SimonA

Natalia, Thanks for the lovely report! Just FYI -- the house was papered last night, and will be again tonight. A shame tickets aren't selling well.

Neither is Diamonds. I'm guessing they just wanted to fill out the Millennium Stage program with another pas de deux?

There's also a discount now available for the Saturday matinee and both Sunday performances: all remaining orchestra seats are $39. The code is: "147300".

Vishneva recently posted on her official website that she'll be dancing in the new Ratmansky ballet, in addition to Onegin and R&J.

Back to ABT. Based on what I saw in Symphony #9, I'd have to imagine that the likely order of the Shostakovich cycle will be chronological: Symphony #1, Symphony #9, & the Op. 110a (a.k.a. String Quartet No. 8). Initially, I thought that the Op. 110a would make a good middle ("adagio" in a very loose sense) movement. But in Symphony #9, Ratmansky appears to be gesturing toward a kind of submerged political/historical narrative (as Marina Harss discusses in her blog post here) that's reflective of Shostakovich's own public/private discourse. Like the score itself, Ratmansky's choreography appears to deconstruct the experience of war, contrasting the public euphoria and hollow triumph of "victory" with private tragedy and unspoken pain. To me, we saw this in microcosm in the 4th movement, with the expansive movements (for the Gomes character) set to the brass unison, which are contrasted with the involuted, intimate, almost furtive duet (for the Gomes-Seminonova pairing) set to the haunting, lonely bassoon solo. Concluding with the cycle with the brooding intensity and bleak tragedy of the Op. 110a seems to offer Ratmansky an epic personal/historical sweep that would be devastating. "Seeing the music" is such a cliche, but I'll never be able to listen to the Ninth Symphony again without recalling, in my mind's eye, some of the more striking passages in the ballet. And if Ratmansky is intent upon continuing to mine Shostakovich's own tortured personal history, set against a broader, if coded, historical narrative, as reflected in the music, well, I simply can't wait for the rest of the trilogy.

Cornejo was seen leaving the theater in crutches. Wonderful matinee today, shame about the injury.

.

Casting has been posted. Thought I'd give this a pass, but the opening night cast (Shirinkina, Shklyarov, and Kondaurova) is tempting. PRINCIPAL CASTING (subject to change) Tue., Oct. 16 at 7:30 p.m. Cinderella: Maria Shirinkina The Prince: Vladimir Shklyarov Stepmother: Ekaterina Kondaurova Wed., Oct. 17 at 7:30 p.m. Cinderella: Ekaterina Osmolkina The Prince: Igor Kolb Stepmother: Alexandra Iosifidi Thu., Oct. 18 at 7:30 p.m. Cinderella: Alina Somova The Prince: Alexander Sergeyev Stepmother: Sofia Gumerova Fri., Oct. 19 at 7:30 p.m. Cinderella: Maria Shirinkina The Prince: Maxim Zyuzin Stepmother: Alexandra Iosifidi Sat., Oct. 20 at 1:30 p.m. Cinderella: Ekaterina Osmolkina The Prince: Igor Kolb Stepmother: Sofia Gumerova Sat., Oct. 20 at 7:30 p.m. Cinderella: Alina Somova The Prince: Alexander Sergeyev Stepmother: Ekaterina Kondaurova Sun., Oct. 21 at 1:30 p.m. Cinderella: Ekaterina Osmolkina The Prince: Igor Kolb Stepmother: Sofia Gumerova

Any word on casting? Tickets go on sale for KC members on Monday.

Just wanted to briefly note that the seats I warned against earlier (from my experience at an Encores! performance) in fact comprise the orchestra pit for ballet performances at City Center.

Cinnamonswirl, how was Ciaravola's performance overall on Saturday? She's the one Giselle I missed. I found the lighting for Act II just bright enough for me sitting in the middle of the orchestra. But I could definitely see how it might be a problem farther away from the stage.

