Treefrog

If you click on any of the "Buy Tickets" links, you get a calendar listing of all performances for the season. Click on the date of interest, and you get the casting (plus curtain time AND ending time).

Hm, Gene Kelly isn't listed in the cast of "Sombrero". The scene you describe sounds a little like "Brigadoon", although I don't recall Charisse wearing a black dress.

Amazing!

I agree, this sounds more like a distraction than an enhancement. But then, I adore that particular piece of mime. In the Joffrey's production, the Prince is backed up by the women of the corps --- the soon-to-be Flowers. And when I say "backed up", think of back-up singers in your favorite 60's singing ensemble. While standing in formation, the women march and salute like soldiers, dangle their fingers in front of their faces to convey mouse whiskers, throw their hands back in mock-horror ... it's great fun, and not really distracting in the way a full re-enactment might be.

Hey, great! We've already got Barbie's car -- does Isadora Barbie come with the scarf, or does one buy that separately? (I hope people don't find this TOO tasteless -- I mean it more as a comment on American commercialism than in disrespect of Ms. Duncan.)

Um, GWTW, if you are going to move here, you have to get with the (American) program! Go back and reread the press release -- wait, no, I don't want to condemn you to more bathroom trips. Barbie sells; NYCB doesn't. This isn't about ballet; it's about separating people from their money.

Oh, please, yes!

Do we get to vote before each performance? Majority of votes decides that night's outcome? I like it -- interactive ballet!

Not worth it, in my opinion. My daughter's studio recently hosted a master class with Maia Wilkins, who would be called the prima ballerina of the Joffrey if they employed such titles. I was delighted to hear that she spent a considerable time coaching the girls on presentation and épaulement. What a fabulous emphasis! Artificial selection is an insidious thing. Because of it, we have roses that have no bouquet, and retrievers that don't retrieve. But they sure look beautiful! We humans tend to select for "flash"; the subtler beauties seem to be harder to appreciate and isolate. More's the pity.

Which just goes to show that beauty is in the eye of the beholder...since this view is totally at odds with the ones expressed in this thread on dropped-crotch grand jetés...

Ed, do I detect a subtext here? Perhaps you attended a performance recently that was marred by this boorish behavior? Life in general is marred more and more often by people who pay little attention to the clues around them, or just don't care. In the former case, adding more clues might help. As GWTW notes, dimming the lights is the traditional clue. I suppose it could help to make an overt announcement; certainly, theaters are finding many creative ways to get people to listen to their cell phone/pager/candy wrapper message. However, I would be afraid that a "shut up and listen" message would simply annoy you and me withou having the desired effect on the miscreants. As for the ones who don't care, one can try "shh" and a glare, but that seldom works these days. Boors generally have no shame. I don't think more live music is necessarily the answer, although I'm in favor of that on other counts. Rude, self-centered behavior is increasingly the standard in all walks of life, and judging from what I see entering (and, unfortunately, leaving -- one teacher can have only so much effect) my classroom, it's not going to get better anytime soon.

Dancercheese, I suppose it's just because of who I am. I like to analyze things. I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, and to be honest, I'm not always sure it serves me well. Sometimes, I DO try to sit back and just enjoy the performance.

Ranging a little far afield here, but a local modern/jazz company (River North Dance Company) has as its slogan, ""BARE SOULS -- not to mention bare abs."

What a coincidence! I was thinking about this issue (AD as choreographer) just the other day -- and the case in point was the Joffrey Ballet of Chicago, no less. I was thinking that it ought to be a very good and fortunate situation all around. The AD can hire dancers that suit his choreography. He (or his staff) can coach them in ways that are consistent with the choreography. Dancers get to perform a repertoire choreographed on people much like themselves. I should think this would create a kind of unity of style in the company. But, as usual, this is pure conjecture; I have no evidence to support this hope.

If you went Saturday night, Cliff, I can verify that the youngster was indeed Tony. His hair was grown to nearly chin length, and I can see how that might confuse you (and others). I don't know about the matinee.

