nanushka

I agree about the "thrones". They look like random furniture from a burgueoisie household. They don't look to belong to the nobility, and even less to be the royal couple's thrones.

I know nothing about thrones, but would there necessarily be a set of thrones in every large space in the palace? Or would the "main thrones" be moved around to be used in different spaces as needed? In other words, perhaps these weren't even intended to be thrones but rather just nicer chairs for the rules to sit in on this particular occasion.

The scenic design reminded me of the Nutcracker production in that visual richness was achieved more through the costumes than through the scenery.

To the extent that the set relies heavily on painted panels rather than three-dimensional sets, I think you're right. But I do think there's a degree of visual richness in those images that's simply absent in the Nutcracker production.

The ballerina crisis at ABT is real, but I think would be readily resolved if (1) Part had been given a couple of Semionova's performances instead of piling them (almost) all on Seo; (2) using Part in more performances in general, now that she is in the prime of her career; (3) promoting Abrera and Lane to Principal status, which I believe they could sustain; and (4) whooshing Skylar Brandt to Soloist and then Principal in a matter of minutes. Christine Shevchenko and Devon Teuscher are also potential Principals and should be given a shot at the infamous Wednesday matinee of Giselle (Shevchenko was gorgeous as Moyna), which seems to be the first step on the Principal trajectory, although in years when Giselle isn't being performed, some other Wednesday matinee. It's not that ABT lacks talent. In recent years there has been something of a logjam, with not enough really fine dancers learning the leading roles.

Hear hear!

Semionova? If she returns. Gillian and Boylston seem to be able to make this their own. Lane, I think is not able to rise to this occasion.

Is there a doubt of Semionova's return?

I have to disagree with your sweeping judgment of Lane. Sure, her Rose Adagio had some problems, but the rest of the performance, I thought, was quite good. And it was her very first time dancing in this production!

Gorak is dancing Bluebird at the June 12 performance with Boylston.

I completely missed that, thanks for pointing it out. Unfortunately, I would never pay for ticket to see Hee Seo dance in this of all ballets, with her undeveloped and unreliable technique.

I'm not faulting Osipova by saying she "withdraws"

Whether one withdraws from injury or because they withdraw for other reasons, they are still withdrawing. That is not being negative towards Osipova or faulting her, it's the truth.

The star strategy is not a myth. Their own CFO discussed it openly. Several of the retiring dancers have openly discussed it.

As for KM's reliance on Seo, no one quite understands it. I agree she is not a "star" ( although I actually enjoy her dancing in some roles). She's the fallback option for KM when his star strategy falls through (for whatever reason). She gets a ton of performances thrown on her, increasing her risk for injury, when the problem could be solved by giving more of the soloists and talented corps members a shot at learning these roles. What happens if Seo needs to pull out for whatever reason? A company as talented and esteemed as ABT should have many dancers (FROM WITHIN THE COMPANY) that can fill in on a moment's notice.

You don't see the Mariinsky calling around the outside world when one of their stars get injured.

I think this is another good point. The star strategy and the Seo conundrum are indeed related. If a company is going to survive with a star strategy in place, it at least needs to ensure that a healthy, full roster of company dancers is still being cultivated. The two must work in tandem, and I don't think it's illogical to find fault with both sides of the strategy when neither side is being instituted in a manner that's really functional and workable for the long term.

Also can we at least say something like "if Osipova is forced to withdraw"

She had a fairly catastrophic fall in Giselle, it was not clear if she could get up, and when she did she was horrifically unsteady on her feat. She did finish the ballet (mostly partnered work) like a professional but it was obvious she was not 100% and she was visibly limping and having difficulty walking at curtain calls.

One is of course entirely correct in calling her action with regards to Bayadere "withdrawing" --it is what she did, but it is not as if she chose to do so, and given all the moaning and rending of hair about cast changes it would be nice if that was made clear.

I'm sure she would have preferred to not have fallen, not be injured, and to be able to perform as scheduled.

