Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

2011 Met season - official announcement


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#61 California

California

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,587 posts

Posted 03 December 2010 - 07:00 AM

In the newly printed brochure, the program for the mixed rep evening is now New Ratmansky, New Wheeldon and Shadowplay. There is no mention of a new Millipied work on the program. That is at odds with their previous season announcement.

Interesting...All four works are still listed on the "Calendar" page on the ABT site:
http://www.abt.org/c...rtdate=5/1/2011

And still no word on the TBA casting for Don Quixote May 21 and Swan Lake July 2.

#62 richard53dog

richard53dog

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts

Posted 03 December 2010 - 08:42 AM


In the newly printed brochure, the program for the mixed rep evening is now New Ratmansky, New Wheeldon and Shadowplay. There is no mention of a new Millipied work on the program. That is at odds with their previous season announcement.

Interesting...All four works are still listed on the "Calendar" page on the ABT site:
http://www.abt.org/c...rtdate=5/1/2011



I got my brochure yesterday and was looking at the ABT online calendar last night. I looked at that mixed bill and thought, that could be a very long evening!! I'd be happy with one less of the new premieres, my pick to ditch would be the Millipied so I hope the brochure contains the later information.

Also I'm wondering if the "new Millipied" that is being brought to Moscow in MArch is the same work that ABT may preform in NY in May

#63 Ambonnay

Ambonnay

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 07 December 2010 - 01:06 AM

On Hallberg imitating a ballerina in Bright Stream, NT doesn't really mimic the pointe work. I wonder if a male principal dancer could do that kind of thing, or whether it is specific to the training for a ballerina?

Separately, the front of the current brochure has a picture of Gillian that seems different from her prior pictures not only due to the lack of makeup, but also by the weight she appears to have lost if the picture is not airbrushed.

#64 abatt

abatt

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,883 posts

Posted 07 December 2010 - 06:10 AM

On Hallberg imitating a ballerina in Bright Stream, NT doesn't really mimic the pointe work. I wonder if a male principal dancer could do that kind of thing, or whether it is specific to the training for a ballerina?

Separately, the front of the current brochure has a picture of Gillian that seems different from her prior pictures not only due to the lack of makeup, but also by the weight she appears to have lost if the picture is not airbrushed.


I saw Murphy a few weeks ago at a performance where she was in the audience. She looks exactly like she has always looked, and has not lost weight. The photo on the brochure is the worst I have ever seen from Ferri. They have altered her image to make her look like a figure out of a wax museum.

#65 abatt

abatt

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,883 posts

Posted 10 January 2011 - 01:23 PM

ABT has added some casting info on its website. Part's partner for SL is Cory. Bolle is partnering Paloma in Giselle. I'm not too happy about the Stearns partnership with Part for SL. I was hoping it would be Bolle. Also, Reyes will be partnered by Radetsky in Cinderella.

#66 Krystin

Krystin

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 14 January 2011 - 08:39 AM

I saw above that people had a question about whether David Hallberg would actually be performing in pointe shoes for The Bright Stream. ABT released their e-newsletter (I'm assuming this is appropriate to link to because it was released by the company) and there is a great shot of Hallberg in pointe shoes. Here is the link: The Bright Stream

#67 DeCoster

DeCoster

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 08:02 AM

Speaking of Hallberg (and other dancers with lovely arches), does anyone have any speculation on the Seminova/Hallberg DQ?

I usually do 4 Sat. matinees with my Mom (she doesn't like to stay up late) and a couple evenings with my friend. It seems that in the past 2 years they've really improved the casting for Sat. matinees. Last season we got an Osipova/Hallberg R & J and a Murphy/ Carreno SL. Perhaps the management has noticed that the matinees sell very well.

Nice to see opportunities for Maria Riccetto. She ended up partnering Simkin in Nutcracker and she appears with him again in Coppelia. (I heard their Nut pas de deux was excellent, although regretfully I was not there.) Someone mentioned that they hoped Sarah Lane would sort of experience opportunities via a partnership with Simkin. Although I admire Sarah Lane, I personally would quite prefer these chances go to Maria. She not only has paid her dues, but is a much more consistent dancer, and, although it might not be mentioned much, she can act!

Also of note: Hammoudi is cast for another principal role after his own Grownup Nutcracker Prince debut. Speaking of nice feet!

