nanushka

R&J is a pretty long show. Personally, I'd go before and maybe do drinks or dessert after.

I agree. If you want a truly excellent dinner, conveniently located (it's steps from the Met), and don't mind a notch up in price (but also quality) from the others, I'd say definitely go to the Lincoln.

I too am curious to hear more about this — i.e. what form the backlash has taken.

I agree about the original Brahms as a work. Even the final movement seems paradoxically more exciting, I think, with the smaller-scale instrumentation (given a skilled enough ensemble, of course).

The piece was made as an early large-scale work for their new home and larger stage at Lincoln Center. It’s so rich and lush and (IMO) overstuffed, I don’t think it could possibly work with less than full orchestration. Stravinsky recommended the Schoenberg to Balanchine, I believe.

There are some descriptions in Nancy Reynolds' Repertory in Review that I found interesting and that really captured what I saw in Mearns' performance of the role a few years back:

Woodward is still listed for this weekend (in Dances at a Gathering), at least in the cast list on the NYCB website. Are people seeing something different elsewhere?

Yes, hence the NYT headline: "Mariinsky Dancers Barred..."

It was certainly a controversial decision — but a debacle?

The Times has details on next year's offerings here. (Link should work for non-subscribers.)

I really don't think there's going to be widespread confusion about an obscure Balanchine ballet from 1933 (revived and adapted in 1935 and 1941), especially when all it takes is a glance at the more detailed info in any program or on any repertory page to clarify what's what. Do we even know when this piece was last performed or if its choreography is known by anyone living? Balanchine himself seems to have been unbothered by the recycling of titles for wholly different works (e.g. Mozartiana — admittedly using the same music, but still), or by changing the name of existing works to suit the tastes (his own or others') of a new time.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tzigane#:~:text=tzigane (plural tziganes),Hungarian Gypsy (Romani person). tzigane (plural tziganes) (sometimes offensive)[4] A Hungarian Gypsy (Romani person).

Phelan in the Brahms-Schoenberg gypsy rondo? Hmmm.

Sure, it's a fact. But it's also rhetoric. There's a message in how it's presented — and in the fact that it's the only fact stated in the byline.

Yes, just because someone's hired into the corps without their height totally precluding their ever being considered for promotion doesn't mean that height won't end up being one (if not the) reason they are or aren't promoted. Promotions happen in the context of the company at a particular time, including the needs and capacities (e.g. potential partners, repertoire) of the upper ranks at that time.