nanushka

Okay, but every ballet company has AD-created pieces, so it's not fair to point at McKenzie in particular on this. (And if you look at AD salaries, McKenzie makes a lot less total than many other ADs, including Martins, Tomassan, and Nissinen.) I'm not sure if one gets royalties on what are essentially public domain works.

That's what I meant when I described it as "a perhaps innate tension." I never commented on McKenzie in particular. It's an interesting conflict of interest that seems particular to dance companies. (Opera companies, for instance, would not generally have ADs earning royalties on productions.)

I wonder if it's at all common for ADs to forgo royalties for performances at their home company during their tenure.

I think when the production is bad, they dump it as soon as possible (as soon as finances are available for a new production) it even if McKenzie is listed as the choreographer. Isn't McKenzie the choreographer of the ABT SB? They are dumping that for a new Ratmansky sB next season.

I didn't mean to imply that the artistic side would never win out. Just that it's a perhaps innate tension, and one I'd never thought of before.

I'm assuming McKenzie gets paid a royalty every time SL is performed at ABT because the program lists him as the choreographer, even though a lot of it is directly from Petipa. He's laughing all the way to the bank, while fantastic dancers leave the company because there is no money for promotions. .

It's an interesting conflict of interest. Can one make innovative artistic decisions for one's company if one is benefitting financially from the (perhaps mediocre) status quo?

One year Veronika Part was a "Big Swan" but had an issue (illness injury) during the performnace. She exited and suddenly a different Big Swan came out in full makeup and costume and finished her role. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the understudys have to sit backstage in costume and makeup at the ready.

Are the "Big Swans" costumed differently than the other swans? Could it perhaps just have been one of the swan corps stepping in?

It seems impossible to imagine that there could be a whole slew of costumed and warmed-up understudies down to and including a "Big Swan" hanging out backstage during every performance. If there's a "Big Swan," that means there'd be not only a Siegfried, O/O and Rothbart, but also (presumably) a whole Pas de Trois ensemble and perhaps even others. Really?

I must say that contra what someone else wrote above, her extended balance was more than a bit wobbly, hardly in the Cojocaru league of breathtaking balances.

I have to disagree. The balance was, to my eyes, quite breathtaking, and quite long -- perhaps a bit wobbly, but not more than a bit.

Cojocaru is kind of a freak of nature when it comes to balances. I don't think we need to make that our standard!

oh also wanted to mention that Joey Gorak looked the best he's ever looked tonight. It's really been a ground-breaking season for him and he finally looks completely confident, happy, and with great presence on stage. Really vying for that well-deserved promotion.

I agree this is how he looked in Act I, but in Act III he was having some real problems with the "Danse du corps de ballet et des nains" (in this version a trio with the same two girls from Act I). He seemed to just be blanking on the choreography, and with the girls circling around him he looked overwhelmed. At one point he forgot which one he was supposed to be lifting and had to spin back around -- too late.

Otherwise, though, it has indeed been a fantastic season for him. It's exciting to be watching the rise of what promises to be an exceptional career. I'm excited to see him next Saturday as Franz.

Act III last night was indeed quite eventful. Between the botched trumpet fanfare (the sound of a sad and angry elephant), the onstage "horn players" forgetting to raise their fake instruments to their mouths, Gorak's flub in the trio, Arron Scott dancing half a beat behind the music in his "unison" Neapolitan with Craig Salstein, and Hee Seo's fouettes threatening to take her straight down into the orchestra pit -- the whole production looked quite ragged! It should make for an interesting Times review. But don't they say a rough opening night makes for a good run? Something like that?

In the middle of it all, Hee Seo danced what I agree was one of the most beautiful first movements of a Black Swan pdd that I've seen. For those 6 or 7 minutes we were truly in a different world.

I agree with nysusan's assessment completely, about both Hee and Gillian. Regarding abatt's comments: I'm inclined to agree about Hee's technical deficiencies, based on past performances (as Aurora and Gamzatti, in particular). But we should remember that we have no idea where she was or what she'd been doing when she got that call at 8:30 last night to rush in and dance Acts III and IV. It seems unfair to involve this particular performance in our judgment. I'll be curious to hear how she does on Saturday night. And given her many gifts as an adagio dancer, I'm still holding out hope for a late blossoming of technical security in the coming years (a la Veronika Part).

