Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×


Inactive Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

About jsmu

  • Rank
    Bronze Circle

Registration Profile Information

  • Connection to/interest in ballet** (Please describe. Examples: fan, teacher, dancer, writer, avid balletgoer)
  • City**
  • State (US only)**, Country (Outside US only)**

Recent Profile Visitors

1,297 profile views
  1. Actually, Bouder used to do the correct choreography. One can hardly blame her, given Martins' most recent atrocities towards her AND the company to say nothing of Stafford's incompetent and ineffectual 'direction', for doing whatever she wishes now. Yes, the Kirkland Firebird was unsuccessful--however, Balanchine's last word after that production was the horrible version in which von Aroldingen was often called 'Fire Engine, ' with virtually no dancing and a hideous body-concealing costume with a tail. That died decades ago and it is safe to say that Balanchine's last actual *choreography* fo
  2. That is the CHOREOGRAPHY. The passage, which was originally chaines deboules for Maria Tallchief, was redone for Gelsey Kirkland in the 1970 revival. The split jetes are supposed to start smaller and build for the entire passage, which Kirkland and apparently Mearns DID. Bouder, brilliant as she is and much as I love her, is not doing the correct choreography here.
  3. I think the problem here is that some people find their own opinions ever so much more valid than those of others. It is transparently obvious that promotions are subjective, as is all advancement in a performing art form; it is also clear that, as Toni Bentley said, 'intrigues, love affairs, manipulations, timing, and idiosyncrasies decide everyone's life and future.' I have been going to NYCB for decades, and I have no difficulty whatsoever finding patterns of inadequate dancers being cast in roles by Peter Martins on a regular basis. The 'sink or swim' tradition has faded as well.
  4. I don't doubt that Gottlieb thought that, and still does. Had Martins said any of those things, they would have been essentially equivalent to what he did in fact say, and equally self-serving. Remember, Balanchine often referred to his ballets as 'butterflies'--and never once evinced enough interest about his successor to name one clearly and publicly. I see a certain Russian fatalism (often mentioned in Solomon Volkov's book of conversations with Balanchine) here. We hardly know that Balanchine's hospital visitors ever discussed the succession at all; Farrell, at least, has said m
  5. Peter Martins' 'take' on many things is well known, including his pathological aversion to keeping any great Balanchine ballerinas on staff at NYCB. Violette Verdy, Merrill Ashley, Suzanne Farrell...There is no one commenting on Martins' assumption of the job, most particularly Martins, who does not have a highly personal involvement in the matter, so the swipe at Lawrence is unjustified.
  6. What else would you expect Martins to say? The Gottlieb anecdote is equally as impossible to prove as the Betty Cage quotations *except that* Gottlieb was not the bedrock of the NYCB for over thirty years. In addition, the Gottlieb anecdote is *vague* in its reference. Was Balanchine talking about partnering or was he talking about the directorship of NYCB? No one knows . I think it sounds far more like partnering.
  7. 'Abusive?' Hardly. Harshly correct. What Croce said about Watts was never less than the truth; she excoriated Watts for omitting, simplifying, and butchering steps and sometimes entire roles; for projecting her own neuroses and demons onstage in ballets as a sort of attempt to add 'drama;' and for doing all this shamelessly. In fact, Croce frequently praised Watts in print until after Balanchine's death, when things truly went south for good. I was present at many horrific Watts performances in the later Eighties and early Nineties; if anything, Croce was restrained in her characterization.
  8. I now understand why Cass, who was considered a frontrunner for principal status, was never promoted from soloist and left the company. I always wondered. I remember a marvelous "Tarantella" with her.
  9. This. And I think he's a little young for the (arguably) biggest AD job in the country.
  10. Yes, I was aware of what Corella is doing to the company, and how many full-length warhorses he's dragging out. Of course, the myopia of the presumption that a great ballerina and artist like Nichols has nothing to contribute to any ballet not by Balanchine is stunning, but so was Corella's own little purge (sorry, in corporatespeak that would be 'housecleaning' or 'downsizing,' perhaps) when he took over the company.
  11. Nichols was at PA Ballet and left after approximately one year. Given the fact that her spouse was also employed by the company, one wonders what Corella managed to do to alienate one of the most beloved and equable ex-ballerinas in the world?
  12. Ulbricht would be wonderful, but given the taste-free NYCB Board I fully expect MILLEPIED. There are endless possibilities among ex-NYCB ballerinas (Ringer, Nichols, ad infinitum.) Couldn't disagree more about the dismissal of Martins!
  13. Reviews of the first three performances, please? Helene? sandik? seattle_dancer?
  14. Agree completely, volcanohunter--the last thing we need is a set dwarfing jumps and lifts, as hard as dancers work. My instant reaction to the frame in this clip was 'NO.' The costumes seem to be lovely, especially those for Emeralds, and the different tiaras are interesting. Rausch looks ravishing here--wish I could see her in the role.
  15. Iliesiu was very good as the Tall Girl at Carolina Ballet--I imagine she will be even better now.
  • Create New...