From Alexandra's article: "On top of that, we had a young Giselle (Dorothée Gilbert) who seemed to be dancing at the top of her game (and delivered an exceptionally moving mad scene).." Oh, how I wish I had seen Gilbert on Sunday rather than on Friday, when she had the problems we discussed earlier in the thread. Again, from the review: " ... Osta, tiny and very light, danced with a crystalline purity that was especially beautiful in Act II." Absolutely agree, re: Act II. I will say, none of the three casts I saw struck me as ideal. Dupont, for me, was too cold and, as Natalia said, had little chemistry with Ganio. Osta / Le Riche both showed technical diminishment (didn't mention this detail earlier, but in his Act 2 solo, Le Riche only began his entrechats halfway through the musical cue -- he began with just regular jumps in place, not sure what the technical terms are to describe this). And Gilbert / Hoffalt get an incomplete based on Friday's performance.

Thanks so much for wonderful analysis, FauxPas! Would love to read your thoughts on the female principals, as well, like last year.

Isn't the new Ratmansky going to be the three Shostakovich ballets?

Osta and Le Riche showed some of their age this afternoon, but I thought Osta had some of the loveliest, most ethereal dancing in Act 2 that I've seen during this run. It felt like Le Riche was holding back until the Act 2 grand pas de deux. Those astounding double cabrioles-front seemed to come out of nowhere! It was almost like watching a different dancer, in terms of power, energy, height of jumps, etc. He earned the biggest ovation of the afternoon for his solo. Overall, a satisfying Giselle today.

Sorry, corrected above. Was looking at the casting in this thread rather than in the program. I'd never seen Gilbert dance before. Recovery from injury makes sense and could explain what we saw.

Just some very brief thoughts after today's matinee (Gilbert/Hoffalt): I guess I shouldn't take technical mastery for granted! Today's performance set in relief the great virtues of Dupont's dancing, which I probably underestimated in my previous post -- particularly her musicality, purity of line, and beauty of phrasing that all rests on an absolutely solid foundation of technical assurance. I thought Gilbert's Act I Giselle today was wonderful. Her acting was warmer and more animated, and she fits more of the traditional archetype of the character. Her dancing was fresh and lyrical, with a lovely sense of spontaneity. Dramatically, Act I was spellbinding, and the melodrama much more involving, than last night. That said, I did miss some of Dupont's technical perfection. E.g., in Act I, it looked like Gilbert briefly fell off point during the hops and performed her last few hops from less than full point. A minor but palpable distraction. After a great Act I, I thought Act II was merely good, with Gilbert's dancing not quite as special. Did someone in a previous thread mention upper body tension? I sensed some of that, and along with some technical limitations (I wished for deeper penchees, higher jumps or more consistent height in jumps, etc.), that all contributed to an Act II performance that wasn't quite as riveting. That said, one image (among many great moments) will stay with me -- GIlbert's beautiful sense of weightlessness as she's lifted in the pas de deux. Aurélia Bellet's Myrtha wasn't on the same level as Gillot's, and the corps looked a bit less sharp this afternoon.

[Admin note: moved from the POB in NYC thread.] I attended last night's performance of Giselle with Dupont/Ganio & Gillot at the Kennedy Center, In assessing Dupont's performance, I'm wrestling with the thoughts raised by this thread about the October 2009 POB Giselle. I'm finding myself fairly close to silvermash's view that Dupont, while technically exceptional, is dramatically less involving. Dupont is almost too impossibly glamorous to be believable as a peasant girl in Act I. Her Giselle seems to be a more modern, self-confident, and less bashful girl than the archetype. I agree with Nanarina that Dupont's acting, in the mime passages, is very understated and subtle, but certainly there (I was lucky to have my binoculars, even sitting in the middle of the orchestra). But, for me, the larger issue was that she doesn't quite capture the character of Giselle in the quality of her dancing. Her dancing is so controlled, and so perfectly measured, that she misses something of the carefree, uninhibited, and spontaneous love of dance that lies at the heart of Giselle in Act I. Even her "collapse" consisted of perfectly executed pirouettes, followed by a fall, rather than movement with more dramatic verisimilitude. Dupont's cool, technical perfection seemed better suited for Act II, which I felt was much more involving. Her dancing was undoubtedly beautiful and ever so musical, but it also felt at times more professional than ethereal. Ultimately, hers was a performance more impressive than moving. Gillot's Myrtha, as everyone has said, is a marvel. Truly a breathtaking dancer. Overall, this is a wonderful production. The corps danced with such beauty and uniformity -- never have I seen wills so beautiful and terrifying.

