NYCB to present Romeo and Juliet in 2007

[Dale]

Although Robert Gottlieb's piece in the NY Observer takes on ABT's MacMillan productions, he does drop a bomb in it regarding NYCB:

Romeo (which MacMillan created in 1965) benefits from a compulsively theatrical plot: It was, remember, devised in the first place by someone who knew what he was doing. It’s also the world’s most famous love story, and not only do all young actors and dancers want to appear in it, but audiences inevitably want to see it—it’s worked in every kind of theatrical situation: stage productions, operas, Broadway musicals, movies, as well as numerous other dance versions, including ones by Lavrovsky, Ashton, Tudor and Cranko. (And, rumor has it, a Peter Martins version on the way.)

So, how do we feel about the possibility of a long-form Romeo and Juliet (the company already has Lavery's pas de deux) at NYCB?

[drb]

Generally, the R&J's currently available are long boring ballets with a few high spots for the lead characters. Peter Martins does have a history of shortening the classics, so that could be all to the good: more ballet, fewer swords, and less posturing. More importantly, NYCB has more natural star-level Juliets than the competition has (excluding guest super-stars). Just for starters: Bouder, Mearns, Scheller, X (he's not afraid to cast a surprise newbie, and the loyal audience loves to see them).

Of course, the same is true for Sleeping Beauty too...

[Farrell Fan]

Having recently returned from Saratoga where Martins's Swan Lake was well-received, all I can think of is that Romeo and Juliet would probably boost the attendance there considerably next year, for at least a week. For myself, I'll stick to the few minutes of Bejart's love duet for Farrell and Donn in the Elusive Muse film.

[perky]

I've never liked the Prokofiev Romeo and Juliet score. Hearing it played in The State Theatre is not something I would look forward to. Is it really true that full length ballets=fuller houses? I can't think of any other reason why they would consider a full length Romeo and Juliet at The State Theatre. It just doesn't seem like R&J and NYCB go together. Instead of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich you have a peanut butter and pickle sandwich . If Martins feels the need to do another full length, why this one? It doesn't have the soloist opportunities for the women that Petipa's full lengths do.

[drb]

Yes Perky, alas, selling tickets. Just look at the full houses for R&J at the cavernous Met, and in ABT's "dead time" of mid July too. The "name" and star-turns by the leads sell. Even though reviewers and BTers found so much dull time in it. But it would fulfill some company needs. 1. a lot of the younger men have really improved of late and are in need of consequential roles. A Tyler Angle Romeo? Craig Hall a Mercutio? Or vice versa. And so on... 2. the hope would be that Peter would replace some of that dull stuff with things like his Lake's choreography for the trio of women (how about deleting the boring three harlots with a divertissement for three ballerinas?). Hopefully, it won't be set in Denmark...

[richard53dog]

So, how do we feel about the possibility of a long-form Romeo and Juliet (the company already has Lavery's pas de deux) at NYCB?

I for one feel like shuddering or maybe .

That would mean another program with just Martins on it. Although it would be real easy to avoid.

Richard

[Farrell Fan]

I've never liked the Prokofiev Romeo and Juliet score. Hearing it played in The State Theatre is not something I would look forward to.

Nor I. Maybe this project might not seem so depressing if Tchaikovsky's music were used, or Delius's, or Berlioz's. How about Bellini? Zingarelli? Zandonai? Some of these scores might not be suitable for a "full length" ballet, in which case the new music director could be put to work filling in the blanks.

[Leigh Witchel]

The company's training is antithetical to full-length narrative ballets. NYCB is deliberately not a dance-actor's company, and the full-lengths by Balanchine tactfully work around this.

So now that there is Swan Lake, Sleeping Beauty and potentially a R&J, will the company's training change to accomodate this? Let's face it, neither the Swan Lake nor the Sleeping Beauty is a world-class production - is NYCB going to dump their world-class rep in favor of second tier stuff? What will give, the new full lengths or the older repertory? And of all the full lengths, R&J is the one that's least satisfying from an institutional standpoint (besides roles for the lead couple and Mercutio, there's not much).

I wonder what the company's profile will look like in two decades.

[bart]

The company's training is antithetical to full-length narrative ballets. NYCB is deliberately not a dance-actor's company, and the full-lengths by Balanchine tactfully work around this.

So now that there is Swan Lake, Sleeping Beauty and potentially a R&J, will the company's training change to accomodate this?

A very interesting question. Here's another to those who know about what is going on at the School of American Ballet:

given that Swan Lake and Sleeping Beauty are already in the rep and that people are seriously considering the possibility of adding a full-evening Romeo and Juliet, has there ALREADY been a change in the training at SAB that would help prepare the dancers for this kind of rep? What IS being done, for instance in training for the character work required for both corps and soloists in R&J? Or do the dancers have to learn how to do it once they're in the company?