Good point. Though I'm sure the fact that she started off the season with a withdrawal from Sleeping Beauty (from a performance that had been publicized for many months, and one that seemed doubtful to ever happen, given the idiosyncrasies of the Ratmansky choreography) left a sour taste in many BA mouths. Which is not to excuse the tendency you're deriding, just to offer a bit of explanation.

And on a similar note, although he wasn't Hop-o'-my-Thumb, only one of His Brothers, little Justin Souriau-Levine (our Little Mouse at BAM the past 5 years) really stood out on Saturday afternoon. That kid definitely has a stage career of some sort ahead of him! You can tell he just eats it up.

As far as I know, there is a long history of children performing "the garland dance." I recall reading about them in older books written by former Kirov dancers. Anyone who's grown up at a residential ballet pre-professional school attached to any classical ballet company anywhere in the world has probably been a child in the garland scene. If not, they've certainly learned it as part of their repertoire training. Personally, I love this tradition.

I'm willing to put up with it primarily because I assume the chance to be in these productions is a big motivator for the students, who are, after all, the ones we'll be watching in decades to come.

Other dancing that stood out: Joseph Gorak in Prince solo ; wish we could have seen more from him. Princess Florine (Misty) really different choreography (for me) including something like a step up turn with a low ronde de jombe. Gabe Stone Shayer I had never seen featured. Wow he flew so high as Bluebird but the most impressive feature was how soft and elegant his arms were during the diagonal of brise voles.

One thing that makes me a bit sad about Gorak's rise into principal roles is that we'll probably never see his Bluebird again. His was the most gorgeous I've seen at ABT. I remember vividly how liquid and lovely his legs were in that diagonal at the start of the coda.

I'd also love to see his Bronze Idol again, though that may well happen this year yet at least.

By the way, as this is the 1921 Bakst version, where the heck are The Three Ivans?????

The physical production is modeled on Bakst, the choreography is modeled on 1890.

All the complaints about the costumes and wigs are making me laugh. This has to be the most perfectly designed, sumptuous period ballet I’ve ever seen. Richard Hudson has achieved something extraordinary with this production: it was like seeing an early 20th century fairy tale book come to breathtaking life on stage. When the curtain went up for the Prologue, I was overwhelmed with delight. I could have been watching Moliere at the Comedie-Francaise – and the staff there know how to build 17th century costumes and wigs. Those wigs! The wigs are superlative. SUPER-LATIVE. If you don’t know what the Queen had on her head in Act I, google “fontange” and check out some of the images. And in Act III set in the 18th century, I was actually disappointed there weren’t more towering wigs. Well, you can’t have everything. Though Hudson based his designs on the work of Bakst and his orientalism, the costumes reminded me very much of the work of Edmund Dulac, early 20th century illustrator of fairy tales who was strongly influenced by Bakst. Actually, I thought Hudson’s use of the Bakst color palette was rather conservative (I really love deeply saturated hues) but he has a great sense of balance and knew where to draw the line. What a pleasure not having to sit through yet another parade of lollipop-colored tutus! I never want to see that McKenzie production again. As you can see, the dancing was almost an afterthought for me today. This production deserves multiple viewings. Very happy I’ll be going to see Lane & Cornejo again in June and hoping they’ll be over their technical jitters and have a bit more joie de vivre by then. For me, this production belongs to Richard Hudson.

I wholly agree. I thought the physical production was GORGEOUS!

Um, just checked her Swan Lake and everything but balcony and family circle is sold out. Wow.

And the only thing left in balcony is the boxes! Crazy for the Met!

The orchestra section is SOLD OUT for Misty Copeland's R&J.

She is definitely being made principal at the end of this season, whether we like it or not!

I thought Sarah Lane had a rocky Rose Adagio, but improved substantially for the rest of the ballet. Sarah started out very strong, but when she had to do the balances there were wobbles, until she finally came off pointe. She immediately got back on pointe. Also, the leg that was in attitude kept moving when it should have been still.

I'd just add, though, that Lane did raise her arm during each of the first set of balances, which many dancers do not do. (Some don't even do it during the second set, which IMO is really not okay!)

