sandik

This thread has gotten very interesting. My initial response to the issue of his title (permanent guest v resident) was 'don't quibble, Sybil,' but you're absolutely right in pointing out that it's the intent that matters. Like the distinction that colleges make with assistant and associate professors, one relationship is like dating, and the other is marriage. A resident generally precludes other residents, while a guest can be one of several. So if the RB is thinking marriage with Wayne McG, what does that mean for them? I haven't seen any of his work for the RB, just some things for his own company, but those seem very different in style and intent from my image of the RB. Pacific Northwest Ballet recently did a new work by Victor Quijada, a choreographer with a mixed background that includes a great deal of club and street dancing. The new piece was like an exploded view of breaking, where things have been slowed down, taken apart and set in place so that the audience can see them more clearly. It was a fascinating work, very well received by the audience, but as I was seeing it the second or third time I was asking myself how it fit in with the rest of the rep. It's not that I think a company's rep needs to be homogenous (and this is certainly not the first modern-influenced work PNB has commissioned) but I do think that everything needs to work together in some fashion. There needs to be something about the work and the skills needed to dance it that relates or informs other aspects of the rep, or this is just a beautiful orphan. And it's that concern that I see reflected in this thread -- that no matter how interesting or well made or challenging McGregor's work with the company might be, that it doesn't really 'go together' (to recall the old Sesame Street song). Or will this prove to be an exciting collaboration for both sides, remembering some of the work that Tharp made during her resident time at ABT?

Oh, these are just charming -- thank you so much for posting them. I've been interested in Kyaksht ever since I first read Karsavina's autobiography.

Golly, this is a shock. I can certainly understand why the RB might want to have an ongoing relationship with an artist like McGregor, especially given his work with new technologies, but somehow the title resident choreographer makes it sound like a different kind of aesthetic shift. Any idea what will happen with Random Dance -- is he still going to direct?

I saw this as a kid, so my memories are from that part of my life. In that context, alongside films like Mary Poppins and Dr. Doolittle, I thought Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was quite good. Sally Ann Howe seemed more formal than Julie Andrews, a bit stiffer, but then the character was a stiffer one too, so that was appropriate. The musical aspects were not quite as charming as the Disney film (the dancing was less inventive) but they worked well in the context of the film. Where I think it really fell short was in comparison to the source material -- Dahl's work has a darkness that film and theater adaptations seem to feel they need to banish, as if children can't cope with the nasty bits. There are many flaws in the recent Tim Burton "Chocolate Factory" film, but he does manage to capture a good-sized chunk of the scary stuff.

And now the third week of casting is up. I don't follow Nutcracker casting very closely, but unless it turns out that they've stopped marking debuts on the cast lists, it looks like no one is making a debut in a role new to them so far this year.

I thought the 'harem' comment was a bit much, but didn't the reviewer go on to suggest that someone should write a biography of LeClercq herself?

Thanks for the heads-up -- I knew Ms Boris in Seattle in the 1970's and 80's. Cakewalk is a charming work, and I wish it were performed more widely.

I saw her as Clara last year -- she did a lovely job, including some well developed bits between her and the Pasha. That particular relationship can be interpreted sveral different ways, and I'm always interested in seeing the choices people make with it.

If they'd only promoted that, I'm sure the project would still be viable!

I'm such a slowpoke, I just read the interview linked in the first post of this thread. The interview is fascinating, but the photo of Millberg Fisher by Maurice Seymour is absolutely stunning. I wish people still had those kind of rich portraits made, alongside the action shots we see today.

I heard this earlier today and have been sad ever since. I remember walking out of the theater after seeing Nashville for the first time totally gobsmacked, planning to see it again as soon as I could. It was jammed full of detail, some of it crucial to the characters and plot, some of it just part of the environment I've often thought that he must have met John Cage at some point -- his films had that wonderful random quality that Cage's music has. Altman made you work, and the rewards were stunning.

Week one is up here

Oh, this is true of so many choreographers (and their estates) -- not just Petit!

