Macaulay on ABT Spring Season

[CTballetfan]

Just read Alastair Macauley's review of ABT's spring season. Sorry I don't know how to set up the link. If you read it, please respond with your thoughts on his take.

[Waelsung]

Here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/05/arts/dance/review-american-ballet-theater-season-metropolitan-opera-house.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Farts&_r=0

Since I attended only one performance this season (Swan Lake with my beloved Veronika Part who unfortunately was underwhelming), I should not be allowed to comment, but I am going to say anyway (because this is not an opinion but fact) that financially the season was a disaster. With the exception of Misty's performances, Ferri's geriatric Juliet and a couple of Vishneva's outings, tickets for everything else were widely available across all the sections. The main reason? If you ask me, it's the abundance of hapless Ratmansky's ballets dominating the repertoire and the absence of true stars that could justify shelling out $125-$150 for a decent seat. Just my not so humble opinion, of course, but I personally am not going to pay a dime for a Ratmansky production ever again and am not willing to attend anything that doesn't have at least one real international superstar on stage.

[aurora]

Here's the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/05/arts/dance/review-american-ballet-theater-season-metropolitan-opera-house.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Farts&_r=0

Since I attended only one performance this season (Swan Lake with my beloved Veronika Part who unfortunately was underwhelming), I should not be allowed to comment, but I am going to say anyway (because this is not an opinion but fact) that financially the season was a disaster. With the exception of Misty's performances, Ferri's geriatric Juliet and a couple of Vishneva's outings, tickets for everything else were widely available across all the sections. The main reason? If you ask me, it's the abundance of hapless Ratmansky's ballets dominating the repertoire and the absence of true stars that could justify shelling out $125-$150 for a decent seat. Just my not so humble opinion, of course, but I personally am not going to pay a dime for a Ratmansky production ever again and am not willing to attend anything that doesn't have at least one real international superstar on stage.

well, I'm glad you aren't in charge. I think Ratmansky is brilliant. But opinions are well, you know.

[Kaysta]

I think, overall, Ratmansky is the best thing to have happened to ABT in recent years. ABT lost a lot of talent in the last decade. They can try to replenish it by importing rent a Russians, which will keep the fans of Russian ballet buying tickets, or they can choose to grow the company from within and eventually build their own stars. While the second option may be slower and more painful, it's better for the long term health of the company. At this point, the company is well used to Ratmansky's style and it's what is keeping this company fresh and artistically relevant.

If someone would rather see Zakharova and her sky high ostentatious extensions in another warhorse, to each their own. Personally, I will take seeing ABTs dancers in the Shostakovich Trilogy, the highlight of the Met season for me.

[miliosr]

In Macaulay's accounting of things, though, he reported that the two Ashtons -- Sylvia and La Fille mal Gardee -- were the two worst-selling items of the season. Ratmansky's not responsible for that and it's a sad day when Ashton has now become a tough sell in New York.

Macaulay's comments about Cory Stearns are right in line with general thinking on this board -- that he excels in sinister character parts. Macaulay references Stearns' performance in Firebird and Stearns earned some of his best reviews ever for his performances as the sinister Moor's Friend (Iago) in The Moor's Pavane.

[Olga]

I think, overall, Ratmansky is the best thing to have happened to ABT in recent years. ABT lost a lot of talent in the last decade. They can try to replenish it by importing rent a Russians, which will keep the fans of Russian ballet buying tickets, or they can choose to grow the company from within and eventually build their own stars. While the second option may be slower and more painful, it's better for the long term health of the company. At this point, the company is well used to Ratmansky's style and it's what is keeping this company fresh and artistically relevant.

If someone would rather see Zakharova and her sky high ostentatious extensions in another warhorse, to each their own. Personally, I will take seeing ABTs dancers in the Shostakovich Trilogy, the highlight of the Met season for me.