During the second set, her first balance was unimpressive, but her second was quite long, and I was hopeful. The slip came on the 3rd, and then the 4th was basically still recovery.

And/or was that way of dancing closer to the sources to which he is also returning? (At least as he and his collaborators interpret those sources...)

Exactly. Why assume that Ratmansky is inspired by the British rather than that both Ratmansky and the British are inspired by the original source?

I actually thought that what was substituted for the fish dives was quite lovely. Certainly, it robbed us of the opportunity to applaud at that big moment in the music, but it was a beautiful pose nonetheless. It had been previously announced that Lane/Cornejo would do the original (i.e. notated) choreography, while the other casts would do the interpolated fish dives.

Also, Hoven and Abrera did the overhead lift at the end of the first movement of the Bluebird PDD today.

I believe, just my opinion, that KM is trying to lure Kochetkova from SFB and will offer her a principal contract. I've seen her dance a few times and she is a good, good dancer but IMO she is no reason to deny in house dancers opportunities. Her name can't be a ticket draw. It's painfully obvious that he has no interest in offering Sarah Lane opportunities. With the departure of 3 principal women some replacements will happen even if it isn't 3 for 3. I figure it will be Copeland and Kochetkova (if she accepts}. Stella is a maybe after her Giselle. Lane no way. I would love to be wrong.

Which in-house dancer could have danced Nikiya with Sarafanov, though?

Any thoughts on Kochetkova in Bayadère? I have tickets to the Saturday night performance (originally Osipova/Sarafanov). I've never seen her live.

That said, I have no idea how any of these people would do from a development standpoint. The AD is basically the fundraiser-in-chief, so whoever ABT eventually chooses will have to have a knack for cultivating donors.

Are there any examples of major U.S. ballet companies where the AD position is more solely artistic and a general manager-type position exists to handle development, etc?

I'm not holding my breath. Has there been any sort of a peep at all (of the sort that can be mentioned here on BA, that is) from the board or from individual members that they're unhappy with KM's performance?

From what I understand, KM attends all board meetings--which, again from what I understand, is unusual for an AD.

Sometimes I switch it up and sit in the cheap side orchestra seats that are close (row G or so) but they cut off a good portion of the stage.

If you're willing to go back to around rows N-O-P on the side orchestra seats, not as much of the stage gets cut off and it still feels reasonably close.

Unfortunately, as was reported her earlier, Kourlas has left Time Out New York, and their "standalone dance section" has been cut from their print edition. I loved the in-depth interviews she used to do.

Maybe it's my imagination, but it seems Macaulay generally gets more space for reviews than other NY Times writers. Whatever his opinions of particular performances, which I usually haven't seen, I find him the most stimulating and thought-provoking of all the Times ballet critics.

I agree with your characterization of his writing on ballet in general. His particular opinions of and ways of describing particular performances often drive me nuts, but he is pretty good at discussing the art in general.

He is the chief dance critic, no? So it makes sense that he'd command more space. And he is often able to frame his articles not just as reviews of single performances but as reflections on broader issues in light of those specific performances. And he often gets to review multiple casts at one time (as in his review of the two Saturday performances and, even more distinctly, his "round-up" reviews of 4-5 casts from the entire run of a production).

This is such a great idea -- can't wait to add these to my feed!

Would it also be okay for people to post links to other ballet blogs (including those not written by BA members) here, or is there another place where those sorts of recommendations are collected? I'd love to hear from others what they've found out there.

I do agree with much of that, Amour. I think the problem with Gia may come from the conflicting interests and styles of two different publications. She does these long, intimate, chummy interviews with dancers for TONY -- and then can she really turn around and write an objective review of their dancing for NYT (especially if she wants them to keep coming back to her for more interviews)?

I definitely turn here much more for genuine, insightful reviews -- and the multiplicity of voices and opinions really helps. When I read the NYT reviews, it's more about getting a glimpse of what the rest of the (non-obsessed) world is being told to think!