Ari

January 30, 2005

I don't think Kaufman's article is anti-ABT. On the contrary, she emphasizes the revolutionary work the company premiered in the '40s. All she's complaining about is that the company is not being true to its artistic heritage -- a charge that, unfortunately, could be levelled at many other top-level companies.

McKenzie's defense is that the company didn't have the money to rehearse a special program of its 1940s ballets. If that's the case, and it sounds right, then it's the fault of the Kennedy Center for not making funds available to have a program that would fit in with its 1940s festival.

January 30, 2005

However, most other companies haven't "scaled" to quite the same extent as ABT under Kevin McKenzie. It is simply a fact that year after year, KC Saturday matinee audiences got to see Ashley Tuttle in virtually every full-length ballet. (Dvorovenko's Juliet is an exception that comes to mind.) Tuttle is a lovely dancer, and I enjoyed these performances. However, as a result of this casting, many of the ABT dancers who excite the most comment in the press and in this forum are virtually unknown quantities to me, apart from videos, despite years as a subscriber.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, it must be frustrating to those who, for one reason or another, can only go to Saturday matinees. Not only do they not get to see the big stars, but they almost always get the full-lengths, since the KC tends to schedule mixed bills for early in the week. (Not this time, though; the Fokine program is being given on Saturday.) It might be worth writing to the KC about this, and let them know that their Saturday matinee audience is more sophisticated than they seem to think.

January 29, 2005

Well, that answers a question. I had wondered who would take Ashley Tuttle's place as the Saturday matinee ballerina. Having seen Tuttle in almost every matinee performance of full-length ballets for some years, I guess we'll now be seeing a great deal of Wiles.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it's way premature to assume that Wiles is being relegated to permanent Saturday matinee status. She and Part are the most junior of the Odette/Odiles, both being soloists, so in the ABT scheme of things that means they get matinees. (This type of scaled casting is common in other big companies, too.) But others get matinees as well: no less a luminary than Diana Vishneva is dancing Odette/Odile on Saturday afternoon, July 9, at the Met. And if I'm not mistaken, Gillian Murphy was doing matinees not too long ago, and now she's down for three (evening) Swan Lakes in DC, as well as the telecast. So Wiles does have prospects.

January 29, 2005

I've been meaning to reply to this for a while now, but kept getting sidelined with other things. Apologies, rkoretzky!

You raise a lot of important issues, and I hope that others will jump in and contribute their thoughts. But I want to address a more specific topic, that is the choice of Ms. White to head SPAC.

I know nothing about the decision process involved here, so this is all speculation. But it seems to me that SPAC's most pressing need at the moment is MONEY. Chesbrough's attempt to get rid of the ballet was due to his desire to stop the flow of red ink, and the subsequent state audit revealed the organization's financial situation to be even graver than first thought. And in announcing White's appointment, SPAC officials stressed her familiarity with people and organizations that have the big bucks. It might be that her tenure at SPAC will be limited to however long it takes to get it back on its financial feet. I somehow doubt that White, with her lifelong background in politics, is much interested in a prolonged career as an arts administrator. But turning around a nonprofit organization financially would look very good on her CV.

As I said, however, all this is pure speculation. I'd be interested to hear what others think.

January 29, 2005

In Meredith Daneman's new biography of Margot Fonteyn, she says that towards the end of her life Fonteyn was asked by Ninette de Valois who, of all her partners, had been the best. She replied -- to de Valois's astonishment -- Robert Helpmann: "None of the others were ever like him." She said that while Nureyev brought her out, he wasn't so comfortable as a partner. de Valois then posed the same question to Alicia Markova (whose own partnership with Anton Dolin was legendary), who also replied, "Helpmann." So he was obviously a better partner than he's been given credit for.

January 28, 2005

Two qualities a male dancer needs to be a great partner are physical strength and attentiveness towards his partner. He has to be willing to divert his mind from his own performance and concentrate on making his partner's look better. Some of this can be taught, but it helps if the dancer really enjoys what he's doing.

Physical strength is, of course, something that can be built up. The young Peter Martins learned this the hard way, according to his autobiography, when his partner at the Royal Danish Ballet sniped at him until he started going to the gym.

One legendary partner of the past was NYCB principal Conrad Ludlow. Balanchine was able to make some of his most physically daring choreography for ballerinas (for instance, the second movement of Brahms-Schoenberg Quartet) because he had Ludlow there to protect them. He was in great demand by non-NYCB ballerinas on the concert circuit.

