Farrell Fan Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Along with my opening night tickets in today's mail, there was this notice: "Dear Patron, Please note that New York City Ballet's Opening Night 2005 program will not include George Balanchine's Tarantella as listed on your Guild invitation. The prgram for that evening will include Fearful Symmetries choreographed by Peter Martins, the world premiere of a New Ballet choreographed by Albert Evans (only performance this season), and N.Y. Export: Opus Jazz choreographed by Jerome Robbins." I suppose something like this was inevitable sooner or later, but I am nevertheless very angry and very sad that Mr. B is being dispensed with on opening night. Shame on you, Peter Martins! Link to comment
Alexandra Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Now, now, Farrrell Fan. Let's be fair. There are so few Balanchine ballets that when "Tarantella" was pulled -- undoubtedly for an excellent reason -- it would have been impossible to find a substitute Link to comment
Dale Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 There wasn't any Balanchine in the last gala and the only Balanchine in last Winter's gala was Tschaikovsky pas de deux. Bad sign. Link to comment
Juliet Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Farrell is doing ALL Balanchine that week. Come to 'what used to be the dead zone, but is improving'...... Bad sign is right, Dale..... Link to comment
carbro Posted October 2, 2005 Share Posted October 2, 2005 What's a Balanchine? FF, aren't you glad you're otherwise engaged? Link to comment
bart Posted October 2, 2005 Share Posted October 2, 2005 The correct spelling is "bal a Chine." This refers to a dance hall somewhere in China, where Balanchine performances may still be found. Link to comment
drb Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 The correct spelling is "bal a Chine." This refers to a dance hall somewhere in China, where Balanchine performances may still be found. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Will the Majestic Theatre in Shanghai do? Serenade premiers with the Shanghai Ballet on October 25. Or, sticking with the Frenchified spelling, how about the Chatalet in Paris, November 28, 29, where Mr. B.'s old Mariinsky will give Four Temperaments, La Valse, Ballet Imperial and Prodigal Son. Just not in The House of Balanchine.... But then isn't what Peter Martins is offering much more exciting than, say, what Peter Boal offered for PNB's Gala? Link to comment
KayDenmark Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I get the point here, but I would like to see the Evans. Didn't his first piece for NYCB receive good reviews? And as Martins goes, "Fearful Symmetries" is by far my favorite. Link to comment
oberon Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 The dud on the programme is the Robbins. It looks so dated and corny now. Maybe Albert's ballet ended up being longer that expected, or it was felt that TARANTELLA didn't go with Albert's piece. At any rate, I'd much rather see a new Evans than my 2,000,000th TARANTELLA. Link to comment
Alexandra Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Yes, it's a shame Balanchine didn't create any substantive works. One does get so tired of "Tarantella." Link to comment
oberon Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Yes, he did make a few substantive ballets and I wish they were doing one of them instead of the Robbins. One of the problems with TARANTELLA is, it often gets thrown on as a substitute piece when dancers in a scheduled ballet are injured. Link to comment
sz Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 There are so few Balanchine ballets that when "Tarantella" was pulled -- undoubtedly for an excellent reason -- it would have been impossible to find a substitute <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Alexandra, you're a hoot! While I'm also disappointed to hear that there will be no Balanchine ballets performed at NYCB's (aka Peter Martins' Ballet Co.) on opening night... rest assured, Balanchine ballets (14) outnumber Robbins (6), Martins (7) and Wheeldon (5) in the 2006 Winter Season. Link to comment
PetipaFan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Remember what B was quoted as saying in Bernard Taper's book: "He says he doesn't want his works preserved. "For whom?" he asks me. "For people to see that I don't even know what they're like, that aren't even born yet? And are my ballets going to be danced by dancers I don't know, that I haven't trained? Those won't really be my ballets. The choreography, the steps--those don't mean a thing. Steps are made by a person. It's the person dancing the steps--that's what choreography is, not the steps themselves."" Why would you want to see Balanchine ballets anyway, Farrell Fan? (I'm joking, of course.) Link to comment
Farrell Fan Posted October 3, 2005 Author Share Posted October 3, 2005 I like "Fearful Symmetries" as well, and look forward to Albert Evans's new ballet. But in recent years, opening night has become a largely ceremonial, symbolic occasion which leads not into a week or two of repertory, but into weeks on end of "Nutcracker." (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) Last year's opening night program, "Ballet Four Ways," reduced Balanchine to one of a choreographic quartet. This year he's gone altogether. Despite season statistics, the symbolism of this is terrible. Link to comment
