Jump to content


ABT in DC-Kennedy Center, spring 2013Mixed Bill and Corsaire


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#16 California

California

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,416 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:10 AM

It's a shame Herman Cornejo had to pull out of the performance (hopefully it's only precautionary?), but Jared Matthews was a dynamo in the virtuoso role. Perhaps not quite as explosive as Cornejo, but still thrilling.

Bad news about Cornejo - he had to pull out mid-performance when they did this piece at City Center last fall. Anybody know what the problem is? I hope this is just a terrible coincidence. He is cast in some great roles in the Met season.

#17 abatt

abatt

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:11 AM

. Julie Kent looked lovely but didn't have much to do.
.


I think that was part of the reason they revivied it - Give Kent something to do that's not very difficult. That's her only assignment for the KC Tour, since she does not do Le Corsaire anymore. I suspect the reason they are doing Month in The Country at the Met is to give Kent a relatively easy role to do.

#18 YouOverThere

YouOverThere

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 371 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 10:49 AM


It's a shame Herman Cornejo had to pull out of the performance (hopefully it's only precautionary?), but Jared Matthews was a dynamo in the virtuoso role. Perhaps not quite as explosive as Cornejo, but still thrilling.

Bad news about Cornejo - he had to pull out mid-performance when they did this piece at City Center last fall. Anybody know what the problem is? I hope this is just a terrible coincidence. He is cast in some great roles in the Met season.


The program merely said that he was ill, and made it sound as if it was something of a last-minute switch.

#19 vipa

vipa

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 05:43 PM


. Julie Kent looked lovely but didn't have much to do.
.


I think that was part of the reason they revivied it - Give Kent something to do that's not very difficult. That's her only assignment for the KC Tour, since she does not do Le Corsaire anymore. I suspect the reason they are doing Month in The Country at the Met is to give Kent a relatively easy role to do.


Isn't that strange? I haven't seen Julie Kent dance in years but do have a ticket to see her in Month in The Country at the Met (she's not the reason I bought the ticket). Why do they keep her on if she is so limited that they have to find things for her to do?

#20 Alexandra

Alexandra

    Board Founder

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,242 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:14 PM



. Julie Kent looked lovely but didn't have much to do.
.


I think that was part of the reason they revivied it - Give Kent something to do that's not very difficult. That's her only assignment for the KC Tour, since she does not do Le Corsaire anymore. I suspect the reason they are doing Month in The Country at the Met is to give Kent a relatively easy role to do.


Isn't that strange? I haven't seen Julie Kent dance in years but do have a ticket to see her in Month in The Country at the Met (she's not the reason I bought the ticket). Why do they keep her on if she is so limited that they have to find things for her to do?


There are a lot of different types of ballets, and they need different types of dancers. Some emphasize technique, dramatic ballets need people who can bring a character and different situations to life, and often older dancers have the maturity to do that better than the technicians. I think we need all of them :) (I don't think Natalia Petrovna is so easy a role, either. It doesn't have fouettes in it, but the pas de deux are not simple.)

#21 Meow

Meow

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:44 PM

I saw the mixed bill this evening. Most of the people who post here are more educated about the ballet than I am, so it was interesting for me to read the mostly positive reviews. My reaction to Symphony in C was that is was not the pristine, classical dancing I expected. To me, it did not seem sharp and clear. The Moor's Pavane was the high point for me, and I thought Simone Messmer was the standout. I wondered if the men could have given it more force. In Symphony No. 9, it seemed to me that Ratmansky threw in everything but the kitchen sink. Everyone was moving all the time, there did not seem to be much purpose or even beauty to a lot of it, and then there were these moments that I guess were supposed to be coy humor, like the repeated falling to the floor in jerky steps, that just made me say What??? And why???

#22 Alexandra

Alexandra

    Board Founder

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,242 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:42 PM

Meow, I was there this evening too, and didn't think it quite as strong as last night, in some ways. It still looks to me as though they're cleaning "Symphony in C". Tonight there were more Balanchinean touches. (I actually liked last night's absolutely un-Balanchinean joy.) Re "Symphony # 9," you might be interested in this interview with Ratmansky in the New York Times by Brian Eibert called "For the Love of Shostakovich, the Destroyer." It addresses the musical issues you raise and gives a lot of interesting background on the music and the ballet. Here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.c...ch-project.html

My take on Ratmansky is that he's genuinely doing something new, and often I "get it" (or at least think I do Posted Image ) on subsequent viewings. Opening night, I saw the historical references; tonight it seemed more of a dance piece. It's both, and probably more. He DOES do a lot of things at once. There's one section where the small groups of dancers are all doing something a bit different, and with different musicality, at top speed, I knew there was a reason for it, but it certainly shook my eyes. But it all comes together, and probably if I see the piece 2 or 3 more times, I'll be able to read it as a whole and it will make perfect sense right off the bat.