I never saw him, but I've never forgotten what Arlene Croce once wrote about Nicholas Magallanes: "He could show off a ballerina like black velvet under a diamond."

In a ballerina, I think the most important attribute of being a good partner is reliability. A dancer can't be 100% predictable, of course, since each performance comes out differently depending on the music and other circumstances, but there's nothing more dismaying for a man than to see his ballerina doing something he hadn't expected. Certain ballerinas have been notorious for this -- but that also helped make them exciting to watch.

January 27, 2005

The architect Philip Johnson died today at the age of 98. His relevance to ballet, of course, is that he designed the New York State Theater at Lincoln Center "for George."

Associated Press story (which makes no mention of the State Theater)

January 25, 2005

Housekeeping note:

This thread spawned an interesting discussion about whether dancing modern technique is harmful to ballet dancers. Since it is a separate issue from the Rockwell article, it now has its very own thread in Anything Goes:

Ballet Dancers Doing Modern Dance

The original posts from this thread have been moved over there.

Take a look!

January 25, 2005

I saw Democracy last week and had the same reaction as atm. Moreover, I came away wondering exactly what the play was about. On the surface it's about an aide to Willy Brandt who was, until he was unmasked after many years, a Russian spy. But I couldn't figure out what aspect of the situation interested Michael Frayn. The play's title and some of its dialogue, and a program note by Frayn, suggest that he was pondering the nature of democracy (as opposed to a totalitarian ethic like Communism?), but this wasn't developed. This was an odd contrast to an earlier Frayn play, Copenhagen, which had almost too many ideas emanating from an essentially static dramatic situation.

I also wondered about James Naughton's performance. He can, I am pretty sure, be charismatic (I didn't see him as Billy Flynn in Chicago, but he sparkles on the CD), but in this play, despite what all the characters say about his tremendous rapport with the voters (and women!), he comes across as a somewhat ineffectual, slightly ridiculous figure whom it was easy to bamboozle.

January 19, 2005

Last night's gala was mainly a ballet affair, with some operatic intervals, two shortish and one very long . The party pieces were, as Natalia has written, distressingly bad, but at least the two complete ballets, both by Balanchine, provided some substance.

This was the first time in quite a few years I've seen La Valse, and I was happy to have the chance. It suits the Kirov stylistically, and offers plenty of opportunities for the dancers. We saw more of the company, top to bottom, in those 30 minutes than we had in all three acts of Cinderella.

I was delighted to see Uliana Lopatkina for the first time but she was, I thought, miscast in the lead. She looked too mature, knowing, and grave, where the ballerina should be young, innocent, and avid for experience. As Natalia has mentioned, the moment when she donned the black garments was performed almost as though she knew what was coming, instead of being a reckless dive into disaster. I'm sorry we're not seeing Pavlenko in this, or Vishneva. The other dancers coped very well with the choreography but were a bit too careful. The performance as a whole didn't have the overwhelming impact it can at NYCB.

Sofia Gumerova seemed more comfortable in Rubies, oddly enough, than in the Black Swan pas de deux, where she was technically shaky and dramatically inconsistent (she smiled sunnily through most of it, occasionally remembering that she was supposed to be Odile). She didn't take any risks in the penchée/plié sequence of Rubies, however. She and the other soloists, Vishneva and Leonid Sarafanov, all seemed to plunge enthusiastically into the unfamiliar style, but Sarafanov needs more than enthusiasm, he badly needs coaching by someone who has danced the role. He really didn't know what he was doing. The corps girls are still too demure in this.

Sarafanov has a problem: he is gifted with an elegant line and gobs of bravura ability, but he is so slight and underdeveloped that his technical fireworks make him look like a child prodigy rather than a man, and his partnering is seriously deficient. He wasn't helped by having to dance two pretty macho roles, Corsaire and Rubies. No way does this boy look like a pirate or a street fighter. If he is not to be confined to the more restrained roles in the repertory (which I'm sure he doesn't want) or to be shunned by ballerinas, he is going to have to build himself up physically and significantly improve his partnering.

