The Goldberg Variations
Posted 05 April 2002 - 10:00 PM
Posted 07 April 2002 - 01:58 PM
for Dances and Goldbergs I'd probably have to lay down in front
of the water fountain located just outside of standing room.
Manhattnik, I don't know why you like the Starbucks at 67th and Columbus--it's really gloomy and I really hate paying $3 for a jigger of coffee with a pound of milk foam. Better a cup of joe
or a small chardonnay at Peter's at 68th & Columbus.
Posted 07 April 2002 - 05:21 PM
Myself, I have been known to run out to Balducci's and get soup and a biscuit...depending on what shoes I'm wearing....(sometimes I just stagger out to the lobby and listen in my head to the music....you can get a lot of beading done on a bodice in 83 minutes of Goldberg.)
When I was at school outside of Chicago, many is the fourth act of an opera which was sacrificed to The Last Train....
Back to Goldberg, I like the music. Sitting in the theatre for the ballet fulfills it's initial purpose: sound sleep. ;)
Posted 07 April 2002 - 05:25 PM
Posted 07 April 2002 - 11:48 PM
Posted 08 April 2002 - 04:16 PM
On the one hand, a part is often so clearly built on one individual's style and gifts that any replacement seems inept and out of place. The most obvious example is Mozartiana, a bouquet from Mr. B to Suzanne Farrell. The concluding "Theme and Variations," in particular, is a virtual encyclopedia of Farrell steps and gestures. After her retirement, the company avoided the work for a few seasons, then tried one or two top-flight ballerinas in the role. They just looked like bad imitations of the original, despite their considerable efforts. Finally, Kyra Nichols came along and showed how to make it her own. She explained in an interview that she only studied the tape long enough to learn the steps, then put it away, working on the part just with a mirror. As a result, there is an homage to the original in the high splits and off-balance turns, but the performance is all Kyra.
Sometimes, though, it's just a matter of experience. Darci Kistler, for instance, is a dancer who just keeps getting better the more often she performs a role. I remember her first Sonnambula only because I wish I could forget it: competent but without passion. When I saw her do it recently, she was ravishing, almost reminiscent of Allegra Kent's evanescent performance.
There's an extra problem with the Robbins ballets, since he preferred to stage revivals with the company's younger members, who would do his bidding in every detail. He was a fanatic for re-creating precisely the image he wanted, and more experienced dancers, confronted with a step they find awkward, tend to say, "Gee, Jerry, don't you think it looks better this way?" while demonstrating an alternative. As a result, Robbins gave us a chance to see rising stars in demanding parts, but they didn't always have the chance to mature in them.
Posted 13 April 2002 - 03:19 PM
What both of you said helped me to understand why I loved it so much, and I agree with both of you on the points you made about Robbins.
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):