It did seem painfully ironic, though, being shown Gillian's Act II and Hee's Act III -- exactly the opposite of what might be a perfect split-cast evening!

Jared Matthews danced a very strong Rothbart. It's unfortunate that we're losing him just as he seems to be really coming into his own as a more dynamic and confident artist.

Devon Teuscher and Stella Abrera were the two swans. Stella seemed to be phoning it in. (Can't really blame her, I guess.)

Misty Copeland, Luciana Paris, Nicole Graniero and Skylar Brandt danced a very clean "Cygnettes" variation, with the exception of those same four bars in the second half of the piece where our ABT dancers always fall behind the beat. I really wish they could be drilled harder on that part.

Speaking of the beat, one thing that perhaps most bothers me about this production, among its many flaws, is how often there are jarring shifts in tempo right in the middle of a piece -- shifts that have no musical justification whatsoever.

And another thing (waving a drink and slurring my speech): the sort of prancing / running-in-place thing that the corps does during the B section of the "Danse des coupes" (while raising their arms and then dropping them to their waists) -- I see this sort of step (with variations of arm movement) in the corps (often peasant) dancing of every Kevin McKenzie ballet. It was there last week in Giselle. I don't remember ever seeing this particular type of movement in other stagings. It looks so silly! I'm calling it "the Kevin McKenzie Special" from now on.

Cojocaru is very light, ethereal, and sometimes seems to vaporize into thin air. But she's also very loving and human, if that makes sense. She's sort of like Galina Ulanova, who also didn't seem like a "ghost" in Act Two.

My question is not so much how she was able to visually do the choreography, though, but rather how the choreography makes narrative sense in that sort of interpretation. It seems to me that, at least early in her Act II interactions with Albrecht, Giselle can't possibly be acting of her own volition. What reason could she have for running around, appearing and disappearing like that? She (it seems to me) must be "possessed" -- and in fact we see direct evidence of that as Myrtha conjures her and causes her to dance. It's only over the course of the act that Giselle is able to gradually break free of that possession and, from the power of her love and forgiveness of Albrecht, attempt to save him. That's what we see happening when Myrtha approaches Giselle and Albrecht downstage right with the branch, which (it turns out) no longer has power over Giselle.

I'm trying to imagine a different way of successfully interpreting the "metaphysics" of Act II, but having some difficulty.

I also like how in Act Two Cojocaru doesn't make her Giselle "ghostly." She's not like Vishneva and Osipova who seem like possessed spirits. Cojocaru's Wili is the same sweet, loving girl of Act One.

How does the Act II choreography make sense (particularly when Giselle and Albrecht are first interacting, and the former keeps appearing and disappearing even from his very arms), if Giselle is basically the same as in Act I?

I did not see last night's performance, but it's hard for me to imagine a fully successful Giselle who's not in a fundamentally different state of being in the second act.

Until today, I have never seen first-hand what was so special about Hee Seo's dancing. When I've seen her in technically demanding roles (Aurora, Gamzatti), she's always flubbed it, more or less, at key moments. (I've avoided her Odette/Odile for this reason.) And then Onegin, which is supposedly more her thing, just bored me to death. Going into today's Giselle, I was worried. I saw Vishneva/Gomes on Monday night, and I was pretty sure today would be a let-down -- with my reservations about Seo and the fact that Hammoudi hasn't apparently danced much in recent months.

As it turned out, I had nothing to worry about.

Seo was a near-perfect Giselle: graceful and girlish and delicate in Act I, ghostly and fluid and ethereal in Act II. Her acting was superb. One moment that really hit hard: as the sun rises and the dawn bell begins to toll near the end of Act II, the shift in Seo's body and face as the significance of that sunk in was subtle yet intensely striking. It was one of those moments when you're so thankful to have been looking at exactly the right place onstage at exactly the right time. The curves of her back, neck and head as Giselle's head is bowed -- a signature pose that recurs throughout Act II, at this moment and elsewhere -- were simply gorgeous.

Her dancing was like a breath of cool, fresh air after the heavy, incense-laden richness of Vishneva's. As much as I love the latter's Act II, with Seo I felt like I was seeing something truer to (my perhaps totally inaccurate conception of) romantic ballet: fluid and spirit-like, but not at all mannered. The tempi were less indulgent, and the whole performance in that act made a more cohesive and forward-moving whole.