I agree that Ratmansky is the best thing going at ABT and that the Shostakovich Trilogy was the highlight of this

ABT season. And I would also say that Serenade/Symposium was stunning, Cockerel was fascinating and Sleeping Beauty was much more enjoyable than last year. As I've said elsewhere on this board, we in New York City are incredibly fortunate to have Ratmansky choreographing for both NYCB and ABT. I'm looking forward to the Spring seasons when we will be treated to more new work and also to both companies performing some of his older. I saw both the Ashtons: I thought Sylvia just didn't work, very flat performances, and I don't feel I can comment fairly on the other one because it just isn't my cup of tea. As for ABT's Swan Lake...I hope Ratmansky's version goes to Pennsylvania or Boston so it will be relatively easy for me to see.

[aurora]

In Macaulay's accounting of things, though, he reported that the two Ashtons -- Sylvia and La Fille mal Gardee -- were the two worst-selling items of the season. Ratmansky's not responsible for that and it's a sad day when Ashton has now become a tough sell in New York.

Macaulay's comments about Cory Stearns are right in line with general thinking on this board -- that he excels in sinister character parts. Macaulay references Stearns' performance in Firebird and Stearns earned some of his best reviews ever for his performances as the sinister Moor's Friend (Iago) in The Moor's Pavane.

Agreed. I think they need to make a concerted effort, if they schedule Ashton again soon (and I hope they do, I don't want another what--12 year ?--hiatus for Fille) to advertise it better. Really promote Fille especially as a family friendly event, which it most certainly is.

Sylvia had issues this year--first ballet so they were a bit rough around the edges, hit by an injury to the ballerina who excels most in the role in her first performance, which by all accounts was therefore somewhat compromised (Murphy). I think that she really is the only natural Sylvia they currently have (maybe Polina? who pulled out pre-season!). It is a great part but not, without some more coaching, a great fit on anyone else in the company at this moment. It has also been done with some frequency lately. Perhaps scheduling it and Fille was too much Ashton for an unfamiliar audience.

[Olga]

My recent post got me thinking, or I should say hoping. Wouldn't it be grand if ABT ditched its current Swan Lake and brought Ratmansky's in. The Met should be large enough to do the full scale La Scala production -- making good use of the cavernous Met stage. Additionally, it would be great for the dancers. One of the noticeable aspects of Ratmansky is that he gets great performances out of his dancers. I think it would be very helpful for them to be coached by him in that role.

[abatt]

From what I observed, the first few weeks sold poorly, but the R&J, Swan Lake and SB sold very well. When you add to that the fact that every Copeland performance sold very well or was a sell out, perhaps that's enough to finance the emply seats for Ashton and other poor selling ballets.

I became a Boylston convert this year. I've avoided her performances for a few years. She has improved a great deal.

[stuben]

I agree with several of the comments on this thread, especially about the scheduling of the season, I too, felt sad to see the low ticket sales for the start of the season, but then again I thought (and again my own take) Sylvia was a poor choice. I may be wrong but having seen the draw of the later half of the season, perhaps they should have started with either a classic like SL or SB? Then into the rest, just to get the attention of those "visitors" to the ballet, in general I feel that everyone knows Swan Lake and like any form of advertising.... get their attention first?

I also feel that the low attendance of performances like Cockerel could be the lack of knowledge about this ballet for many new comers? I am thinking there should be more "education" in the ballet schools or studios about the history of ballets, I know in any given local studio, everyone knows of The Nutcracker, Swan Lake, Sleeping Beauty, but I doubt many know of Cockerel or similar ballets, so I would start in the education level long term.

As for short time to get people interested, I thought they should have combined Cockerel with Firebird? Two birds in one day? Cockerel can easily be a one act ballet (as I have read many comments), this might help to be a Ratmansky night too!

I mostly like his work, but I do feel that some that are a bit dark may not fare well with some of the audience, I actually heard someone snore during a part of "Serenade After Plato’s Symposium", I don't think it was his choreography but the lighting along with the music?! Since the rest of the show I saw was lively and lighting was bright, that does help especially if you are in the evening shows.