#68 Ambonnay

Ambonnay

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 17 January 2011 - 08:28 PM

I think there should be a certain alertness to not giving less tall ballerinas opportunities just because there is a less tall male soloist or male principal who need partners (ie Simkins and Cornejo). That was how ABT ended up with a Reyes who doesn't dance material roles, in many instances, with anybody other than Cornejo and who, in my mind, falls somewhat below the standard for an ABT principal ballerina (although that standard is not met by certain other ABT principal ballerinas as well). If Kajiya, Lane and Riccetto get roles that, absent the height of these ballerinas, would be accorded to other soloists or corp members by merit, then is it right to prioritize finding a partner for short men over the advancement and development of other ballerinas?

Why don't the taller women who might now be losing opportunities get priority and, when they get roles, cause non-short men to be cast next to them? Why the male development focus? Why shouldn't Simkins be given more roles that don't require female pairing per se or that don't involve him being the "lead" danseur (eg Ali the Slave; Puck in Midsummer Night's Dream; )?

Allowing men who can only pair one or two principals or soloists mainly also has detrimental effects on other men in the company, who have to take on more roles with all the non-short ballerinas. Hence, the recent inability of Cornejo to carry the load in the way that Hallberg/Gomes and even Stearns have. Note I am not talking about men who are slightly on the less tall side, like Corella, who can still pair a number of ballerinas. I am talking about cornejo and Simkins.

A related issue is why ballet adheres to the traditions that that male danseur is expected to be taller than the ballerina. Is that something that audiences should reconsider?

#69 RUKen

RUKen

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 72 posts

Posted 19 January 2011 - 05:56 AM

I think there should be a certain alertness to not giving less tall ballerinas opportunities just because there is a less tall male soloist or male principal who need partners (ie Simkins and Cornejo). That was how ABT ended up with a Reyes who doesn't dance material roles, in many instances, with anybody other than Cornejo and who, in my mind, falls somewhat below the standard for an ABT principal ballerina...


My recollection is that Xiomara Reyes was already dancing lead roles when Herman Cornejo was still relegated to supporting roles. (Someone with access to the casting during the mid-2000's can check on this.) Regardless, your points are good ones. For the past decade, one of ABT's perceived selling points has been its male principals. Their strategy may be to build on their strength from within while addressing their weakness with guest performers.

#70 DeCoster

DeCoster

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 19 January 2011 - 01:37 PM

If Kajiya, Lane and Riccetto get roles that, absent the height of these ballerinas, would be accorded to other soloists or corp members by merit, then is it right to prioritize finding a partner for short men over the advancement and development of other ballerinas? Why don't the taller women who might now be losing opportunities get priority and, when they get roles, cause non-short men to be cast next to them? Why the male development focus?


A related issue is why ballet adheres to the traditions that that male danseur is expected to be taller than the ballerina. Is that something that audiences should reconsider?


I don't think that male development is always the focus: it goes both ways. I would venture to say that Cory Stearns has received certain opportunities because his height allows him to partner some of the more established taller women such as Part and Wiles.

Height is not merely a matter of aesthetics, either. Women grow several inches on pointe (taller girls grow more, as they have bigger feet). Often the male dancer has to hold the female dancer's arm above her head to support her in assisted pirouettes and promenades (I wish I could describe this better, but hopefully you know what I mean). This could be difficult and tends to look really awkward if she is already taller then him on flat ground. (Just imagine someone is taller than you and you have to hold one of their arms over their head while they spin around in front of you.) Also, there are lifts to consider. Gomes can partner anyone, but Simkin, as one can easily see, is somewhat limited as to whom he can hoist over his head.

It does seem unfair: a small ballerina can be partnered by a tall/big guy (like Boylston and Gomes in EHAO or Julie Kent with Roberto Bolle) but generally a tall ballerina doesn't work with a small guy (because of reasons I mentioned). Of course there is some choreography that doesn't call for pointe shoes, or doesn't call for much partnering, where height doesn't matter much. Or even some--Prodigal Son comes to mind--where a taller girl and smaller guy can work to great effect.


I love watching partnerships develop and evolve; it's one of my favorite parts of ballet. I'm not sure if Reyes' was promoted mainly as a partner to Cornejo; I recall that Julio Bocca and Angel Corrella used to partner Reyes fairly regularly as well. (Of course Bocca retired years ago and we see little of Corella these days) She may not be a technical virtuoso like Murphy and others, but I always admire her acting and musicality. I've come to appreciate her more and more over the years, especially her Giselle and Juliet.

Incidentally, if you're interested in a parody of the classical ballet paradigm you should check out the Trockoderos. They love to play on the big ballerina with the small male dancer theme. It's pretty astounding some of the partnering they actually do pull off, but you can clearly see (and get a good chuckle at) the difficulties that arise. They will also provide an answer to your pointework question.


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):