Hammoudi and Seo seemed an excellent partnership, and Hammoudi was at his best in his partnering, while his solo dancing was at certain points sloppy and, even when clean, generally less impressive than other Albrechts I've seen. He did the brises, rather than the entrechat sixes, and they were thoroughly unimpressive. It looked like he was lightly skipping down the stage rather than demonically possessed (a la Baryshnikov, for instance). I love the brises when done extremely well, but if that's not possible I think the entrechats should be the fallback.

The moment late in the pdd when Albrecht whisks Giselle across the stage in arabesque and her foot repeatedly lands (sorry, I lack the vocabulary) was among the best I've ever seen. As was the moment of Giselle's death: she hung suspended for a long moment and then, with uncanny slowness (though still with complete lightness -- not as if he was preventing her from falling, but as if she had already turned more spirit than flesh), dropped down between his arms.

Devon Teuscher was an excellent Myrtha, though she seemed a bit uneasy at first. Once there were others on stage, though, she was fleet and commanding.

Blaine Hovan and Misty Copeland danced the peasant pdd competently, but not with anything near the grace and effortless classical technique of Gorak and Lane on Monday.

(Side note: Misty could apparently use a gay best friend. Someone needs to tell her that that garish -- can it really be orange?! -- lipstick I've seen her wear several times now is not a good choice for her, onstage or off.)

Nancy Raffa was Berthe, and her miming was excellent. But still, the undoing of Giselle's hair was ridiculously obvious and involved. Perhaps they could settle for less than a full undoing, so fewer actions would be needed to make it happen? (It's supposed to look like it's happened naturally, after all!) And perhaps give Berthe something more obvious to do with her downstage hand while her upstage hand does the necessary work? Something, please! Unfortunately, Seo's (real?) hair, once down, had a very layered, contemporary cut that really did not fit the scene's time or place.

A lot more to say -- this performance was really a highlight of the season for me thus far! -- but that's enough for now.

Did anyone get to see Veronika's Giselle in Columbia, MD, last weekend? I'd love to hear details from any eye-witnesses!

Hallberg has not found the kind of relationship that he had with Osipova, and his appearances have been less thrilling because of that loss. His closest partner now is Murphy, but that comes across as a Platonic kind of relationship to the audience, not a passionate relationship. This from a previous NY Times interview with Hallberg:

Q. Can you tell me about your relationship with her (Osipova)?

A. We don’t verbally communicate, but it’s a very raw, very emotional, almost sexual connection. I mean — it’s a feeling. Because obviously we don’t talk, so we don’t profess anything. We just dance together. And when we dance together, it’s electric for both of us.

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/for-hallberg-a-month-inside-the-bolshoi-pressure-cooker/#

Osipova helped Hallberg to elevate his performance. She helped him bring more dramatic heft to the stage. There was always a sense of urgency when they performed together. They were on their way to becoming the next "it" couple of ballet partnerships at ABT.

I'd be curious to know whether she has found any special partnership with anyone at RB. I saw the broadcast of Osipova's Giselle w. Acosta, and I did not sense any special chemistry there.

I'd be curious to know some people's thoughts on his partnership with Zakharova, since they seem to have performed together quite a lot since he went to the Bolshoi. I've only seen brief clips of a few of those performances, as I never made it to any of the theater simulcasts, etc. I'll be seeing their Swan Lake in July.

I've also seen Semionova do wonderful work in SL with Gomes and also with Hallberg. Her body type (very long limbs) is well suited to O/O.

I found Semionova's O/O to be impressive but not moving. The performance I saw (with Hallberg in 2012) seemed studied, with not enough apparent spontaneity.

One moment that was particularly striking to me has remained in my mind. Early in Act II, when Odette is still frightened of Siegfried, she turns away from him downstage left, and he then comes up behind her and takes her hand. I remember that as Hallberg reached out to take Semionova's hand, she simultaneously reached her hand back. The gesture was all wrong: Odette does not give her hand; her hand is taken by Siegfried as she is gradually tamed/wooed by him. Semionova was moving through the choreography rather than living the character. This is why canbelto's descriptions of her performance as Giselle earlier in this thread rang so true to me.