[carbro]

[H]as there ALREADY been a change in the training at SAB that would help prepare the dancers for this kind of rep?

There were already character and ballroom classes at SAB in Balanchine's day. But in terms of the classicism, I don't think Martins sees a need, as he has adapted the "classical" choreography to the bodies he has and the training that has shaped them.

Is NYCB going to dump their world-class rep in favor of second tier stuff? . . .

I wonder what the company's profile will look like in two decades.

Wasn't it you, Leigh, who noted that greater care is already being invested in the newer works at the expense of the older ones? If the world class rep hasn't been literally dumped, it is being dumped by neglect.

I wonder if there's even a long-term vision -- beyond immediate marketing gimmicks -- behind building the company's rep (although it is hard to see the substitution of Balanchine ballets in favor of Martins ones as "building"). Perhaps the first such "gimmick" was the 1972 Stravinsky Festival, but when it yields such "novelties" as Symphony in Three Movements, Divertimento from Le Baiser de la Fee and Stravinsky Violin Concerto -- three ballets approaching (if not quite at) masterpiece quality, it's easy to forgive any commercial motivation. In fact, it's easy to applaud the Festival as a self-made motherlode of creativity. That logic evaporates quickly in light of subsequent composer-themed festivals (despite a few minor gems and a major work or two coming from each), and completely disappears when we start examining the fruits of the American Music Festival and almost all -- until the last -- the Diamond Festivals.

Does Martins expect a full-length Romeo to develop his company in a new direction or develop latent gifts of his dancers, or just sell tickets? I think the point about few roles for soloists is important.

Unlike perky and Farrell Fan, I like the Prokofiev score. I don't think it works well as the basis for ballet, but I enjoy listening to it. Whether it or another ends up accompanying some new NYCB R&J, I'll keep in mind the following principle: You can't trash what you have not seen. I'll be there. Who knows? Maybe my prejudices will be dashed! Wouldn't that be a slap in my face! And what a happy relief!

[AmandaNYC]

... I'll keep in mind the following principle: You can't trash what you have not seen. I'll be there. Who knows? Maybe my prejudices will be dashed! Wouldn't that be a slap in my face! And what a happy relief!

I'm going to second what carbro said... and hide behind that.

But...

Does Martins expect a full-length Romeo to develop his company in a new direction or develop latent gifts of his dancers, or just sell tickets? I think the point about few roles for soloists is important.

The main thing I really love about NYCB doing SB and SL (and Nutcracker, too) is that these ballets provide many soloist roles, giving the dancers more opportunities and giving us more opportunities to see different dancers shine. I don't particularly like narrative ballets, which is why I go to NYCB regularly and go to ABT rarely (city center seating doesn't help change the latter). So, I hope when and if NYCB decides to undertake a new full-length ballet, it has opportunities for many dancers in the company.

On the positive side, Martins' more streamlined full-length ballets are what get me to watch a full-length ballet I would not normally be willing to sit through... not that it's a reason to undertake R&J or another full-length ballet.

-amanda

[drb]

... Maybe this project might not seem so depressing if Tchaikovsky's music were used, or Delius's, or Berlioz's. How about Bellini? Zingarelli? Zandonai?...

Or maybe Luigi Marescalchi, who composed the first Giulietta e Romeo (he even got the order right!) ballet score in 1785 for choreographer Eusebio Luzzi, a five-act version, for intermission lovers. But more to the point, the score by Constant Lambert for the Bronislava Nijinska 1926 Ballet Russe version, with some choreography by BALANCHINE!

[beck_hen]

Not something I'd be eager to see. It's not that I think Martins has no right to do it, or even make money off it. I wonder if it will show off the dancers as well as other works in the repertoire do.

Having nurtured an admiration for Wendy Whelan's adagio dancing, I decided to see her and Woetzel essay Swan Lake. I saw competent professional dancing that wasn't magical. Seeing Whelan in Concerto Barocco is a very magical and even holy outing. There was something that didn't translate. My personal feeling is that I don't gain as much watching NYCB in the traditional repertoire as I do watching them in their regular repertoire.

However, if it works, it works. I can imagine, with time travel a possibility, buying a ticket for McBride and Tomasson in Coppelia.

Still, R&J does seem like a moneymaker choice. There are other versions, like the Tudor or Ashton, that eschew the bombast of the Macmillan, and in Tudor's case, the Prokofiev score. If the dancers aren't suited to any of those, what will be different about the Martins? What I mean is, what changes would be made to create a neoclassical R&J? Macmillan's has the political and social framework, and the other two I understand to be emotional chamber ballets involving the main characters. Is changing the style of the dancing and shortening the evening enough of an update? Since we all know the story, the work can really function as plotless? I am interested in the vignetted/symbolic/condensed narratives Ashton used in Marguerite and Armand, A Month in the Country and Enigma Variations, but is Martins interested in that type of thing in the slightest? It's easy to be cynical.