I also do believe in nurturing from within vs imports, since after all this is called the American Ballet Theatre, with emphasis of the "American", otherwise, it would be called the "Russian Ballet Theatre" or "International Ballet Theatre"?! My take on this would be ... why hire US/homegrown talents and let them sit in the corps to be supporting roles for imports or heavily PR dancers!?

[nanushka]

...but I personally ... am not willing to attend anything that doesn't have at least one real international superstar on stage.

Wow. That's quite a statement!

[Birdsall]

I do think "stars" are always going to help sell. I agree with someone above who said that it will be a long and maybe painful process of mainly using homegrown talent, b/c most of us outside of NY do not really know the corps members or up-and-coming dancers. Trenary was a complete delight to me in Sleeping Beauty, although two friends who frequent ABT had said she was probably going to be good, because there is buzz around her. I thought it would be a good debut by a young dancer and was not prepared for just how good it was! So I see value in the homegrown talent.

And I mainly flew up to see the "work" (the reconstruction) out of curiosity, so I did not really care about "stars," but if I were going to fly up for Swan Lake or something I have seen many times and was not flying up to see the "work" itself, I would probably choose performances with "stars."

I guess I have too much opera fan left in me (although I never go to the opera anymore...things are so bad when Radvanovsky gets all the bel canto roles, in my opinion). In opera STARS are very important. It is one of the reasons the Met has such a huge reputation. I think it is going through some problems currently, but in the 80s and 90s and early 2000s you could fly up and see huge stars in every show you attended. If someone canceled usually a fairly decent star jumped in. Most opera lovers I know want to see the big stars in all their roles. Yes, an up and coming singer (or dancer) is always exciting when they give a performance that is sometimes better than a "star," but the performing arts do tend to revolve around stars. I think it is more blatant in opera and Hollywood. Ballet dancers have a much less nomadic lifestyle (they guest here and there occasionally but usually stay most of the time with a home company), so I think it is more normal to have homegrown talent in a ballet company, but until ABT has very recognizeable homegrown talent that are buzzed about in London, Paris, Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc. I think a good approach might be to have SOME stars (maybe a couple more than this past season) while also using a heavy rotation of homegrown talent to give them experience and exposure and prove to the world that a trip to ABT is as exciting as the Mariinsky or Bolshoi.

[Olga]

Another factor in the low attendance at the beginning of the season is that the first three weeks overlapped with NYCB. Those weeks included both Ashton's and a lot of Ratmansky's. Definitely though, ABT could have done a lot more to promote Cockerel.

[nanushka]

I think a good approach might be to have SOME stars (maybe a couple more than this past season) while also using a heavy rotation of homegrown talent to give them experience and exposure and prove to the world that a trip to ABT is as exciting as the Mariinsky or Bolshoi.

This sounds good in theory, but once you give all the current principals a performance or two and throw in one or two guest stars, there really isn't much room left over for up-and-coming homegrown dancers to have a shot. If your goal truly is homegrown talent, it's not enough to just give the current principals a slot; you also have to make some space for the ones who aren't yet at that level -- like Trenary. If one or two guest artists had been given a Sleeping Beauty this year, she would likely not have gotten to perform the role.

[stuben]

I do think "stars" are always going to help sell. I agree with someone above who said that it will be a long and maybe painful process of mainly using homegrown talent, b/c most of us outside of NY do not really know the corps members or up-and-coming dancers....

This is why I love the NYCB website, each dancer corps or otherwise, have a voice! They have managed to get in a short video of the dancers for anyone not in the area or know enough of these talents and what they have done to get into the company! This may also be why many of the dancers at ABT have to do their own social media to basically help the audience know who they are?!...

Another factor in the low attendance at the beginning of the season is that the first three weeks overlapped with NYCB. Those weeks included both Ashton's and a lot of Ratmansky's. Definitely though, ABT could have done a lot more to promote Cockerel.