Re MRR's above correction: thanks, I got the two weeks confused. Semionova is the only repeating O/O, not Giselle.

She got injured and never got a chance to dance Giselle again which I will never be

able to understand.

Yes, it's unfortunate that Semionova's second Giselle this week (the only repeat performance of the week) couldn't have been given to Stella. Veronika Part also dances Giselle now -- might she ever get the chance to bring this role to ABT?

Re: Batsuchan's comment #4 above, Gorak is scheduled to dance Coppelia with Yuriko Kajiya, not Sarah Lane (though I'd love to see the latter pairing in that ballet!).

In the old Royal Ballet version that I saw, Bathilde tells Giselle that she too is engaged when she gives her the necklace, and that moment was always so sad.

I feel like I've seen this part at ABT too, though I don't recall it being there on Monday night. Perhaps I'm just thinking of other non-ABT productions I've seen, live or on video. In any case, I really like when this exchange is included.

I'd like to assent to the above points, but also add a few reservations:

• I felt the mad scene was a bit overdone. In particular, the stunning moment when Giselle runs into Albrecht's arms and immediately falls limp and lifeless was diminished in power by the fact that Vishneva had already fallen apparently lifeless several times earlier in the scene. How, then, could they tell so immediately that on this particular occasion she was actually dead?

• The release of Giselle's hair in the mad scene bordered on the ridiculous. Susan Jones (Berthe) was basically down there brushing it out for her, there was so much obvious activity focused on it. When Vishneva rose, her hair was gorgeous and flowing -- but that's not the point. It should be disheveled, and only coming loose.

• The tempi in Act II were at times too slow. I suspect this was wholly arranged between the dancers and conductor (David LaMarche) in order to allow for the style of performance that was desired. I think this music and these steps certainly deserve to be luxuriated in, when the performance is great enough to justify doing so (as here it was). But at a certain point, any hint of forward momentum or musical/choreographical sense gets lost and the whole thing becomes just a series of disconnected gorgeous moments without enough propulsion.

• The now-requisite half-curtain call / half-tableau at the end of every Vishneva-Gomes performance is becoming tiresome. Every time, it seems, the curtain opens on the two of them grasping each other, lost in their own private world of dancerly bliss. A tableau is one thing (e.g. the end of Romeo and Juliet, when the curtain opens again to show the lovers sprawled on the stone), but this seems over-indulgent.

These are mere quibbles, and on the whole the performance -- from Vishneva, Gomes and Gorak in particular -- was gorgeous and moving and superb. But I did feel the need to offer a few counter-points.

I read that Gorak followed up the double tour with a pirouette thus increasing the difficulty -

This was of course lost on me since it is perceptible to the initiated, however that would indicate a lack of fear about difficulty.

His difficulties, when present, seem to come more in the partnering elements than the solo elements. Wednesday night's performance was the best partnering yet that I've seen from him. It was an excellent performance all around, and a pleasure to watch.

Looking at those curtain call videos and photos, I feel it is very strange that ballerinas in the role of Manon take off their short wings and appear in long hair. Why do they do this? I think it is beautiful that the ballerina is lost in their roles and still feeling their passion of the performance during curtain call.

Vishneva did appear for her initial bows (before the ones in front of the curtain in the first video above) with her wig. She was absolutely "lost in her role and still feeling the passion of the performance" when the curtain initially opened on her and Gomes -- so much so that she did not even look to acknowledge the applause, but rather just stood there holding onto Marcelo.

I wonder if perhaps they have raised the ticket price so dramatically to make up for the lost revenue from the poorly-sold weeks...?

If so, that's a brilliant strategy!

Dale: I was just looking on ABT's site and on the eve performance of June 14 it has Abrera listed as Cinderella, followed by Murphy (presumably for the Fairy Godmother) and then Hallberg. http://www.abt.org/calendar.aspx?startdate=6/1/2014

(The order is out of whack - for the other Cinderella performances it always lists Cinderella first followed by The Prince and then the Fairy Godmother.)

I got excited thinking Abrera was given a Cinderella but then I read your casting list and you have Abrera listed as F.G. Is the order on ABT's site more out of whack than I thought, meaning Abrera isn't cast as Cinderella?

I'm guessing that when someone went in to add "Abrera" they just accidentally entered it first on that list, instead of last like on the others. Murphy and Hallberg were previously listed in the same order before Abrera was added.