I had the rare (for me) pleasure of two trips to the ballet this week! Tuesday was the Joffrey's Gala Benefit. No, I'm not a huge benefactor of the company. About two weeks before the event, subscribers were offered two free tickets on a first come, first seated basis. This gesture earned lots of good will, from me at least, and I hope from other Joffrey regulars (even though I suspect the ulterior motive was really to fill the house on this important evening). However, since my freebie tickets were in the very last row of the orchestra, my impressions were indistinct. More on the Gala later. Last night we saw the spring repertory performance, "Encore Arpino!", comprising three revivals of pieces choreographed by Joffrey Ballet of Chicago founder and Artistic Director Gerald Arpino, plus the premiere of Arpino's "I/DNA". Think of the program as a box of three chocolates and one piece of gristly meat. "I/DNA" was hard to swallow. It is Arpino's commentary on the death penalty, specifically on the injustices of its application here in Illinois (where 13 Death Row inmates have been exonerated in the past few years, prompting outgoing governor George Ryan to commute the sentences of all remaining Death Row prisoners). In Arpino's vision, the convicted innocent is Christ, and his execution evokes a Passion Play. So, much to my surprise, I found my self teasing apart the artistic elements. I didn't care at all for the choreographer's interpretation--most of these men were wrongly convicted of particular crimes, but few were good and innocent people. However, Arpino did a good job of shaping his particular vision. Dolphingirl pronounced the choreography "ingenious." The set, designed by Ming Cho Lee, consisted of a huge, blood-splattered electric chair over which was suspended a single electric light. The music (by Charles Ives and JBC Orchestra conductor Arnold Roth) opens with impossibly long notes of a descending scale -- so long, we lose track and become uncertain how the progression will resolve. First we see the Fates -- three women garbed in black hooded robes. Christ -- er, "The Man" (Domingo Rubio, bearded and long haired, clad in loose white pants and a tank top) -- emerges to contemplate the chair and his impending encounter with it. He is accompanied by "The Righteous One", played here by the very tall Fabrice Calmels garbed in a long leather coat and looking a tad like a Nazi, but certainly stern and authoritarian, perhaps apocalyptic. Mary -- er, "The Mother" (Deborah Dawn) -- comes forth, dressed in a rather ingenious blue dress that initially is drawn over her head as a shawl (think of every lawn statue you've ever seen) and forms a flowing gown when released. She laments her son's fate. Then, a vision of the past: The Man watches himself as a little boy (9-year-old Tony Montalvo) playing with his mother and foster father (Willie Shives). This scene is really quite effective, in no small part due to Montalvo, who is small for his age, hugely personable, cute as a button, and plays as if he were about six. The focus returns to the present, and ten male "Adorners" leap in adulation and agony. (Why not twelve? Inquiring minds want to know if this is due to artistic vision or a lack of male personnel in the company.) Eventually comes the execution, signalled by edgy music and the momentarily brightening, then dimming, lightbulb. In case we haven't yet understood the analogy, the Fates hide Christ/The Man so he can strip down to his loin cloth, and two adorners remove him from the chair -- arms straight out, legs hanging and crossed, the perfect embodiment of the Crucifixion. The Adorners bring him to Mary/The Mother for a little Pieta tableau, after which they enshroud him. He becomes resurrected and walks into the sunset. The piece was met with polite applause, neither affronted nor adulatory. In contrast, the applause swelled during the curtain calls, reflecting the judgment (correct, in my opinion) that the dancers had performed admirably. Now for the fluffier stuff. The other three pieces had much more of a classical flavor. Pure eye candy, and thoroughly enjoyable. The evening opened with "Italian Suite", a series of six vignettes from, one supposes, an afternoon in a park or garden where lovers are strolling. The opening vignette, a melange of little pas de deux, sets the scene. The counterplay among the couples is really quite lovely. The women take over the garden in the next vignette. I particularly liked the dancing of Erika Lynette Edwards in this part; she has an extra bit of verve and personality that makes her exciting to watch. Then a lovely pas de deux (Emily Patterson and Samuel Pergande), which is followed somewhat later by a puzzling pas de trois, as Kathleen Thielheim competes with Patterson for Pergande's attention. (Puzzling because the women do not seem annoyed with each other, nor do they try to outdo each other. And also, because they are dressed identically and I have no idea who actually won out.) A cute scene in which Julianne Kepley swoons over a bouquet as she recalls the lover from whom she has received it rounds out the vignettes. "L'Air d'Esprit" is a gem. It was conceived as a tribute to Olga Spessivtzeva, according to the program notes, which add, "To define Spessivtzeva's dancing may be somewhat baffling, since she did everything with utter ease ... With her seemingly fragile body, she created visions of beauty that touched the soul of the spectator; she could as easily evoke tears as cheers." Clearly a role that requires a certain self-confidence and assuredness, and filled so ably by the spectacular Maia Wilkins. Wilkins is an incredibly expressive dancer. No doubt she has an exquisite line -- I'm not a good judge of technique -- but what I notice is that she can hold her head or her hand just so, just right, so delicately ... and then explode with controlled energy. The piece itself is kind of a Reader's Digest Condensed Dance; it's the perfect thing for those who like Romantic ballets but find them too long (are you listening, Manhattnik?). Here, we have an opening pas de deux, male and female solos, and a closing pas de deux. Wilkins, garbed in a pink Romantic tutu, looks like the storybook ballerina every little girl dreams of; her partner, Davis Robertson, is the handsome cavalier. The initial pas de deux opens and closes with breathtakingly stunning lifts -- the first with Wilkins lit brightly from the side and Robertson enshrouded in shadow, the second an impossibly lovely move that ends with Wilkins on Robertson's back, with both of their arms outstretched and Wilkins' legs elongated as well. Robertson, who is usually a strong and splendid dancer, partnered Wilkins ably but did not have a good solo. An awkward landing near the beginning either triggered or epitomized his difficulties. Not the performance one might have wished for this stalwart who, I hear, will be leaving the company soon. Rounding out the program was Suite Saint-Saens. There were many things to like here, but something I noticed particularly was the use of a male corps. I might be wrong, but I don't remember seeing that often. Now, back to the Gala. It was again an all-Arpino program, and I thought the company simply shone for its very appreciative audience. On the program were "Reflections" (a theme and variations), a preview of "Ruth, Ricordi Per Due" (a pas de deux that will premiere next fall, I think), and the ever-popular "Light Rain". The highlights of "Reflections" were the first variation, danced by an explosive Suzanne Lopez, and the third variation, a lovely, expressive pas de deux danced by Wilkins and Willy Shives. There is a chemistry between these two that makes them a pleasure to watch, and we had a second chance to see them in "Ruth". "Light Rain" was spectacular, from the opening shimmer to the closing one -- energetic, enthusiastic, and tight. I recall Alexandra praising the company some years back for their careful rehearsal. More recently, an acquaintance mentioned that the company has a collective style -- he characterized it as moving, even breathing together, and mentioned that you could see a sameness in the way dancers run, use their backs, hold their arms ... many things. I think that's true. This company hangs together, and even if they didn't have a collective style, they surely have a collective spirit.

