nanushka

Over the last 30-40 years minus the last 10, I'd say. There's been a noticeable change.

That's a pretty outdated description of ABT, though. None of the current principals were really international stars before coming to ABT. James Whiteside is the only current principal who did not enter the company in the corps or even earlier. The vast majority were in the Studio Company or ABT II.

But La Valse and Slaughter were both seen in the Fall, weren't they? While that makes them unexciting for those of us who attend numerous performances, I think that's precisely why they're programming them again. I suspect it's been very difficult for them to get in the studios with the recent COVID spike. Liebeslieder hasn't been done in a number of years so would require a good deal more rehearsal time. Not saying I don't agree it'd be great to have more variety — just that I don't think it's only about "smaller-scale works." (I think Diamonds was problematic not only because it's larger-scale but also because of the amount of rehearsal that means it'd require.)

In addition to the Giselle, I found Simkin's Whipped Cream with Sarah Lane to be particularly memorable — a top-notch performance.

I think that's what it is, in fact — i.e. they're putting together the programs they can based on the limitations they're currently facing.

I agree @Olga and think you may be right @Balletwannabe. They were a bit slow to require the vaccine in the first place IIRC, so it may be just a matter of time.

When is the last time Copeland performed in a classical (or neoclassical) ballet? Though I don't follow her career closely, I feel like it's been quite some time, and perhaps not only due to covid.

Here are some excerpts from that performance:

I completely agree. And I suspect that, for many, any initial distraction would diminish over time, as this (hopefully) becomes more normalized. I found Angle's previous look (obviously artificial) to be distracting too. It's a natural function of aging for some men. I don't see any reason why they should be prevented from dancing certain roles just because they don't have a full head of hair. The shaved look is quite common nowadays for men with thinning hair, and on many it looks (IMO) much better than the alternatives. (That said, if I were in a position to do so, I might suggest that Angle not go full-on shaved, but rather buzzed. I think on his head that would look optimal. But that's just my personal opinion.)

I'd see that! I don't know that her Preghiera would particularly do it for me, but I'd love to see her tackle some of those variations especially.

It's just a glitch. It's listed for not only January 20 but also the 18 & 19. The description is the same as for fall season opening night, and it leads to the page for the Sept. 21 performance.

And we don't know seem to have sufficient data yet to determine for sure that Omicron is actually milder than earlier strains — or if it only looks that way statistically because so many more vaccinated people are getting infected, resulting in a lot of mild cases. The actual mildness of the virus can't be determined until there's enough data comparing Omicron vs. non-Omicron outcomes in unvaccinated and/or immunocompromised people.

I too have uncertainties about the cancellations, but they might be truly necessary if there are enough cases all at once that the required onstage and offstage roles can't all be filled.

Ah, that explains why they had the orchestra play the whole PDD.

All of whom, depending on company and location, may be required to be vaccinated. So in that way it's like many workplaces in the U.S., with vaccine and mask requirements in place (to varying degrees, on the latter). In many of those workplaces, when there's one (or more than one but unrelated) positive case — if anyone even knows about it — things don't shut down. I do hope we get to a place where that can be the norm, even if we're not there yet.

I too have wondered if these closures are necessary, @cobweb. I'm 100% in favor of vaccine and mask requirements, but I haven't thought through (or heard full enough explanations of) why closures would be necessitated just by a positive case or two among a fully vaccinated company.

That's due in part to the fact that we're dealing with a new variant, for which three vaccine shots (the original two plus a booster — the latter of which many people haven't yet gotten) are needed in order to achieve the same degree of protection we used to have against the original COVID variants. The virus has changed, in large part due to insufficient worldwide vaccination rates; that's just a fact we need to respond to and deal with now. While it's true that vaccines don't "prevent" (i.e. eliminate) transmission or breakthrough infections, they do significantly reduce those occurrences. And at the scale of populations, those reductions can make a huge, impactful difference. Too many people seem unwilling or unable to think on such population-level terms.

Oh indeed. I don’t exempt anyone. But there are different degrees of risk. I meant to suggest that there’s a cost to all of our risky behaviors, some more than others. We each decide how much risk we’re willing to take (for ourselves and others) to keep “living our lives.” I think it’s good to keep that in mind as we make those decisions.

800,000+ dead in the U.S. alone but at least we haven’t had to stop living our lives.

Yes, right — exposure following contraction. I was referring to exposure of the vaccinated person, sorry to have been unclear. I meant that vaccines don't protect against exposure of the vaccinated person (as @pherank said above), but they do protect against contraction (as @aurora said above); and thus they limit further exposure, contraction, serious illness and/or death of others.

Medically, exposure typically means (potential or probable) contact, I believe, so I'd say vaccines neither limit nor protect against exposure. Vaccines protect against contraction; masks limit exposure.

For those who've seen the role performed by dancers who aren't really "jumpy spitfire turners" (not necessarily short — though there's often a correlation), have any made a strong case for the casting of the role in this way? Or is it generally those who are cast "to type" that really do best with it?

Was LeClercq actually pretty tall? I think I've heard she was actually more average height but looked leggy. (She'd always looked tall to me in videos.) What was her height?

Have they always cast so broadly for Dewdrop? It seems like such a good role for smaller, jumpy spitfire turners. I'm surprised to see that they don't stay within a narrower range of dancers for whom that's a specialty. I know Nutcracker is, broadly, a production that gives many dancers many opportunities, but I've just been surprised by how little they've focused on that "type" this year. Maybe I've just been following the casting more closely than before, though.

It's too bad Medici doesn't (apparently) have a Roku app. If so, I'd definitely subscribe at that price, at least to check it out for a year. (Marquee has a Roku app, but it's terrible — almost not even worth the trouble.)