nanushka

He danced Colas (arguably more difficult than most male leading roles), Mercutio, Ali, Bluebird and leads in the rep programs. He received glowing reviews from New York critics. What is overstated is speculation that Jeffrey gave ABT an ultimatum.

I agree with your last point. But again, the roles you list -- other than Colas -- are not in the category I was describing. They are not (other than Colas) what I would refer to as "leading roles" (as opposed to roles commonly danced by principals, soloists and corps members alike) in the context of ABT's core full-length rep.

He has danced leading roles all season to great acclaim by the critics! Bravo Jeffrey!

This seems like something of an overstatement to me -- the "leading roles all season" part, not the "great acclaim" part.

Cirio has certainly been warmly received by many on this board. But I completely agree with fondoffouettes that this seems out of line with typical promotion practice. What other principal has been promoted in recent memory without having danced any of ABT's central leading roles -- the full-length principal parts which are (like it or not) the core of ABT's reportory? (I don't include roles like Bluebird or Ali or Eros in this category. While commonly taken on by principal dancers, they are not leading roles, and they are not the bulk of typical principal's repertoire. Even Simkin dances select full-length leading roles.)

Cirio, but not Gorak.

Wow.

Love that Hoven got soloist, but otherwise this is upsetting.

If I had to name one very-minor nitpick, it was that she was a little too crisp and sharp in her solos in Act II and Act III for my tastes. Her fleetness of foot is marvelous, but for me personally, I would like to see a little more languid softness in the more-mature Aurora in the wedding p.d.d., and especially in the dream Aurora in Act II. But this is a very minor quibble.

I completely agree. There wasn't quite enough distinction between Act I and Acts II-III.

I'm a bit late to the party but must echo what everyone else has been saying. This was a superb performance. And it truly did feel like, as abatt above said, a star was being born. The audience reaction after the Rose Adagio was intense. We'd all seen her before, but this was a revelatory emergence of such deep talent and artistic intelligence. Rarely is a performance so emotionally engaging and technically exceptional as Trenary's Aurora. She used every instant on stage to convey character, always engaging fully with the other dancers around her and, ultimately, with the audience. In terms of both acting and dance technique, there was a sense that she had studied the part, engaged with every beat of the music, analyzed and made careful choices for execution -- and yet, what resulted was something that seemed purely spontaneous and fully lived.

(As an aside, someone recently said to me, in reference to a different dancer's glamorous image, that she is "the Maria Callas of ballet." In a very different sense, In terms of piercing artistic intelligence, I would say that of Trenary yesterday. As with Callas, there was a sense that she had brought a powerful if intuitive mind to work on the role, that she understood what she was doing and why at every moment. And yet, again, there was no way in which the performance seemed studied or labored. There was total commitment to and engagement in the part.)

Trenary's dancing yesterday was so cleanly articulated -- every single step was crystal clear. (If I were a dancer, and wanted to learn the part of Aurora, I think I could have no better tool than a video of yesterday's performance to study.) And yet these steps all came together to form fluid whole arcs for every phrase and, on a larger scale, every variation. (I feel like I'm pushing paradox past the point of believability in all these descriptions -- but that's truly how it seemed! Such is the mystery of an exceptional artistic performance, I suppose.)

Interestingly, there was a similar quality of clear articulation balanced by unbroken fluidity in some of Whiteside's dancing yesterday as well -- especially the difficult Act III variation. I've seen Gomes, Gorak and Cornejo all dance this, and Whiteside's was definitely the best. His was not overall the most fully successful performance of Désiré that I've seen in this production, but this perhaps most challenging and important moment was quite impressive. (I also agree that he pulled the costume off most successfully. Though there was still one moment where one of those ridiculously cartoonish cuffs hung down right in front of Trenary's lovely face as he held her hand above her head.)

Devon Teuscher similarly handled the trickiest parts of the Lilac Fairy's variation (the more challenging of the two used in this production) with grace and finesse.

Sarah Lane and Zhiyaho Zhang danced one of the best Bluebird PDDs I've ever seen. Zhang competes with my memory of Gorak in this role. While Gorak had more gorgeous liquidity in the opening phrases of the coda, I must agree with fondoffouettes that Zhang's elevations were truly astonishing -- especially because there seemed to be so little force propelling them. (He's no Vasiliev, for instance.) It truly did create the illusion of flight at certain instants.

(So odd, though, that Lane and Zhang did not come out for a bow after their exit at the very end of the PDD. I don't remember this being the case with other pairs in this production. I almost thought perhaps one of them had been injured and couldn't come back out. But that didn't seem to have been the case, as they both seemed fine in the finale. Does anyone recall other couples not taking a bow?)