Good point and forgot about the overlap, which should be an even more important note for ABT to take about promoting what they do during this time! So marketing is not doing their job as the NYCB

[Birdsall]

This sounds good in theory, but once you give all the current principals a performance or two and throw in one or two guest stars, there really isn't much room left over for up-and-coming homegrown dancers to have a shot. If your goal truly is homegrown talent, it's not enough to just give the current principals a slot; you also have to make some space for the ones who aren't yet at that level -- like Trenary. If one or two guest artists had been given a Sleeping Beauty this year, she would likely not have gotten to perform the role.

What I meant was maybe instead of Seo or Murphy there could have been Vishneva (or someone else) in at least one of those two performances. Then, in Swan Lake maybe Tereshkina could have had one performance, etc. Just a couple more stars but spread out so as not to keep anyone from getting a chance. I don't mean fill up the week of Swan Lake or Sleeping Beauty with stars but have at least one in each ballet run and the other slots could be for homegrown. So Trenary could have still gotten her chance in SB and another star would have been in another ballet. Seo did two performances and that to me was overkill considering the talent level. And I really doubt the name Seo or even Murphy (as well known as she is) really bring in the out-of-towners......One of the Seo performances could have gone to a well known ballerina. I think there are ways to do it so that both homegrown and international stars could have chances and maybe once the homegrown talent have names that are known around the world maybe then jettison most of the international stars, but for right now I think they need some famous stars to keep buzz alive. To me this past season had a few stars but it seemed like it went from too many to not enough. There should be a happy medium to please various types of people. But that is just my opinion.

[Kaysta]

Didn't Seo do two performances because she filled in for Semionova?

I don't mind one or two outsiders brought in per season, but one for each performance is too much for me, when I'm still waiting to see Gillian dance Giselle, Stella dance O/O, Sarah Lane dance Juliet, Trenary dance anything.

But I understand some folks feel differently.

[mimsyb]

Didn't Seo do two performances because she filled in for Semionova?

I don't mind one or two outsiders brought in per season, but one for each performance is too much for me, when I'm still waiting to see Gillian dance Giselle, Stella dance O/O, Sarah Lane dance Juliet, Trenary dance anything.

But I understand some folks feel differently.

I am of the opinion that a dancer doesn't get better or grow in a role if all they get is one performance in any given season. These things take time, nurturing. Any performance given over to a visiting star (who more often than not has nothing vested in ABT) is one less chance for our "home-growns" to discover what they need to do to improve or shine brighter. And if a ballet is not performed again say, for two or more years, well that's just time taken away from their growth as an artist. Getting real stage time is very important for any dancer. I hate to keep re-iterating this, but it's one of the reasons that so many of the dancers at NYCB can actually hope they might move up. Everyone does so much dancing during a season, in so many ballets, that an AD can really see which dancer is ready for promotion. I think at times if dancer "A" or dancer"B" is always seen in the "Swan Lake" corps, then that's where they stay. Maybe ABT should do a "Night of the Stars" and use that one performance to showcase a bunch of visiting stars. And then leave the rest of the Season to the actual company members.

[abatt]

I thought Seo's SB last season was better than her efforts this season. I'm not necessarily in agreement that more performances = improved performances. A prime example is Cory Stearns. He's been a principal for several years and has been doing the same lead roles for several years (in NYC and also on tours), but as pointed out in the NY Times, he still seems stunted in leading classical roles. Bad coaching?

[Mme. Hermine]

In a season like ABTs over so many weeks, evidently Macaulay is allowed to skip reviewing a ballet just because he doesn't like it?

[abatt]

ABT may actually be happy that he did not review Corsaire. Every time he does he calls it foolish. No publicity is better than bad publicity. His review would probably not have helped ABT sell any additional tickets. Back in the day, ABT didn't need any review to increase Corsaire sales. The idea of seeing Ananiashvilli, Bocca, Carreno and Malhakov on the same night meant that tickets flew out the door. Alas, not anymore....

[DeCoster]

My recent post got me thinking, or I should say hoping. Wouldn't it be grand if ABT ditched its current Swan Lake and brought Ratmansky's in. The Met should be large enough to do the full scale La Scala production -- making good use of the cavernous Met stage. Additionally, it would be great for the dancers. One of the noticeable aspects of Ratmansky is that he gets great performances out of his dancers. I think it would be very helpful for them to be coached by him in that role.

