doesn't look dead to me - the light fixtures overhead, the metal details in the grand staircase (on the right in this scene) down which the guests arrive at the ball, indeed little glints of light play off the gold trim on the costumes of the aristocrats like echoes of the handsome fixtures above. (I could quibble about the tapestry behind the Duchess's throne, which is so "busy" the Don disappers into it when he stands motionless in front of it, but as my friend pointed out, the aristos pay him no attention either, until it suits them to taunt him, so it fits.) Anyway, for me, the ballet takes off when this scene begins - it's very attractive when we first see it, and the dancing is mostly better than in Act I, and there's more of it.

Not that Act I is nothing. It establishes the characters and the situation and it entertains, too, intermittently: I was delighted by the puppet show, richly imagined by someone who knew what children couldn't do, and didn't force that issue, and how much they could do, and exploited that, in the best sense of the word.

But what prodigious dancing there was last week! leibling's examples are really good ones - post more often, leibling! - because they show the individuality Balanchine encouraged and Farrell encourages, not merely among dancers but among each dancer's dances. Mahoney's two dances were so very differently done that when I first saw them I experienced a kind of cognitive disconnect between what I had seen and what the program book told me - that it was the same dancer in both, at the same performance. And so I think you're right, leibling, Pickard's highly detailed dancing is what Farrell tries to draw from her dancers in the sense that, in my experience anyway, this way of detailing what she shows us is uniquely Pickard's way among Farrell's dancers (like the dancing of Deanna Seay among the others in MCB, my other favorite company). Or was this what you meant?

And Ogden's last Dulcinea was the most marvelous - in the Dream Ballet in Act III she seemed to be pressing onward into risky new territory from the strong, clear verticality that has been hers so far in this production. Do you think so also, Farrell Fan? Or did you see this sooner in the run?

If I had to choose between Mauresque women, I would still prefer Magnicaballi by a small margin over Sladkin - Magnicaballi seemed to me more creamy-clear, large and flowing, showing greater mastery, although Sladkin was often sharper, some details slipped away from her. But Magnicaballi is an established principal, and Sladkin, as Mike points out, is listed in the corps! Both showed us what a great little gem this is, and it's one of those times I'm lucky I didn't have to choose - thanks to the three women - the two dancers and Ms. Farrell - I got both.

Sladkin's third performance in Mauresque Sunday afternoon was even better than her eye-popping one on Saturday's matinee, and was preceeded by a few minutes by another corps girl, Lisa Reneau, in her one performance of Rigaudon Flamenco, with Runqiao Du. If it was a debut, it didn't look like one; it was clear and assured.

But to return to leibling's post, I also wanted a little more drama here and there. For example, when I wash my feet, I lift each one and put it down. And at the end, Marcela is rather dutiful about closing the book and crouching to pick up the sticks to make the cross she lays on Don Quixote. Does she realize what finality closing the book signifies? Maybe she could caress wistfully the edge of the book as she slowly crouches, with her head at a bit of an angle against it too? Or is this sentimental? Just an idea. So much of this production is at such a high level - mainly the ensembles, variations, divertissements and the designs, but not entirely - that when a lapse or blank spot appears, it shows, by contrast.

#66 kfw

kfw

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,267 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 06:40 PM

Juliet and dirac, the folks who expected Petipaís Don Q. have my most ironic sympathy, as the one time I tried watching that ballet I quickly lost interest. Some day in a good faith attempt to renounce heresy Iíll try again. Anyhow, Balanchineís version of the story fascinated me even when it didnít fully engage me.

Farrell Fan, I'm really glad you could see the ballet this time!

The rapid shifts between the tragic (which I felt in whenever Dulcinea was onstage or she and/or Marcela and the Don were onstage together) and the farcial (recurring in the Don's battles with Disneyesque phanthoms) still jarred yesterday afternoon, but I was thrilled by Ogden's abandon, and, as I believe someone else commented, each solo and pas and ensemble set piece had fleeting delicious moments that cried out to be seen again.