If you choose to make narrative ballets there are many subjects out there. Carlos Acosta recently complained in an interview that people are not choreographing to interesting narratives, and proposed adapting Khaled Hosseini's novel The Kite Runner. That type of work may not be in NYCB's line, but it might prove more artistically compelling than an R&J retread.

[Hans]

If Jenifer Ringer is still with the company (I haven't kept up with NYCB dancers' comings and goings) I'll bet her Juliet would be pretty extraordinary. Just please don't let Per Kirkeby (sp?) design the sets....

[carbro]

Jenifer Ringer is indeed still with the company and has proven herself a potentially formidable Juliet in the Lavery balcony scene. I use the word "potentially" not because of anything lacking in Jenny but rather the thinness of the pas. Lavery, I would argue, uses too few steps. Martins' tendency (he has improved remarkably in this regard) is to use too many.

[Brioche]

I haven't seen it, but read about it endlessy - Kent Stowell's R and J for Pacific Northwest Ballet is apparently quite good. Perhaps the title is different ....The Trajedy of ............?

And it's a collection of Tchaikovsky's music as I recall.

And as a Marketing Manager at a small company - yes, programs with ballets of a narrative nature do sell better (to the general public) then a mixed program. We've only recently gone that way - out of neccisity for keeping the company up and running and building a larger audience.

[Hans]

Hm, I'm not sure I'd title anything starting with "The Tragedy of...." That's just asking for snide comments from critics.

[Helene]

Kent Stowell's version for PNB is, indeed, called The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, and it is a wonderful ballet. Music Director Stewart Kershaw created the score from many Tchaikovsky scores, most of which are little known. Not a note of Tchaikovsky's "Romeo and Juliet" was used.

One of the highlights of the ballet is the last scene of the first act, the wedding scene. It is entirely in mime and set to the "Pregheria" from Tchaikovsky's Suite No. 4, which Balanchine used for Mozartiana (both versions). Flemming Halby performed the role of Friar Lawrence for years, and now that he's retired, he'll be greatly missed.

[zerbinetta]

Unfortunate as it seems to add another full-lengther to CBs repertory, the 60 -70% houses often seen in spring/summer '06 might necessitate a cash cow like R&J.

But it would be preferable to hire Ratmansky to do the job.

[papeetepatrick]

Unlike perky and Farrell Fan, I like the Prokofiev score. I don't think it works well as the basis for ballet, but I enjoy listening to it. Whether it or another ends up accompanying some new NYCB R&J, I'll keep in mind the following principle: You can't trash what you have not seen. I'll be there. Who knows? Maybe my prejudices will be dashed! Wouldn't that be a slap in my face! And what a happy relief!

Yes, I also like (in fact, adore) the Prokofiev score, and cannot even think of a single full-length ballet score I prefer. It's definitely on a par with 'Swan Lake' and 'Sleeping Beauty,' and way beyond 'Nutcracker,' which has all that flabby-sounding stuff in the first act. I'd be somewhat interested in a Martins version. I saw Lavery's pas de deux this winter and found it extremely unsatisfying--this could be mostly for those of us who do like the full-length Prokofiev ballet, but it seemed to just not have time to quite even start, much less build up into something (I think it was Borree and Askegaard I saw in this, but it was so forgettable I've forgotten that too). I remember that on the same program was 'Friandises,' which is also not very satisfying, but there was at least one moment when dancers went like bullets diagonally across the stage that I can remember.

[Helene]

But it would be preferable to hire Ratmansky to do the job.

That is a wonderful idea.

[Amy Reusch]

Or they could revive Tudor's R&J. I've heard it was very nice and would be curious to see it. I believe it uses the Tchaikovsky score and is fairly short (could it be one act?)... I don't know that would fit the bill for NYCB.

[richard53dog]

Or they could revive Tudor's R&J. I've heard it was very nice and would be curious to see it. I believe it uses the Tchaikovsky score and is fairly short (could it be one act?)... I don't know that would fit the bill for NYCB.

Amy,

Tudor's R&J is set to pieces by Delius. The music is much more gentle than the Prokofiev.

You are correct, it is one act , about 1 hour. When I saw it , it was on a bill with other pieces.

I wonder how audiences today would take to it, it's more abstract than the versions more commonly done today.

Richard

[zerbinetta]

It's a beautiful piece & I'd love to see it revived but don't think it's for NYCB.

[KayDenmark]

God, no, not Ratmansky. His Anna Karenina at the Royal Danish Ballet was unwatchable. The only thing that kept me from fleeing in the middle was some great stagecraft and scenery, which I'm assuming he didn't build himself.

I'm with you on the Per Kirkeby sets, however. He's seen in Denmark as a master painter, but I sure don't see what makes him special.