California

I saw Spartacus for the first and last time Friday night. I'm relieved to discover I'm not the only person who found it appalling. (Thank you, mimsyb and angelica, for your candor!) Yes, there are some "guilty pleasures" - especially the PdD in the 2d and 3rd acts. And we do see some amazingly athletic and versatile show-off solos, especially for the men. But overall this is Soviet (not Russian) ballet at its worst. All those soldiers, blood, guts, killings, battles in silly encounters, storming around to that relentless movie score by Khatchadourian. I am glad I saw it, as it reflects the Soviet mentality in the 1960s, when they crushed the Prague Spring in 1968 and the communist world descended even further into brutal oppression that lasted until the 1980s and glasnost/perestroika. I don't want to go too far with this, but I had flashbacks during those battle scenes of Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will, with battalions of Nazi soldiers showing us how powerful and dominant they were. Like canbelto, I'm amazed the Soviet censors let that pole dance sequence through. It wasn't just the principal with her embarrassing antics, but also the writhing couples all around the stage, reminiscent of a drunken frat house. Perhaps the dark lighting made it tolerable to the censors, as you had to strain to see much of what they were doing. Swan Lake from the 80s -- when the Soviets were first allowed to study Freud -- reflected their naïve excesses in trying to incorporate him into their classic masterpiece. Both of these pieces tell us a lot about how the arts can reflect the culture of their times, for better or worse. Most troubling and sobering to me is that 22+ years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russians still love these ballets. Putin has said that the single worst event of the 20th century was the collapse of the Soviet Union (not WWII, when millions of his fellow Russians were slaughtered by the Nazis?). He must love Spartacus.

Thank you for these detailed reports. I thought of Jeff Koons while reading them: is Ardani having the last laugh at the fools who pay good money for this stuff? Is this the program they have planned for City Center this fall? The managers at CC must be very worried at this point. They could have done Le Jeune Homme et la Mort (which Vasiliev has been doing elsewhere), surely a role she could learn, if she doesn't already know it. The Carmen they previously announced with Ballet San Jose would have been interesting, too.

AGMA has a list on their web site of companies with their contracts: http://www.musicalartists.org/agreements_dance.html

Colorado Ballet uses a live orchestra for everything except one weekend of four performances at the University of Denver Newman Center. Everything else is at the Caulkins Opera House in downtown Denver. Live music can be the first thing to go when a company has financial problems -- Ballet San Jose had to switch to recorded music this year after bringing in less than they expected from their last Nutcracker. The current iteration of LA Ballet uses recorded music and many performances are in school auditoriums at area colleges. And doesn't Washington Ballet use recorded music (except for Nutcracker) for its programs at the Eisenhower Theater at the Kennedy Center? I don't know about Ballet West, but with 40 dancers and six programs, live orchestra seems likely: http://www.balletwest.org/AboutUs/TheDancers

At least from their web site, Milwaukee has 26 dancers on contract, but I can't tell how many weeks on contract. They have five programs scheduled for next year, including their Nutcracker. But these comparisons are very tricky. Milwaukee does each program for only one weekend, while Colorado does most of theirs in 8 performances over 2 weekends. http://www.milwaukeeballet.org/about-us/dance-company All of these second/third tier companies have suffered mightily in the Great Recession, as well as from the cancellation of the NEA Dance program's touring program, which underwrote visits by smaller companies to smaller cities -- both those cities and the companies suffered. Each city is unique. Philadelphia has old money and a legendary orchestra and art museum, but their proximity to NYC and DC (and the Kennedy Center) might hurt as much as help - it's such an easy train ride for serious dance lovers to visit those cities. Minneapolis is a good example of the lack of correlation between a city's wealth, sophistication, and education levels and their likelihood of hosting a successful resident ballet company. Minneapolis has a great symphony, great art (think: Walker), great theater (think: Guthrie), but I can't think of a single resident ballet company that ever took hold. The successful regional companies seem most likely to share determined founders who fought against seeming odds to build those companies. It's possible Pennsylvania has been bigger in the past and perhaps Corella hopes it will grow in the future. I hope New Yorkers will support that company - it's only a 90-minute train ride and you can visit the Art Museum and the Barnes Collection while you're there!