I too experienced Ogden and Rodriguez and dancers merely portraying rather than fully inhabiting the character of Dulcinea, but for me this was as much a result of their relatively pinched acting as their relatively upright dancing. As leibling said, they lacked sensuality. Give them time. I have a framed photo in my study that I bought in a Russian restaurant in Cambridge, Mass. years ago (they were going out of business): a grainy black and white closeup of of Balanchine in a suitcoat (?) clasping Farrell's arm and leading her on. Or so I read it. It must be from a Don Quixote rehearsal. Both partners have a depth of feeling and understanding on their faces that make last week's couples look shallow by comparison. That said, I'm filled with gratitude to and admiration for Farrell and the whole company for their efforts and the beauty of their accomplishments, and for letting latecomers like me see this historical and remarkable ballet.

Jack, it's been great to read your thoughts night after night.

#67 Leigh Witchel

Leigh Witchel

    Editorial Advisor

  • Editorial Advisor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,466 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 07:30 PM

I saw both Sunday performances. Count me among the ambivalent. I have less problems with the choreography (the ballet gets better as it goes on) than I do with its viewpoint and atmosphere. I didn't expect to find it so masochistic and self-pitying, and there are hints of this in other ballets by Balanchine (Davidsbundlertanze, for instance) but I've never gotten three acts of it before.

I had little problem with the music other than finding it not top-drawer. The level of Farrell's company is also still very inconsistent. She's going to have to come to terms with the fact that some of her dancers are not at the level she needs.

I've seen most of the Canadian dancers a few times in Toronto, so a few comments. Ogden danced well, but can't fill the role. Rodriguez danced even better (I really liked her Sunday night Act III, and she tries to give a build to the Act I Marcela variation), but she's at this point too mature for the role. It isn't as if Rodriguez is old, but that role needs to read innocent and naive.

In subsidiary roles, Lise Marie Jourdain looked very good in the corps as well as in an Act III variation, but that was also a problem - that's what the level of the corps ought to be, and it isn't. Kevin Bowles was distinguished in character parts - I saw him as Beaujoulais in Toronto, is that his specialty?

Lastly a big compliment to Zack Brown and Holly Hynes - Farrell's productions have always looked impoverished. This one finally didn't, so also a compliment to whomever got her the budget she needed.

#68 Marga

Marga

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,022 posts

Posted 27 June 2005 - 08:06 PM

From the very first entrance of Dulcinea, where she bends over to dry the Don's feet with her hair- I wished for something more imaginative- more sensuous. I found myself trying to imagine what Suzanne's own performance might have been like in this role.

I recall Farrell's performing this with solemnity, certainly not sensuality, at least not for me. Some may have found it sensuous, I suppose.

I remember it quite clearly: her long hair swung over her head and down, held in her hand, one hand lifting each of Balanchine's feet in turn -- it was more a nurturing motion, as a gentle nurse would do it, or even reverential, as Mary Magdalene to Jesus! Slow and deliberate, intently focused on the task -- one of the most memorable parts of the ballet!

#69 Farrell Fan

Farrell Fan

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,930 posts

Posted 28 June 2005 - 09:03 AM

Marga's recollection of the hair wash-and-dry scene is the way I remember it as well -- reverential, not sensual, and one of the most memorable parts of the ballet. In contrast, the scene in this production faded into the background, perhaps because neither Rodriquez nor Ogden has long-enough hair.

Jack, I saw all three of Heather Ogden's performances and agree that the last one on Sunday afternoon was by far the best. It was also the best I saw all week, but I only saw two of Rodriguez's four performances -- opening night and Friday. I think the ballet came together as a whole very well at the Friday night performance. I saw Robert Gottlieb in the audience for Ogden's first performance on Thursday night and can't wait to find out what he thought of it and the ballet as a whole. My reaction at the end of the week is much like yours -- it was a great achievement -- not quite an unqualified success, but a brilliant restoration of an essential part of the Balanchine legacy. And the score has been going through my head for a couple of days now -- no kidding.