Well, I think it's ok to revive the thread, especially to talk about the Ailey company... If it's Ailey's work itself that you're interested in, the 12/5 program (Night Creature, Cry, River, and Revelations) is a good choice, as is 12/7 (Memoria, River, and Revelations) Cry is a wonderful solo, and an excellent glossary of Ailey style. You can see his Horton background there, as well as the changes that he made in it. Memoria is beautiful, a great group work, but then River and Revelations are also stunning group works. But Ailey himself always thought of the company as a mixed-chreographer ensemble, for all that his name is over the door, so the 12/13 program (Shining Star/David Parsons, Solo/Hans van Manen, Portrait of Billie/John Butler, Episodes/Ulysses Dove, Revelations/Ailey) might be a good choice. Van Manen and Butler aren't in too many repertories these days, and it's so interesting to see what their vision of modern dance was. Parsons is having a successful post-Paul Taylor career as a choreographer, and Dove's work is showing up in many reps lately (including Pacific Northwest Ballet here in Seattle) And there's Tharp's Golden Section, which is a high-energy, virtuoso, work. They will look absolutely stunning in it -- I'm positive.

I'm not sure if this is universal to PBS stations, but I know that my local affiliate (KCTS/Seattle) made a significant investment in the hardware to broadcast and create HD/TV shows, and I've wondered if they are planning their own programming to highlight/promote that format.

This news makes me very sad -- Bradley was an excellent journalist, a great interviewer and a very engaging presence on the screen.

On the odd chance that I can manage to get to SF this spring (a girl can have a dream) which ballets should I try and see to get a chance to see her perform? What are her best roles?

But Michelle Pfeiffer as Ellen Olenska was quite lovely, I thought. (and Geraldine Chaplin played her mother, just to make this thread even more twisty...) And I did think that Gillian Anderson was a great Lady Dedlock in the recent BBC production of Bleak House (played on PBS in my part of the world)

If I understand the rules of the board correctly, we can only discuss information that is in the public domain. At the Q&A after last Friday's performance, Peter Boal mentioned that she had been dealing with a back injury, and had pushed to come back a bit too quickly. He didn't mention any specifics about the injury, or about her time frame. Jordan Pacitti is also out, with a 5th metatarsal break in one of his feet. Boal mentioned that it's a 6-8 week recovery time until he's back in the studio, and that Pacitti was familiar with the process since he'd broken the same bone in the other foot previously. Everyone in the audience winced.

Second week casting is on the website week two Not many changes, except Pankevitch and Yin going into the Dove, and Pankevitch and Thomas going into the Tharp.

Off the top of my head -- didn't Baryshnikov study with Pushkin?

I've seen the company a few times, beginning in the 1980s. They were one of the first butoh groups to tour internationally, and so their particular version of that dance practice is the one that seems to be a benchmark for some people. Butoh has roots both in traditional Asian philosophy and aesthetics, and German expressionism -- to a traditional western eye the work seems extreme, a slow and thorough exploration of natural images verging on distortion. Audiences frequently get caught up in the striking visual images to start with -- they often perform nude, after shaving all their body hair and coating themselves in rice powder -- but I find their physicality even more striking than the 'costume.' If you can, I would certainly suggest that you see them, knowing that they might be significant different than other work you've seen. I hope this is helpful -- if you're still perplexed, let me know what other modern dance you've seen recently, and perhaps I can make some comparisons.

Thanks so much for doing this.

I'd like to second what Leigh said above -- a review is about the dance in the theater at the time it's performed. It's about what the critic (and the audience they sat with) saw at that time in that place. Your knowledge of the work, the artist, the company, the whatever -- might amplify your ability to see, but what you are seeing remains the focus. You have to talk about the dance that is there, not the myriad other dances that might have been. Previews and features are about the dance in the choreographer's head -- reviews are about the dance in the theater.

I was interested in the comments on this article (in the online edition of the Times) several of which felt that the author kept avoiding Tharp's desire to talk about her new work, in favor of pushing her for more personal details she did not wish to discuss.