Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Revivals -- Balanchine works revived by Balanchine ballerinas


Recommended Posts

[NOTE: I split this off from the original Revivals thread, as that was devoted generally to NYCB rep, and this is more specifically aimed at Balanchine works and how they might be revived for his approaching Centennial.]

Back to City Ballet's rep, here's a suggestion that's bound to be popular: invite every living Balanchine ballerina to come in and stage, or at least help coach, a ballet in which she created or embodied a role. A sort of living bouquet for Mr. B.

Link to comment

Farrell coaching Monumentum/Movements. I've seen her do it, but would love to see her get world-class dancers in the leads.

Kent coaching La Sonnambula.

How about letting Suki Schorer do something with the company? Her stagings for the school are so full of musical detail.

If magic were possible, to see how Leclercq would have coached.

Link to comment

Between this wishful thinking and The New Yorker article, I'm getting depresssed. Not about having all the former ballerinas come, etc. but the idea that this is only a pipe dream. :P And, I really can't imagine the Eifman deal happening! Although I've not actually seen his work, I have to believe you all in that it would be totally wrong for the company, past, present or future.

On another thread, Leigh, you explained how the ballet company hierarchy works... So is it really only up to the Ballet Master in Chief how to handle the upcoming season? Are prayer and supplication the only route? Does the Board of Directors have any serious input and/or control?

Link to comment

Juliet, I agree with you. Eifman and Farrell are definitely mutually exclusive, though I am sure she will figure hugely in his "life of Balanchine" ballet.

Martins is very skilled at saying all the right things (ie "This is Balanchine's House, blah, blah, blah"), but he was never a believer--he simply wanted the director's chair. If Balanchine ever mistreated him, he has avenged himself well, and perhaps there is some of that in commissioning Eifman. I can't explain inviting that bombast in any other way. And when he does come, Martins will say, " here is a choreographer from Balanchine's native city. Like Balanchine he is an innovator; how else can we honor a great choreographer but with a new ballet, blah, blah, blah". Kisselgoff will clap like a happy little seal over at the Times.

It's too depressing. :(

Link to comment

I can't answer that question specifically, Leigh, but I was once called to fact check a New Yorker piece and the questions were exremely thorough. It wasn't just "was the ballet choreographed in 1955 or 1956" but "do you agree with the metaphor that that section of that city is like Brooklyn"? And when I said yes, I had to defend it as though I had written it.

So I'd be surprised if such a statement would have passed such dragons without back up :(

Link to comment

When did that happen, Alexandra? I ask because the magazine's fabled fact-checking has gotten more careless in recent years. Typical was John Lahr's statement, in his review of the current Broadway production of Oklahoma, that the leading actress was the first ever to dance the role of Laurey as well as act and sing it. In fact, an actress named Susan Watson did that in 1964. (This caused quite a ruckus on a theater bulletin board I visit.)

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...