harpergroup Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Be grateful that it's "Fearful Symmetries" - we could have had "Morgen" (a true soporific). Link to comment
oberon Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Sorry, but I think MORGEN is a gorgeous piece...and I HATED it the first time I saw it: literally sat there thinking "When is this crap going to end?" Later, it was on a programme with two other things that I just HAD to see and so I thought I would go and sit out in the lobby during MORGEN and chat up the ushers. But then I decided to give it another shot and I was simply floored. Normally, I do not like ballets to vocal music, but this - and, curiously, CHICHESTER PSALMS - proved exceptions. The incredible opening passage for Kistler, in which she simply bourees amid the columns, drew me in. The six dancers appear is a series of duets, each of the three women having a pas de deux with each of the three men. The women seem, like the heroine of Strauss's ARABELLA, to be seeking "the right man." At the end, they have each found the person they are meant to be with. The piece affords three of my favorite ballerinas - Kistler, Ringer & Taylor - roles that really accentuate their gifts both as dancers and as women. I have "sent" people to see this ballet and they all came away feeling it was a work of extraordinary beauty. In the coming season I will bring several friends to see it. Link to comment
Cabriole Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Not wanting to comment on the pieces to be performed or the current administration, but to say, IMO, there is no excuse or justification for not including a Balanchine ballet in the opening program. What were they thinking? Link to comment
drb Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Well, I like Fearful Symmetries too. It must be that I've become ancient, but still it is sad to see The House of Balanchine turned into The Apartment of Martins, even if it does have some nice guest rooms. Link to comment
sz Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 >>.... it is sad to see The House of Balanchine turned into >>The Apartment of Martins >>Last year's opening night program, "Ballet Four Ways," reduced >>Balanchine to one of a choreographic quartet. This year he's gone >>altogether. Despite season statistics, the symbolism of this is terrible. If only the audience would boycott opening night... Peter Martins should be ashamed. Link to comment
canbelto Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I wonder how the NYCB boards would even let this happen. "All Balanchine" programs seem to consistently sell out the house, and programs with a popular Balanchine ballet guarantees a full-house too. But I mean, seriously, when was the last time anyone went to a NYCB program just to see a Martins ballet? Link to comment
Cabriole Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 ... but still it is sad to see The House of Balanchine turned into The Apartment of Martins, even if it does have some nice guest rooms. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What a wonderful line! Link to comment
dancebelt212 Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 nycb is not a balanchine museum. new works need to be danced. companies need to make money. it seems that the public would rather watch a susan strohman event than an evening of fine art...i think the audiences are to blame. Link to comment
Mme. Hermine Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 No one said it was and no one said they didn't. However the rest of your statement is not entirely clear to me. Can you elaborate somewhat? Link to comment
drb Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 nycb is not a balanchine museum. new works need to be danced... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I absolutely agree. It is virtually necessary that a living company have a good new work in its opening Gala. The problem is one of exclusion, not inclusion. Balanchine is very much a unique and living part of NYCB--his school and his technique still feed this company. And he has so many awesomely great works that continue to draw audiences. With time, some art just plain goes beyond objective/subjective debates, Giselle and Swan Lake, for instance. They simply are, they are wanted. And an extraordinarily large number of Mr. B.'s ballets simply are. Link to comment
oberon Posted October 4, 2005 Share Posted October 4, 2005 I have been to countless all-Balanchine performances in the last several seasons and none of them have been anywhere near sold out. Night after night, I sit up in my perch in 4th Ring and feel badly that the house isn't fuller. In fact, in my last seven years of really intensive attendance there, aside from the farewells of Soto and Boal, I can recall very few times that the house was close to a sellout aside from NUTCRACKERs...and even NUT doesn't sell out like it used to. The Stroman piece may sell out, I don't know because I have no interest in seeing it. I do believe some performances of the full-length SWAN LAKE have been very nearly full. Some of the largest crowds I have seen there were for the Eifman MUSAGETE. However, I do think NYCB is doing better than the Met Opera; my friend who works there said last week's ARIADNE AUF NAXOS played to a house that was 43% sold. 43%!! That is really very sad. Link to comment
Recommended Posts