January 19, 2005

From Alexandra, our Founder and Director Emerita:

This Saturday, a new documentary entitled "Sacred Stage: The Maryinsky Theater," about the Kirov Opera, Ballet, and Orchestra, will be screened at the Kennedy Center at 6:00 PM. It's a part of the Millenium Stage series, which is free and held in the lobby spanning the Eisenhower Theater, Opera House, and Concert Hall.

January 19, 2005

Casting update —

Daria Pavlenko is not performing. Her role in La Valse Wednesday night will be taken by Lopatkina, and her role in Rubies by Gumerova. Anton Korsakov will dance the lead in Rubies on Saturday.

No partner is currently listed for Lopatkina in Wednesday's La Valse. She performed it tonight with Vladimir Shishov. Merkuriev was supposed to dance with Pavlenko, but he is doing the first pas de deux with Sologub, so the odds are that it will be Shishov again. Elena Androsova will dance one of the three graces on Saturday when Kondaurova takes the lead.

Somova and Sarafanov did indeed perform.

The Black Swan pas de deux, with Gumerova and Igor Zelensky, was added to the lineup. :wink:

January 18, 2005

I don't think you can evaluate Fonteyn's development as an artist without considering the enormous effect that Ashton had on her. It may have been de Valois who first anointed her Markova's successor, but it was Ashton who really formed her, creating role after role to bring out her gifts and push her beyond what she thought she could achieve. It was that, more than the classroom teaching, that made her a great ballerina, and she wouldn't have gone as far as she did without it, then or now.

January 18, 2005

This is a rather tardy account of last Thursday's performance.

From everything I'd read beforehand, I knew not to expect a traditional storybook Cinderella. I have nothing against a contemporary staging as long as it's good (I've always wondered why choreographers who make story ballets shy away from setting them in the present), but this one wasn't. Ratmansky showed little instinct for drama and his choreography was vulgar and simplistic. He was more interested in a streamlined narrative than in the plush arrangement of dances and dramatic scenes to engage the large company of superlative dancers and mimes that is the Kirov. When the four (male) seasons were performing their coarse unclassical routines, with those exquisite, tutu-ed corps girls behind them, I mourned the absence of choreography that would have displayed them in all their classical glory. That's what I go to the Kirov to see.

On the plus side, the dancers had an opportunity to show their passionate mime. Irma Nioradze in particular was a scream as the vulgar suburban stepmother, a type all too recognizable. I kept thinking how awkward and self-conscious American dancers would have looked in this.

Diana Vishneva has perfect Cinderella looks -- small, dark, and delicate, with a childlike face. Sad that the ballet offered her such little opportunity to shine. I'm afraid Igor Kolb will never be any kind of Prince Charming for me. The other roles were choreographed so perfunctorily that they didn't offer much scope for interpretation

One other thing -- this is the second time in a year that the Kirov has come to Washington with a ballet traditionally aimed at children but in an emphatically adult-oriented version (the other was The Nutcracker). I have no idea what the children who saw this production made of it, but it would have been only fair to them (and their parents) for the Kennedy Center to have issued some kind of warning about the adult content of the show.

January 16, 2005

The following posts were made to the old board and didn't get carried over here during the move, so here they are:

by lampwick, Friday Jan. 14, 7:19 PM:

I just noticed that her feet didn't articulate fully in the metatarsal area. In layman's terms, they didn't point enough. The line was kind of broken at the balls of the foot. It was subtle, but enough that I noticed it and mentioned, I guess. Since other people have noticed this, it's probably some little weakness in the metatarsals (who knows?), and not simply shoes that are too hard. I didn't notice any "stabbing" quality at the floor (I kind of like that idea, actually :tomato:

Her feet aren't bad, there's just a little lack of strength in the metatarsals (I'm totally guessing here) That would affect the power you get in your small jumps and how you would tend to "come down" off pointe (abruptly). It's tough to know without seeing the dancer up close.

It's a nitpick though. Wasn't so bad that it really ruins the dancing. She still looked pretty amazing to me (I wish my feet were that "weak") LOL

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by carbro, Friday Jan. 14, 8:04 PM:

Megan has very long feet, and she appears to have very long toes, too, which would accentuate the appearance of any break in the line of a fully pointed foot. I don't know know if it's a question of strength -- it may well be -- but her anatomical proportions certainly work against her.

I agree, lampwick, that her overall level of dancing overrides this flaw, whatever it is.