A note about the June 9th "Cinderella" premiere. Corey Stearns seems to be out of the run but hopefully not because of lingering injury. James Whiteside has been moved from partnering Xiomara Reyes to partnering Hee Seo on the opening night premiere. Joseph Gorak has been tapped to be Ms. Reyes' Prince Charming - someone has been reading these pages about the unhealthy number of guest performers and the lack of opportunities for talented up and comers in the corps and soloist ranks. Stearns as of now is still scheduled to dance in "Manon" the week before and "Giselle" and "Swan Lake" later in June.

Do we know if Cory has danced the Ashton elsewhere? My guess would be that his injury has healed sufficiently to allow him to dance Manon but that he has lost necessary rehearsal time to learn the Cinderella role sufficiently.

If height is a requirement for von Rothbart, it didn't prevent ABT from casting Vasiliev in the role. (Not that that was a success.......)

Exactly, and he looked completely silly in the costume, because they kept those high boots on his rather short stocky legs. Not attractive.

OK, but if you have two people who barely know each other, as professionals and artists, they should be able to get past that and deliver a performance that is, if not sizzling, than is at least compatible. It's called "acting". Dancers tell a story, both with their technique and their expressiveness. This is not a year end recital. It's the Met. Or maybe this also goes to the degree of all the hiring of guest artists in the first place. Maybe too much odd pairing is going on. If the hiring is to continue (which given the current state of affairs seems to be the way), than why not bring two artists who actually dance together year round to the Met. At least that way, they will have said hello before they step on the stage. I don't need "one for the ages" every single night, but as an ardent and frequent ballet goer and one who spends excellent money for seats, I do expect a bit more from visiting artists than just the steps done to music. I expect it from our local dancers also. As I said. It's the Met. It's ABT.

Agreed, and I don't think we should be getting "works in progress" from guest artists, which is what several here have called Smirnova's Nikiya. (I was not there.) We can (and should!) be getting "works in progress" from ABT's own soloists instead! How are they supposed to grow as artists within the company if they never get to dance the company's signature roles and if the company is instead giving those very opportunities for "progress" to non-company performers? It's one thing to have a Cojocaru come in and give a performance -- I do not like her dancing, personally, but even I would not say her performances are "works in progress." It's quite another thing to be giving one of the company's precious few evenings on the Met stage to an artist from outside who doesn't yet have a finished product to put forth.

For those who have not picked up the lobby casting sheets at the MET, the most recent casting sheet lists the casting for the Rothbart role in SL:

Jared Matthews: 6/23, 6/25 matinee

Hammoudi - 6/24, 6/25 evening

Whiteside: 6/26, 6/28 evening

Radetsky 6/27

Stearns 6/28 matinee

I guess Gomes has given up the role. Sad, since he was so terrific in the role.

Thanks for the update, abatt. I think Whiteside will be fantastic in this. Gomes is a real loss -- but I'm sure we can all agree he deserves a break! Glad we don't have to see Vasiliev wear the costume again -- which didn't suit him at all. Has Stearns danced this role in the past? I'm curious to see if he is mended enough to dance all of his currently scheduled performances, beginning next week.

Veyette looked wonderful. His consummate ease and command of partnering really stood out. Isabella Boylston -- there is so much to enjoy about her dancing. She has beautiful feet and legs, and a relaxed, unforced technique. But I find her unrefined, lacking in a sense of grandeur or nobility. She comes across as overly casual in her manners. I could see her developing into someone I would really love seeing, but it's not there yet.

Misty Copeland displayed a wonderful softness and expressiveness in Duo Concertant. I didn't find Eric Tamm as interesting as she was.

That's a perfect description of what I see in Boylston's dancing as well. She has the steps, but it just doesn't seem like she's paying attention to where everything is -- where her hands are, the position of her head, etc. It's as if she's been rehearsing without a mirror. I hope someone is working with her on this.

Any recommendations for which cast to see? The Friday and Saturday nights are out. Are any of the guest artists worth seeing? Otherwise, I'm leaning toward the Part matinee.

Bayadere is one of Part's best roles, if not her best. She's always gorgeous in it, and it sounds like her partnership with Whiteside has really blossomed. I'd strongly recommend that one!