A final shout-out to Craig Salstein for his fine comic (but not overly broad) performance as Prince Désiré's tutor, Galifron.

So excited to see Stella and Marcelo tonight, then Boylston and Gorak on Saturday! What a great way to end the season!

The only crowd scene I liked was in Act One with the horseshoe-shaped garlands--very effective.

Very interesting -- this was the scene that people most complained about last year as being overstuffed and crowded. I'll be curious to see whether they've scaled this one down a bit to make it more effective.

I'll also be curious to hear (not seeing them this time) whether Lane and Cornejo do the fish dives this year or whether they do the alternate choreo as they did last year.

And curious to see whether there are any other tweaks in the production since last spring.

Thanks for the report, Birdsall. Look forward to seeing your thoughts on the other casts as well!

Fingers crossed that its the mom and ABT Fan are right! What he wrote is definitely ambiguous, so that explanation is certainly possible.

From Calvin Royal's Instagram:

"It's my last week of shows in NYC for the 2016 Spring Season with ABT at the Metropolitan Opera House. Looking back on so many incredible moments onstage and off. I'll carry them with me into the next chapter of performances on new stages in the near future. Exciting things to come!"

I hope those last few sentences aren't a suggestion that he's leaving ABT!

Simkin has posted on Instagram a very brief clip of himself and Misty doing the famous kneeling lift from the R&J balcony scene (the one that, back in the day, Ferri used to do with no hands), and I must say it does not look promising.

Curious about the lack of interest (and what seems to be almost apathy from those on this board) in Kochetkova. She seems to be a main draw in SF, so why not at ABT? Is it her technique? Her lack of height? Her "hipsterness"?

For me it's the fact that she seems technically accomplished but doesn't "dance big." It doesn't help that she's truly tiny. As Nikiya, she looked like a child. I need LEGS in that role. (Veronika please!!) I don't give a hoot about the hipsterness offstage -- I must admit I find her IG persona to be amusingly (if eye-rollingly) bizarre. I just can't get excited about her onstage. Perhaps she'd read better in a smaller house?

Another note: the dream team "Born to Be Wild" contingent all joined ABT from other companies circa 1995. Stiefel joined a little later and Bocca was inherited from the earlier Baryshnikov and Hermann regimes. Marcelo Gomes joined ABT corps in 1997, made soloist in 2000 and principal in 2002. Hallberg joined the company in 2001 and made soloist in 2004 and principal in 2006. Cornejo joined the corps at age 18 in 1999, made soloist in 2000 and principal dancer in 2003. However Cornejo kept on dancing pas de trois and peasant pas de deux's for years after making principal. Certain male leads in classical ballets that would seem like naturals for him like Basilio in "Don Quixote" took years for him to be cast in. Stearns joined the corps in 2006, promoted to soloist 2009 and principal 2011.

This history is really striking. That 2-3 year corps-to-principal transition never seems to happen any more. Were they a bit older and more experienced on joining the corps than those who've entered the corps in recent years? Nowadays it seems to take AGES for dancers to rise up from corps to soloist. Then they either seem to make the additional rise to principal fairly quickly or to just languish as soloists (what KM has called "flagship soloists," I believe).

I think that the talent problem will self-correct within the next three years.

The crux of it was that a disproportionate amount of its recent buzzy ballerinas over the past 5 years were on the taller side (Murphy, Part, Wiles, Semionova) or mid-height but requiring a commanding partner (Kent, Vishneva). Both kinds required tall men who were talented partners (which ABT lacked).

Provided that McKenzie doesn't replace his oldest ballerinas with other tall women (or hire in new tall women), the need for those problematic taller men will disappear. All of the current tall women are at a common age for pregnancy or early retirement. And the current crop of buzzy ballerinas are on the shorter side.

If Trenary and Brandt were the next two elevations, suddenly Shayer, Scott, Cirio, and several of those mid-height corps guys we never discuss would begin requiring a second look (and there would be a far larger pool to draw from afield as well).

Those of us who love the special beauty of tall dancers would be very disappointed if this were the only solution to ABT's talent problems.

I think Raymonda would be a good ballet for Ratmansky to do next season. I might be incorrect in thinking he has created a production already. Regardless, it is a production that would likely sell well and be able to be repeated often. The Anna Marie Holmes' Raymonda hasn't been repeated in quite some time. Based on what appears to be poor ticket sales this Met Season, I don't think we will see another production like Golden Cockerel. I think we might get a mixed bill with Ashton and Ratmansky, but I don't think the company will keep taking big risks. Raymonda is a safe bet. They could also cut it down to be within union rules. Also, with some of their senior dancers winding down their careers, they must balance the repertory to give them all opportunities to dance. I think Vishneva and Gomes are likely to retire in the near future. Both have the star-power to go into more project based work (like Wendy Whelan) and Gomes has expressed interest in choreography. I also think Gomes would be a good pick for ballet master. Because of this, I don't think their retirement from ABT will be the conclusion of their performing careers.