By that standard, PA ballet should be much bigger! Colorado does have a lot of old money - oil, mining, Molly Brown. Can we agree that both are medium-sized regional companies?

I guess I'm confused about how to count size, and I suppose there are different, legitimate ways to do that. Pennsylvania Ballet has the same number of dancers, contract of same length, and about the same amount of programming as Colorado, yet the latter does not appear on your list. Colorado Ballet is 54 years old and the AD was also an ABT principal (Gil Boggs).

Winners of the 2013 National Medal of Arts (to be awarded at the White House July 28, 2014 - live-streamed) include Bill T. Jones and the Brooklyn Academy of Music: http://arts.gov/news/2014/president-obama-award-2013-national-medals-arts

Reports of dancers contacting him to join the company are not surprising, but I wonder how realistic that is. In addition to his stated concern about cultivating existing talent (very smart politically), this is a small regional company. I count only 31 dancers on their web site (7 principals, 4 soloists, 20 corps). (Note a familiar name: Veyette - any relation?) http://www.paballet.org/dancers They are doing six programs for the coming season, including their Nutcracker. This is about the size of Colorado Ballet, which had 30 dancers on contract last year and is planning 5 programs this season, including their Nutcracker. I'm guessing that Pennsylvania fills out their big productions (especially Nutcracker) with advanced students from their school and apprentices, as Colorado does. Their contract for 2009-2012 is on-line: http://www.musicalartists.org/agreements/PennsylvaniaBallet.2009-2012.pdf They had a 34-week contract. Corps members start at $954/week ($32,436 for the contract), principals $1202 ($40,868). Not an easy life! I also wonder, if he does hire from outside, if he'll look to dancers from his own now disbanded company, who have scattered. (Two ended up in the Colorado corps last year and have been wonderful.)

Both Krysanova at the matinee and Kretova in the evening gave us plenty of "guilty pleasures," for which Kitri is well known. The running fishdives at the beginning of Act II were amazing at the matinee; she started in the far corner, ran fast and threw herself from an amazing distance, twice. Kretova was more cautious, only traversing half the stage, and throwing herself with caution. Kretova showed us lots of long, long amazing balances. In one especially long pose in the PdD in Act III, Lobukhin was at the ready to put hand on waist, but she kept holding that balance. He shrugged his shoulders, looked at the audience, as if to say: "how amazing is she!" That got a laugh. I don't know if that was spontaneous or rehearsed, but it was great fun. Krysanova's speed and precision in turns was amazing throughout. She also had the best Plisetskaya leap. Interestingly, both omitted the Italian fouettes in the dream sequence on Wednesday. Alexandrova had done three the night before. Both pairs on Wednesday seemed to be having so much fun, great chemistry. What a joy to have seen this.

I've been searching YouTube for those amazing Krysanova fouettes. You don't really get a sense here of the excitement (or even the speed) we saw in both her Don Q and SL, but it's close. At the Don Q, it seemed to me the conductor was trying to keep up with her. At the SL, he just gave up and she went her own way:

Many thanks to Canbelto and Amour for your very detailed and helpful reports. I have seen this production before and love it, especially the wealth and diversity of the character dances. American productions (especially ABT's) are pale and skeletal in comparison. I had never seen Alexandrova before and was disappointed, but the account of the serious injury explains why she never astonished us. She was more than adequate, but there was never a moment when I felt, wow, I can't believe she just did that! Her wide smiles during bows, especially at the end, were Sally Field moments ("You like me! You really like me!"), but they seemed to be genuine appreciation of her fans. I love that she threw a rose into the orchestra pit to thank them. BTW - I've noticed that the orchestra routinely stands during final curtain calls, faces the stage, and applauds the dancers. I've never seen that with American orchestras. In the trivia department: I'm sure at least one thing changed in this production from when I saw it in 2010: the ensemble in the long white dresses in Act III sat at little tables around the edge of the stage for most of that act in 2010. Now, they disappear into the wings. Perhaps that was an accommodation to the smaller stage at Koch. I don't remember other details changing, though perhaps they did. More trivia: In Act I, Alexandrova's flesh-toned pointe shoes did not have any ribbons, just a broad band of elastic attached near the heel. I've noticed Osipova in recent rehearsal videos wearing her shoes like that, but have not seen it in performance. In II and III, Alexandrova did have traditional shoes and ribbons, though.