One humorous note. There's a section in the ballet when the lighting (by Jennifer Tipton) takes center stage for just a second and changes the piece. Stops the flow cold, changes the mood, makes one aware that something earth shaking is about to happen. It's so stark and arresting that the woman sitting in front of me -- who seemed to have been texting, head bowed, all evening -- suddenly sat bolt upright and didn't take her eyes off the stage for the rest of the piece.

Edited by Alexandra, 10 April 2013 - 08:09 PM.
clarity


#23 SimonA

SimonA

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:52 PM

How was Veronika Part in the Balanchine slow movement tonight?

#24 Alexandra

Alexandra

    Board Founder

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,242 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:57 PM

Well, there are pirouettes :) But she has such a soul that it doesn't matter. I thought she started a bit quietly, and ended strongly, but two friends who were there that I spoke to were very moved by her performance. Unexpectedly, I thought she was quite strong (and oh, so beautiful) in the finale.

#25 YouOverThere

YouOverThere

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 371 posts

Posted 10 April 2013 - 08:00 PM

I decided that the Metro isn't THAT expensive or inconvenient, and with tickets discounted by $20 it was too much to resist going back. I think that Meow summarized it pretty well. Symphony in C is, I think, a piece that has more appeal to people who understand the technical aspects of dance than to people like me who just like an engaging show. My opinion of Balanchine's work will probably seem as stupid to serious dance fans as my opinion of Mozart's music seems to serious music fans. I enjoyed the Tuesday performance a little more. There one lead ballerina, I think that it was the second one (the one who was quite tall), who seemed somewhat mechanical. I found The Moor's Pavane to be more meaningful the second time around (plus this time I read the program notes beforehand), even though I thought that the dancers weren't quite as in sync as on Tuesday. I was struck by how little movement there was in the audience during this piece; it seemed that everyone was totally engaged in the piece. I too did not find a followable "program" to the choreography for Symphony no. 9, but I didn't care. The dancing was challenging and entertaining, and any excuse to listen to something by Shostakovich was good enough for me.

As I said in my earlier post, I thought that the ABT did a better job of programming than the NYCB. Three ballets that were completely different accompanied by music that ranged from Baroque to Romantic to Modern. IMHO, that makes for an interesting show.

#26 Natalia

Natalia

    Rubies Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,388 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:18 AM

re. Tuesday's opener:

A rather mixed program. Odd to have the big classical-tutu piece (Bizet) at the start, then go 'modern' after that. Many folks in 2nd-tier left after the 2nd ballet, Moor's Pavane.

Liked some aspects of the Ratmansky - clever steps and patterns in spots - but not the overall mish-mash of the work. Is it happy? Is it sad? What's up with the jester-like character? Despised the feckin'-ugly black/white costumes and somber lighting. Yawn. Not the most appealing of music...the usual 'snare drums marches' we hear in almost all of Schostakovich's work. And to think that folks at the Met will have to sit through three of these next month. Not even the beauty of Part & Bolle, and the high-jumping feats of Matthews, can save this dog. [For a wonderful Ratmansky ballet set to a melodious Schostakovich work, go to Concerto DSCH (NYCB). That is a masterpiece, clearly understandable...and it has COLOR!]

Moor's Pavane - Hard to believe that his was the most viually colorful work of the night - a RED dress! Fine performance by Marcelo Gomes as the Moor.

The best work of the night by far -- Balan/Bizet Symphony in C -- had its problems with corps unison and even some soloists (e.g., Herrera/Whiteside in 1st mvt unusually stiff). Hee Seo was absolutely gorgeous in 2nd movement; that entrance of buttery bourrees was to die for! Seo & Hammoudi were perfect in the adagio (2n mvt) but she had a little off-balance moment during her initial pirouettes during her moments of the coda. Kudos of the night go to the 3rd mvmt dancers, Isabella Boylston & Danil Simkin, who combined finesse with technical brilliance.

#27 puppytreats

puppytreats

    Gold Circle

  • Inactive Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 751 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:28 AM

Did Ratmansky modify the choreography since the Fall?

#28 SimonA

SimonA

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 75 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:43 AM

Did Ratmansky modify the choreography since the Fall?


I didn't notice any changes.

#29 abatt

abatt

    Sapphire Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,550 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 05:44 AM

Boylston and Simkin will not be doing Symphony in C in NY at the Met. 3rd movement will be Reyes/Cornejo alternating w. Osiliev. I suspect that ABT will do Symphony in C at their Fall Koch engagement, and I'm guessing that Bolylston Simkin will probably be cast in 3rd moveemnt during that engagement.

#30 angelica

angelica

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 468 posts

Posted 11 April 2013 - 10:20 AM

Boylston and Simkin will not be doing Symphony in C in NY at the Met. 3rd movement will be Reyes/Cornejo alternating w. Osiliev. I suspect that ABT will do Symphony in C at their Fall Koch engagement, and I'm guessing that Bolylston Simkin will probably be cast in 3rd moveemnt during that engagement.


Osiliev. Haha. Clever.


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):