I love Raymonda, but on what basis could we assume that it "would likely sell well and be able to be repeated often"? I just don't see it being a big box office draw. Is it a big draw outside the ranks of those of us who already love and attend a lot of ballet?

Also, Gomes has done much more than "expressed interest in choreography." He has indeed choreographed a number of works, for ABT and elsewhere.

P.S. If there's enough interest as a historical reference, I'd be happy to post the 1977-2015 Met season reps.

I would be very interested in seeing that. I really wish ABT had a performance archive like the Met Opera's!

The pas de deux were ok, but she seemed to be gutting her way through all of them.

He did die exceptionally well.

Just to clarify: these last two refer to Part and Whiteside?

What is "gutting"?

Thanks!

Gillian did Giselle in New Zealand. I wonder if she'll ever get to do it at ABT.

And Veronika did Giselle a few years back at the Mariinsky. Fat chance we'll ever get to see that here.

A third year in a row of R&J and Sleeping Beauty, but no Bayadère for the second year in a row? That doesn't seem to fit the pattern of the past decade.

FINALLY...... I will get to see Veronika Part as O/O on Wednesday night, as this must be the first year in a long time that she wasn't relegated to a weekday matinee. Plus Gomes as Purple Rothbart (also a first for me) should make it quite an evening. Can't wait!

Will be looking forward to reading others reviews for the run as well!

Last year VP danced SL with Marcelo as Rothbart on a weekday evening, and I believe she's had evening performances for the past several years at least.

I agree that she's too often been relegated to Wed matinee performances, but I don't think that's been the case with SL as much as with other ballets. I have never been able to see her Kitri, because both years she danced the role she was given Wed matinees. But I believe I've seen every O/O she's done since 2008.

She is, in my opinion, one of the finest O/Os anywhere.

Agreed about Cory Stearns. He was unrecognizable in a very good way. He had such presence as the Astrologer.

No surprise about Veronika Part. We've seen this witty, fun side of her before.

And completely agreed about the idea that this really should have been a one-act. I had the same idea about pairing it with Firebird -- though perhaps that'd be overkill?

This season looked interesting and exciting on paper, but I'm finding it disappointing. Between Fille and Cockerel, I'm starving for good old fashioned classical ballet with lots of tutus and pointe work. I feel like the season has only just begun and it's already more than half over!

I'm kind of ashamed to admit that I've always liked Ali much more than Conrad because of those showy tricks....

Well, I mean, it is Corsaire, after all. I think the whole point is shameless indulgence!

Would anyone be able to provide a brief description of the dance configurations (e.g. which principals/soloists, presence or absence of corps) for the various movements of Ratmansky's "Symphony #9"? I only saw the piece once before and only have fuzzy recollections of it. I'm only getting to see it once more this year, but I really like when I can go in with a sense of the overall architecture of the work.

The musical movements are as follows:

1. Allegro

2. Moderato

3. Presto

4. Largo

5. Allegretto

Thanks much!

I saw it on Saturday night, and (apart from a lackluster pair of Orion's slaves in Act 2) to my eye the corps looked surprisingly good, especially for a first week at the Met, when they've often in the past looked like they need a few more weeks to get up to speed. I thought the company did very well by the piece. Act 3 seemed particularly strong, with a nice lineup of secondaries: Brandt, Scott, Trenary, Sebastian, Giangeruso, Davis, Post, and someone (not sure who) filling in for Zhang.

As for the applause: it's a challenging variation and the music comes to some natural stopping points. As this is ballet, not opera, it doesn't seem surprising to me that an appreciative audience would applaud a good performance at those moments, even if no particularly dazzling feat had just been achieved.

Nanushka--I think we were posting at the same time regarding Sylvia. I now rather wish I had written what you just wrote .

Sylvia is a great favorite among balletomanes but it's not something the Swan Lake/Don Q/Giselle/R&J only audience want to see.

I would suggest, rather, that it's not something that audience knows it wants to see. In other words, it's probably unfamiliar to many of them, but I think the pleasures of Sylvia are very much ones that would appeal to the audience you're describing. If they came, I think most of them would like what they saw, and it plays to many of the tropes and conventions that are indeed familiar to that audience. The problem isn't that the piece is outside of their comfort zone; the problem is that it's unfamiliar. The challenge, then, is getting them in the door -- i.e. marketing.