Yes, Oberon, she looks very much like Mazzo and a bit like Borree. As I see her develop from role to role (I regret I missed her Square Dance), I begin to see a fascinating and complex personality behind her pixie-ish appearance. PM appears to be casting her beyond "type," and I hope he continues. I think she has a lot to offer her audiences.

--Carley

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Michael, Friday Jan. 14, 8:28 PM:

PM appears to be casting her beyond "type," and I hope he continues. I think she has a lot to offer her audiences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'd argue (and have above but want to clarify) that he's not casting her "beyond" her type -- But rather that her type is actually as much neo classical as soubrette or demi character. I find her very good in these roles and her body, though small, is actually rather longer in the leg, to the waist, than it is above it. She's small and acts the soubrette well, but she goes very much beyond that type.

Weakness in her feet is also the last thing I would have attributed to her -- If there has been a criticism I've heard it's completely in the opposite direction, i.e., that she could go a little softer. What I wish I'd said about this in my last post, though, is that this very crisp attack gives her at least the virtue of being very very clear in her point work. Some may find her attack too pronounced, but for that it allows her to show each step with more clarity.

In what you say about her expression, though, Oberon, you are very much in tune with something I've noticed and which a few others have also mentioned: that her facial expressions can sometimes seem a bit frozen. She doesn't do this in her dramatic roles such as Swanhilda, for example, where she knows who she's supposed to be and where she uses her eyes quite well too. But when dancing more "abstract" Balanchine, she will sometimes freeze up in the face instead of just reacting naturally as the flow goes. She did not do this (much) Wednesday in Square Dance. But she's 19 years old and working on it. The example of Ashley Bouder, who habitually somewhat exagerates her expressions and lifts her face very much towards the top of the house (and who as a result projects up there very well) may not be an entirely happy one for Fairchild, however. For Ashley it seems to be natural. (Strange but Innate -- She does everything BIG). For Megan it doesn't seem to sit quite naturally at this time.

January 15, 2005

The following posts were posted to the old board and did not make the move over here, so here they are:

by To the Pointe, Friday Jan. 14, 3:20 PM:

And how would you put a warning on such a forum?
"WARNING! 99% of everything on this forum is crap!"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I feel that the current level of moderation is correct and ethical.

With no disrespect to anyone intended (and no assumptions made that anyone would do this)...

The problem with "I spoke to X dancer and they said" is that first, how do we know that you really did speak to X dancer, second that X dancer is telling the truth and not interjecting their own speculations (or purposely causing a problem), and that X dancer really wanted this information spread on the internet. If X dancer truly wants their own information shared, let them log on and share it.

Unless it is in writing or confirmed by more than one credible source, as Mr. Johnson so eloquently put it "is crap."

I enjoy this board (and Ballet Talk for Dancers), because I can trust it.

I think that the reputation of this community is far more valuable than the need to have its curiosity peeked.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Oberon, Friday Jan. 14, 3:37 PM:

Once on an opera list, someone wrote a scathing review of Soprano X in a certain role and then a rebuttal appeared, signed by "Soprano X". But the rebuttal included a factual error that made us feel quite certain that the person calling herself "Soprano X" was not really her...and later this proved to be true. It was just one of her fans, defending her.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Bart, Friday Jan. 14, 4:08 PM:

RE the gossip issue. I agree with To the Pointe: " I enjoy this board because I can trust it. "

Each of us seems to have a much higher standard when evaluating -- and often condemning -- other people's gossip than when passing on our own own. That's what makes the slope so slippery. PLEASE keep things as they are.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by carbro, Friday Jan. 14, 4:25 PM:

Each of us seems to have a much higher standard when evaluating -- and often condemning -- other people's gossip than when passing on our own own.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank you, bart, for that very sharp insight. Of course, I never deal in gossip, just in facts. :wink:

--Carley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by sandik, Friday Jan. 14, 4:53 PM:

I would suggest that you leave the current rules of engagement alone for now, and see how things shake out. The gods know we all gossip, on many different levels, but I appreciate the fact-based nature of this site. It seems to encourage a more thought-provoking quality to the discussion that I enjoy.