This is very puzzling. That stage meets Balanchine's demanding standards for "spring," and the NYCB rehearsal studios (which I assume Bolshoi is using) are over in the new Rose building, which also has great floors for NYCB. I don't know if anyone on this board is familiar with the stage floors at both Bolshoi and Lincoln Center to compare, but I would have thought Balanchine's theater would meet the highest standards in this regard (although it's apparently not as big as the Bolshoi stage). One difference we have heard about is that Russian stages are "raked," while American stages are flat. But that doesn't explain the complaint about hardness. Nor dirty shoes. NYCB dancers get many pairs of new Freeds each week, so we are used to seeing spotless shoes in performance (as we saw with the Bolshoi principals). This might be a matter of what we are used to seeing in that theater from American companies.

It seemed to me Saturday night that these two hadn't danced together very much and/or had precious little rehearsal time. The partnering seemed unusually tentative and he had to scooch a little to be in the right position several times. His lifts really look like he's struggling, no matter the partner. Perhaps he needs to do some upper-body work...Greatest American male ballet dancer in history? Not yet! Krysanova's fouette sequence was the most spectacular of the week: several turns in second with right leg straight to the side thrown in near the beginning, then multiples, at breakneck speed. She seems to have decided that it's impossible to match the music, so full steam ahead with the turns. Same thing with the entrechat/passe sequence (not sure if that's the right terminology) near the end of the white swan PdD in Act II -- incredibly fast, music be damned. But I confess that it's fun to see.

This sort of makes sense. But this week, it seemed that the higher the rank, the cleaner the shoes. Principals all seemed to be wearing new or nearly new shoes, soloists fairly new, and corps atrocious. I still wonder if the allotment to the corps is pretty stingy, which partly explains this. Also, in a recent interview, Gillian Murphy said that even though her Gaynor Mindens last a long time, she still likes to wear a new pair at performances, so they're nice and clean.

Please also note that the Royal Ballet is bringing Acosta's Don Q to the Kennedy Center June 9-14, 2015. Although casting has not been announced, she is doing several performances of that version in London this winter, partnered by Matthew Golding: http://www.roh.org.uk/productions/don-quixote-by-carlos-acosta Here's the Kennedy Center link: http://www.kennedy-center.org/events/?event=BPBSH Nothing announced yet for the NYC engagement later that month. She said in interviews a few years ago that she did not want to be known only for this role, but she has done a very diversified rep since then, so she doesn't seem to be avoiding it now. I first saw her in the Bolshoi's Don Q in February 2010 at Segerstrom (Orange County Performing Arts Center). Wow! I came away thinking: I have to see this dancer again and did a few months later when she performed with ABT at the 2010 Met season. My guess on Mikhailovsky this November in NYC: she'll cancel the Giselles and perform with Royal (her current home), but show up for the second week.

Some of you might remember Dick Button, a longtime commentator on figure skating. He complained constantly about the dirty skating boots worn by the Russian women. They couldn't afford white shoe polish? When you could see close-up, he was right. Principals seem to be wearing new pointe shoes, but not the others. I have also been surprised at how often ribbons are untucked. Russians: is this a cultural thing, like Americans wearing old, torn jeans? Or are shoe budgets really that tight? Or do they use some strange black resin?

They announced what they call summer 2015. See link above. But it only goes to June.

I saw several people looking to buy, but none trying to sell. But I might have missed them as I wasn't looking to buy.

