Alistair Macaulay's recent review of an Ailey II performance is an example:
The way to survive Ailey II’s quadruple bill “New Works” is to concentrate on the dancers, who are young, engaging and remarkably individual. Otherwise it’s like an exaggerated version of too many evenings at its parent company, the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater, when “Revelations” isn’t on the program: attractive dancers, limited and repetitious choreography.
Of course, not everyone will agree with Macaulay's estimation of either Ailey company -- but we have all had similar experiences with some company or other at some point in our lives. (My most recent was with Rasta Thomas's Bad Boys of Dance in their "Rock the Ballet" program.)
Has this happened to you? How do you handle such experiences? Can one distinguish between the dancing and what is being danced? Can you really enjoy and appreciate skuch a program? Do experiences like this make you feel uplifted by the quality of dance training, or despondant about the state of the art, or some wierd combination of both?
P.S. I ask because I grew up on Balanchine in New York, which makes me tend to think of dancers as servants of the choreography. This means I myself have a hard time separating the two.