Also, frankly, I think the logistics of the transition will be complex enough that you might not want to challenge yourself with a stylistic change simultaneously.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Leigh Witchel, Friday Jan. 14, 7:25 PM:

One other point about gossip we've learned from experience. It's competitive. We all try to top each other's stories, or scoop them. That's another reason to refrain from sourcing dancers - it looks like showing off. Then someone else has to obliquely hint at an even BETTER friendship or source, and off we go. That sort of competitiveness, along with "gotta-be-the-first-to-post-itis" has caused problems here before.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by Victoria Leigh, Friday Jan. 14, 8:19 PM:

To the Pointe's statement about trust says it all. People can trust this board, and I think it should stay that way. If we open it up to gossip, that will no longer be the case.

January 14, 2005

What's happened to the Diamond Project? (Not that I miss it. :tomato: )

January 13, 2005

As the founder of this site, Alexandra put in years of hard daily work developing and maintaining it. Those of us who have been helping her out know how much work and dedication was involved, and, unbelievably, she did it for years by herself. She built it into a site with literally thousands of members and a high reputation for integrity -- no small accomplishment when you look at all the fly-by-night sites out there.

Those of us who are following her hope to continue in this tradition. Take a bow, Alexandra! :yucky: :clapping:

January 12, 2005

Which reminds me of Balanchine's Nutcracker, with that "photo montage" of Marie's memories of the Christmas party, and the flying bed. Oh, and they had a narrator too, and all those sound effects ("Ma-Gic, Ma-Gic")
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

According to Arlene Croce, the children really do whisper "Magic!" during performances of the ballet, but you have to sit very close up in order to hear them. I've never had the privilege.

The narrator was added after test screenings showed that the audience didn't understand what was happening. I think the producers had hoped that the film would have success in theaters as a children's Christmas entertainment rather than as a ballet film. It would be nice if they'd formatted the DVD so that you can turn it off, though. (Come to think of it, maybe you can. I've never tried.)

January 10, 2005

I'm not sure that letters written to Rockwell personally would come to the attention of the editors responsible for choosing the letters to publish in the newspaper. It might be a good idea to cc to the following addresses:

e-mail: letters@nytimes.com

fax: (212) 556-3622

snail:

Letters to the Editor

The New York Times

229 West 43rd Street

New York, NY 10036

January 10, 2005

The latest word on casting, kindly sent to me by Michael Sasser of the Kennedy Center's Dance Programming office:

NOTE: Casting is subject to change.

January 11, 2004 - 7:30 p.m.

CINDERELLA

Ballet in three acts

Music by Sergei Prokofiev

Libretto by Nikolai Volkov (after Charles Perraut's fairytale)

Musical Director - Valery Gergiev

Conductor - Mikhail Agrest

Choreography by Alexei Ratmansky

Set design by Ilia Utkin and Yevgeny Monakhov

Costumes by Elena Markovskay

Lighting design by Gleb Filshtinsky

Musical Preparation by Natalia Merkulova

Cinderella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NATALIA SOLOGUB

The Prince . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ANDREI MERKURIEV

Stepmother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IRMA NIORADZE

Khudyshka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .VICTORIA TERESHKINA

Kubyshka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ELENA SHESHINA

Fairy-Tramp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ELENA BAZHENOVA

Ciderella's Mother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MARIA KOLOMIITSEVA

Cinderella's Father . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IGOR PETROV

Spring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ANTON LUKOVKIN

Summer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .DMITRY PYKHACHEV

Autumn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MAXIM ZIUZIN

Winter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IVAN POPOV

Dance Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .RYU JI YEON

ALEXEI SEMENOV

Hairdressers/Searchers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IGOR NIKITIN

ALEXEI NEDVIGA

FYODOR MURASHOV

Female Dance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IRINA GOLUB

Male Dance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ISLOM BAIMORADOW

The Four Seasons Suite and Guests at the Ball - artists of the Ballet

Solo in the orchestra:

Oleg Rylatko and Eric Lee

The performance has two intermissions

January 12, 2004 - 7:30 p.m.

CINDERELLA

Ballet in three acts

Music by Sergei Prokofiev

Libretto by Nikolai Volkov (after Charles Perraut's fairytale)

Musical Director - Valery Gergiev

Conductor - Mikhail Agrest

Choreography by Alexei Ratmansky

Set design by Ilia Utkin and Yevgeny Monakhov

Costumes by Elena Markovskay

Lighting design by Gleb Filshtinsky

Musical Preparation by Natalia Merkulova

Cinderella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IRINA GOLUB

The Prince . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ANDREI MERKURIEV

Stepmother . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IRMA NIORADZE

Khudyshka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .IRINA ZHELONKINA