#70 kiki

kiki

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 28 June 2005 - 01:35 PM

Is there anywhere online that lists the dancers in SF's company? I am interested in corps, soloists and principles. It's interesting to see who dances for her!

#71 Helene

Helene

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,127 posts

Posted 28 June 2005 - 02:04 PM

Unfortunately, Suzanne Farrell Ballet doesn't have a dedicated official website, but a few pages for the Company, Farrell, and several performers are hosted on the Kennedy Center site.

http://www.kennedy-c...d=4965&source=O

There are miminal listings of company members in the upper right corner (currently only Farrell herself, Principals Chan Hon Goh, Natalia Magnicaballi, and Runquio Du, and Soloist Sonia Rodriguez, with links to bios.)

#72 Jack Reed

Jack Reed

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 28 June 2005 - 02:18 PM

Farrell Fan, I also find bits of the music running through my head. Now, ordinarily, when a tune gets stuck in my head, I can listen to other music for relief from it, but when I let this music play, I can see the dancing! So, my dilemma is, will I ever be able to listen to other music again?

kiki, the soloists listed on the front page of the program number 12 and corps 29 but I think many members of the NBoC are included. The answer to this question might be more complicated than it appears at first. But check back in a day or two; after all, this is Ballet Talk!

#73 Jack Reed

Jack Reed

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,511 posts

Posted 29 June 2005 - 07:00 AM

kiki, after I slept on your question, I realized you didn't ask who's in NBoC and who's in Farrell's usual troupe. You just want to know who's dancing for her this time, right? That's not so hard to answer. Here's the list from my program, including the principals again for completeness:

PRINCIPALS [4]
Chan Han Goh (On leave of absence)
Natalia Magnacaballi
Sonia Rodriguez
Runqiao Du

SOLOISTS [12]
Erin Mahoney
Heather Ogden
Shannon Parsley
Bonnie Pickard
Jean-Sebastien Colau
Keiichi Hirano
Nehemiah Kish
Momchil Mladenov
Jared Redick
Eric Ragan
Alexander Ritter
Avinoam Silverman

CORPS DE BALLET [29]
Erin Ackert
Gina Artese
Amy Brandt
Kristen Gallagher
Celeste Gucanac
Elizabeth Holowchuk
Sara Ivan
Lise-Marie Jourdain
Alejandra Perez-Gomez
Katelyn Prominski
Lisa Reneau
Erin Richardson
Mariaelena Ruiz
Parise Sellitti
Cheryl Sladkin
Lydia Walker
Ilona Wall
Amanda Weingarten
Bill Biondolino
Kevin Bowles
James Leja
Benjamin Lester
Daisuke Ohno
Stephen Straub
Alfiero Supan
Adam Toth
Edward Tracz
Joseph Welbes
Aarik Welles

APPRENTICES
Megan-Marie Carlo
Gwendolyn Duffy
Lauren Fitzpatrick
Oriana Kacicek
Claire Roseland
Dallas Blagg
Joseph Bunn
Ken Guan
James Reed Hague
Andrew Kaminski

CHILDREN
Katie Gilmartin
Gabriel Hearn-Desautels
Kiva McGhee
Courtney Milton
Marissa Ann Rocco
Tiffany Terlizzi
Timothee Courlouble
Aaron Hilton
Robert Stanley

#74 Farrell Fan

Farrell Fan

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,930 posts

Posted 29 June 2005 - 08:06 AM

Thanks for posting that list, Jack, thereby keeping this thread alive. Not that I'm in danger of forgetting that glorious week anytime soon. What I have forgotten are the particulars of the class Suzanne was to teach for "adult non-dancers." I remember a couple of people posting in anticipation of the event and I'd like to know if it lived up to expectations. (In other words, just how wonderful was it?)

#75 ami1436

ami1436

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 325 posts

Posted 29 June 2005 - 08:25 AM

Farrell Fan - the accounts of that day are fabulous. See end of the thread at:
Exploring Ballet with Suzanne Farrell, for Adults (At Ballet Talk for Dancers)

:)

Of course, how gutted am I that this company started up *after* I moved away from DC??? :)


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):