Yes, you could use the psychological twist with either ending. But I wonder if having Seigfried kill off alter-ego and "get the girl" might send the wrong message in the Soviet Union in the 80s: "This Freudian stuff you're hearing about, fellow citizens, is bunk - destroy it and you will be happy." That sounds like a message from Soviet hard-liners of an older era. I don't know that we'll ever really know what Grigorovich intended. As Kisselgoff said at her Lincoln Center Festival event Tuesday: "Don't ever ask a choreographer her intention - never, ever!" But I think it's helpful to try to understand the cultural context within which different works were created -- as best as westerners can understand such things.

Royal is doing Swan Lake next Feb-March, but Osipova has already been announced with Golding. Are there things later in the season that they might do? http://www.roh.org.uk/news/ballet-and-dance-201415

Thanks, FauxPas. Makes perfect sense. But I think Grigorovich added more than an "unhappy ending" -- good doesn't always triumph over evil. I think there's a definite psychological twist with the Evil Genius as Seigfried's alter ego (or some such) - tormented, unable to read people accurately, and suffering in the end for all of that. That's consistent with the 1988 Times story. It's possible in that interview that he didn't have time to explain all of that, or perhaps wasn't as conversant with that aspect. Grigorovich could have gone back to the original ending, with happiness in an afterlife after suicide, but he took a very different direction. The Soviets did not oppose all "tragedy" -- they had R&J, e.g. And it has always puzzled me that they tolerated Giselle's otherworldliness, when they squelched all ideas of a religious afterlife elsewhere. Perhaps they just couldn't think of another way to end things!

I confess to serious confusion about which version we are seeing. The program notes say Grigorovich did his first version in 1969, but that the "current production" dates to 2001. This matters in trying to make sense of the strange libretto, with its quasi-Freudian elements or at least its serious psychological emphasis on Seigfried. The Soviets thought Freud and psychoanalysts were quacks and heretics. Here's a source from 1988: http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/18/world/in-the-new-soviet-psyche-a-place-is-made-for-freud.html So it would be astonishing if Grigorovich came up with this libretto in 1969, when Cold War repression was at its worst (the Prague spring was in 1968), and I wonder if he came up with this later. The post-Soviet 2001 date might just be the costumes and scenery, but he also would have felt free in 2001 to explore ideas that the Soviets repressed. In the 1980s, when Soviet repression eased up a bit, he also might have felt comfortable with ideas the Soviets apparently loathed. So, does anybody know? When did Grigorovich come up with this strange libretto? The program notes are no help at all.

I can't really challenge the scathing reviews here so far. But let me add my appreciation for the wonderful orchestra, which is the Bolshoi's own. The attention to nuance, expression, dynamics makes this a great musical performance to really appreciate. I suppose Russians playing a much-loved Russian classic would be expected to be a cut above what we are used to. Special kudos to the first oboe, who gives us so many iconic musical phrases. Some trivia: these people really take a lot of bows, don't they! The orchestra is asked to stand at the beginning, when the conductor walks on. Extensive bows for the company before the intermission. Principals routinely "break character" to take bows front and center. Someone mentioned that applause had completely stopped when Seigfried insisted Odile come back for another bow. I was in orchestra right, down front, and I could see into the wings that she seemed to be shaking her head "no," but he insisted. Some in the audience caught what was happening and started the applause again, but it was pretty awkward. In the final bows, it seems peculiar that so many in the corps are actually behind one of those big screens in center stage. I did get a kick out of the choreographed bows for the corps, when they all tendu, change position and re-assume their poses. Another detail: Hallberg's partnering opening night seemed very shaky to me, especially anything involving an overhead lift. It looked like he was really struggling with the heave-ho to get her overhead, time and time again. On at least one, he seemed to need a few steps backward to keep his balance. On another, his legs were visibly shaking. I kept worrying that we were about to see a catastrophe and couldn't enjoy any of those moments. When he is supporting her in a turn, he makes a grimacing face that is just not stage-worthy.

There's a very nice write-up on his extensive career on his faculty page at Barnard College, where he teaches in the Dance Department: https://dance.barnard.edu/profiles/robert-lafosse