Yes to this, Olga! You can't read an interview with an ABT dancer without their mentioning how exacting and detailed Ratmansky is in rehearsals, or how they are so motivated to achieve his high standards. I always envied those who were around to attend NYCB during the Balanchine years, and I feel fortunate to be witnessing this.

It's really illogical to blame low ticket sales on Ratmansky. The Firebird and Shostakovich performances I attended sold quite well, in contrast with the Ashtons, and Sleeping Beauty seemed mostly sold-out, even in standing-room. Ratmansky is the most sought-after choreographer in ballet currently (despite what Vogue magazine said recently), and I think the most historically important. It's quite the coup that ABT landed him, considering the offers he likely had. It's almost hilarious to me that folks are complaining about him. Perhaps they have short memories, or maybe they'd prefer a revival of Snow Maiden.

Ratmansky premieres actually feel like happenings, and you see not only big-money types but many dancers from other companies in attendance. I hope he stays with us for the remainder of the career.

So I agree with Mr. Macaulay's season review. (I too skipped Corsaire) And I can't wait to see what is in store for the Fall.

[Olga]

DeCoster - so true. And I also skipped Corsaire!

[Kaysta]

I am of the opinion that a dancer doesn't get better or grow in a role if all they get is one performance in any given season. These things take time, nurturing. Any performance given over to a visiting star (who more often than not has nothing vested in ABT) is one less chance for our "home-growns" to discover what they need to do to improve or shine brighter. And if a ballet is not performed again say, for two or more years, well that's just time taken away from their growth as an artist. Getting real stage time is very important for any dancer. I hate to keep re-iterating this, but it's one of the reasons that so many of the dancers at NYCB can actually hope they might move up. Everyone does so much dancing during a season, in so many ballets, that an AD can really see which dancer is ready for promotion. I think at times if dancer "A" or dancer"B" is always seen in the "Swan Lake" corps, then that's where they stay. Maybe ABT should do a "Night of the Stars" and use that one performance to showcase a bunch of visiting stars. And then leave the rest of the Season to the actual company members.

I completely agree with you Mimsyb. I don't want a return of the guest artists. I was happy to see less of them this season--not because I don't enjoy watching them dance--but as someone who loves ABT, I feel it's detrimental to the long term health of the company. Growing pains are necessary sometimes, things go in cycles.

But I would like to see Sarah Lane as Juliet on the Met stage before I die. Same with Stella as O/O.

[Kaysta]

Yes to this, Olga! You can't read an interview with an ABT dancer without their mentioning how exacting and detailed Ratmansky is in rehearsals, or how they are so motivated to achieve his high standards. I always envied those who were around to attend NYCB during the Balanchine years, and I feel fortunate to be witnessing this.

It's really illogical to blame low ticket sales on Ratmansky. The Firebird and Shostakovich performances I attended sold quite well, in contrast with the Ashtons, and Sleeping Beauty seemed mostly sold-out, even in standing-room. Ratmansky is the most sought-after choreographer in ballet currently (despite what Vogue magazine said recently), and I think the most historically important. It's quite the coup that ABT landed him, considering the offers he likely had. It's almost hilarious to me that folks are complaining about him. Perhaps they have short memories, or maybe they'd prefer a revival of Snow Maiden.

Ratmansky premieres actually feel like happenings, and you see not only big-money types but many dancers from other companies in attendance. I hope he stays with us for the remainder of the career.

So I agree with Mr. Macaulay's season review. (I too skipped Corsaire) And I can't wait to see what is in store for the Fall.

Also agree with both you and Olga.

It might not be true, but sometimes it seems like Ratmansky is the only one coaching the dancers. From the outside, it appears he is more hands on with his work and gives more direction to them. Obviously this is a complete outsiders perspective, so I may be off base.

I hope parts of the Shostakovich trilogy come back for the fall. As well as Plato's symposium.