Just came across this passage from Nancy Goldner's chapter on Chaconne from More Balanchine Variations: "The performance Farrell gave for the television program 'Dance in America' shows her, alas, as a dim reflection of her own self." Anyone with first-hand knowledge here care to agree or disagree?

From my one visit to the renovated City Center, I'd say avoid the front of the orchestra (particularly rows AA-CC). You'll be very close and looking up at the stage -- it was fine for Encores! but probably not ideal for ballet. There appeared to be a decent-ish rake farther back in the orchestra, but I don't remember for sure. My impression was that the best views were in the grand tier (front of the second section). I also hear that the balcony sightlines have improved -- at least, in the front balcony -- but didn't investigate myself.

Jack, Thanks so much for taking the time to re-watch Chaconne and report back. So generous. You've almost convinced me that I should just go ahead and order the DVD ... though if you do have the time to watch the rest of the DVD, I'd, of course, love to get your thoughts. I recently had the chance to watch several NYCB videos from Balanchine's day at NYPL, and, you're right -- there's nothing like it to be seen onstage these days.

A new Ratmansky ballet, set to Shostakovich's Ninth Symphony, will premiere at City Center on October 18. It will be the first part of a three-part Shostakovich project -- second and third parts will be presented during the Met season. Ratmansky to create Shostakovich trilogy

Apologies for bumping this thread, but I don't think this question was clearly answered here: does the sound synchronization problem affect both Balanchine Nonesuch DVDs, or just the first volume (with Tzigane, Four T's, etc.). Thanks so much!

I just returned from New York and wanted to share a few observations from my visit to the NYPL. I watched fewer videos than I hoped, mainly because I kept re-watching the Farrell/Ludlow Concerto Barocco. Truly a sublime performance. That Farrell/Morris/Ludlow Concerto Barocco is available at the library on a stand-alone videocassette (MGZIC 9-1022) and a cassette entitled "Le New York City Ballet," that also includes Glinkaiana: Divertimento Brillante (McBride/Villella) and Apollo (Martins, Farrell, Morris, von Aroldingen) (MZIC 9-1777 and MGZHB 20-454). Unfortunately, the cassette (MZIC 9-1777) had a thick static line just above ankle height through all the performances that was very distracting. I did not see the other copy (MGZHB 20-454), and it may not have the same issue. The video on the stand-alone cassette of Concerto Barocco (MGZIC 9-1022) was faded but otherwise fine. The Adams/Le Clerq Concerto Barocco (MGZIDVD 5-118) was in great shape. Crystal clear video. And, as Paul Parish observed, what a wonderful comparison with the Farrell video. The 1966 BBC Apollo with d'Amboise, Farrell, Govrin, Neary, and von Aroldingen (MGZIA 4-4106 RNC) was also in great shape. The picture is bright and sharp, and the performance was filmed against a white background with minimally intrusive camera work, so everything comes through with great clarity. There's also some wonderful rehearsal footage with both Balanchine and Stravinsky. The Martins Apollo on the "Le New York City Ballet" cassette, which I referenced above, is not as well-served on film, aside from the static issue. It's much more darkly shot, with more "cinematic effects," like the use of shadow and close-ups. It's not overly distracting, but it's not as "clean" as the BBC Apollo film. The final pose on the staircase, for example, is all in shadow, except for light emanating from the dancers' limbs. The Farrell performance is similar on both films. The point of comparison is, obviously, d'Amboise and Martins. I preferred d'Amboise: wilder, more impetuous, with a stronger transformation. Martins, much more controlled, is already the archetypal god-figure from birth. The 1967 Midsummer Night's Dream at the library (MGZIDVD 5-5955) is not a great print. It looks like it was transferred to DVD with the left and right margins cut off. I thought it may have been a playback issue, but switching from 4:3 to 16:9 mode didn't fix it. (I did not notice the pitch issue Jack mentioned, but I don't have perfect pitch.) That being said, it doesn't lose too much of the picture, and I still was able to enjoy the performance. What a treat to be able to watch Farrell, Villella, Mitchell, Kent, d'Amboise, et al., in this. There's so much else that I didn't have time to see! Can't wait to come back.

Vishneva commented on her website that she won't be dancing Cinderella in DC (but will in Edinburgh).