Alexandra, you are right, I'm really not content with forest as forest. ;) You said: Precisely! It's the "why" part with which I always struggle.

I think the trees/forest metaphor is amusing, given my alias! For my own purposes, I am perfectly content to enjoy the forest. If I sit back and heave a contented sigh at the end of the evening, that's pretty good. I don't need to explain to myself what I liked. But suppose I want to rush out and tell my friend why she really ought to plunk down $60 to see tomorrow's performance? Or that I want to post a review? I know that when I read reviews, I like it when the poster provides details. What was so breathtaking? What was jarring? Paint me a picture! I'll admit, part of my discomfort here comes from my scientific training. In science, every statement must be subtantiated. Classically, scientists aren't even supposed to have opinions, just cold inferences deduced logically from the evidence. Art isn't at all like that. (duh!) :rolleyes:

It's interesting that the Smithsonian offers an occasional course. I am astounded that it takes more than 100 enrollees to make money! But that's precisely why I was thinking of a company-based course. It might not make money, but perhaps it could pay off in the long run if it produces a more educated audience, especially one that is acculturated to the company's particular style, vibes, peculiarities, etc.

This question/idea accompanies my other thread on "teasing apart the artistic elements." Do any ballet companies sponsor/market a course on how to watch the ballet? I know that some have the occasional pre- or post-performance talk. I'm thinking of something that meets more regularly and encompasses introductions to history, technique, choreography, and perhaps something about the particular style and goals of that company. Studio demonstrations would be a definite plus, as would post-performance critique sessions. What do you think? If this isn't being done, could it? Is it economically viable? Is there a market? Would it build an audience?

I might have asked this before, but I can't remember. (No; I was thinking of this thread on watching ballet, which is still useful but not quite the same question.) Suppose one really enjoys a performance. How can one tell if one enjoyed the individual artistry of a particular dancer, the artistic interplay among dancers, the way the dancers were coached, or the choreography itself? Is it possible to separate out these elements? I know I've heard reviews like, "I really enjoyed X's dancing, even though I don't care for Y's choreography." And I can imagine the reverse: "The choreography was breathtaking, although X's execution detracted from its promise." As a novice viewer, how can I determine which of these elements is pleasing, which is not?

BW, she certainly will keep on working on choreography, but owing to other commitments she will not be able to attend the same workshop this year. What a bleak outlook, though! I'd better encourage her to find a day job, too. Victoria, the way things are heading now she might follow right in the footsteps of your student, as teaching youngsters is a current passion of hers as well. To whom do choreographers turn when they want to mull over ideas, get reactions and critiques, or discuss the finer points of their art? Is there a fellowship among choreographers? Or do the limited resources push them towards competitive isolation?

Xena, this sounds like a great way to start off. What next? Where does an aspiring choreographer go to get training? Self-tutoring can only take one so far.

So what advice would you give a teenager whose ambition is not to dance professionally, but to choreograph? Aside from Leigh's good advice, I mean. Assuming s/he can acquire the writing/begging/promotion skills, how does s/he learn to choreograph?

I'm with Watermill here. Remarks like "and loathsome" are gratuitous. He made his point that he disapproves of the role. Must he denigrate the child too (for this comment can be taken to apply either to the role or the child, and the child will surely interpret it as the latter)? I also agree that it is never appropriate to write approvingly of infanticide or genocide, even if those "in the know" are willing to wink it off. Try substituting a more recent and familiar despot -- Hitler will do -- and see how it rides.