nanushka

@Drew, just out of historical curiosity did you see that specific performance? I ask just because, when watching that video, I always think it must have been such an emotional night in the house.

That was my interpretation as well, based on these passages: The implied timeline suggests to me that the offered R&J was for sometime after the 2020 Met season (presumably whenever the work would next be performed).

More discussion here:

I also don't see Sarah suggesting that the injuries were Cornejo's fault. She focuses on the practical impact on her:

Sarah has given an interview to POINTE titled "Sarah Lane Opens Up About Her Career, Leaving ABT and Her Hopes for the Future":

Sounds (especially now) like a lovely evening, @canbelto!

I’d be happy to explain on DM why I think differently.

Copy editor here (among other things). Personally, I wouldn't alter the original sentence if I were copy editing the article. I think it clearly communicates all of that in a sentence that also conveys the author's style. [ETA: To clarify, I haven't read the full article. I'm basing my judgment only on what was given.] It's not my job as a copy editor to impose my own style, just to make sure that the author's style (if there is one) isn't causing problems. (And if there isn't one, then I can perhaps provide one — if there's a need for one, given the context.) (And yes, we get what the writer gives us, which includes all that's not given explicitly.)

Huxley really did look gorgeous in the b&w, agreed! (And yes to everything else in the three posts preceding mine.)

I had similar thoughts about the DaaG excerpt, actually. (And I teared up as well!) When Duo Concertante was filmed with a very frontal orientation, I thought, "Ok, good, the 360 approach was fine for that first piece but I hope we don't go back to that." I also tend to sit to the side — primarily due to cost, but I similarly appreciate the oblique view. And when I see multiple casts of the same show, it can be interesting to try both sides (though I tend to be most comfortable audience left, for whatever reason).

I agree. I really wish that those filming dance would recognize when a frontal orientation is important to maintain (which in my opinion is almost always, to at least some degree). These dances (with the possible exception of the new Peck — though probably even there, if it's intended to have an afterlife) were designed to be seen on a traditional proscenium stage, and the audience perspective is important to how they visually work. I'm sure it's fun as a filmmaker to get into the space with the dancers and play with the 360-degree orientation, but when watching filmed dance I prefer to see the visual structure of the work more fully respected (as it was in the Duo Concertante excerpt). Some of Coppola's comments in the recent NYT interview relate to this: There are obviously great inherent challenges to filming dance; I just don't think her solutions to those were generally the best possible ones. The finale of Divertimento No. 15 is neither the Balanchine finale nor the particular movement from that work that I would have chosen to include — but I suppose it made sense, given the scoring for strings and the number of corps dancers involved. Regardless, I found it moving to see the company back in these spaces and enjoyed the dancing itself.

You’re right, that’s what they meant. Annoyingly, they misspelled my name, and instead of issuing me a new card when I pointed it out on my second visit they just rewrote over the first one, so my card looks kinda sketchy! I wish there were a better verification system in place.

I think a confusion of reference (i.e. in relation to time of writing, not date of performance) is the cause of the mistake — and I'm pretty sure their usage is unidiomatic as a result. ("Soon" doesn't mean "near." One would say a July 10 shot is too late, not too early or too soon. In fact, a shot "sooner than July 10" would be preferable — one needs to get the shot sooner than July 10 in order to be fully vaccinated by July 14.)

But I think that's why it should say "no later" rather than "no sooner." If the performance is on July 14, the completed vaccination would need to be June 30, no later. Sooner than that would be fine, wouldn't it?

As we've all learned over the past year, though, we don't wear masks only for ourselves, but for others. This is especially important for the unvaccinated. A negative test really only reflects one's status at the moment when the test was taken. That status could have changed within the (up to) 72 hours between testing and attendance.

I must be as confused as @canbelto because I got the same basic gist from the referenced post, but perhaps I wasn’t reading carefully enough at the time.

I agree with all of this. Yes, “cancel culture” is a nifty phrase, but it really just refers to a world in which actions have consequences and institutions are responsible.

Yes to that.

I'd think "allegations" would be a more neutral term in such a circumstance.

Great. Thanks for sharing the news of this!

Oh my! Exciting news that this video exists. I miss seeing her dance so very much. I hope this video makes its way onto YouTube at some point. Is the whole ballet included in the video?

Definitely. He was a very keen builder of repertoire, I think. I haven't had a chance to watch it yet, but I'm looking forward to it, and very glad to have a video record of the full piece — since, as you say, it's not done too often.

Balanchine's one-act Swan Lake, performed by Ballet Chicago:

I can see that as a possibility (i.e. that it matters more to the trustees, donors, etc.), though I also wouldn't be surprised if it's a non-issue even for them. The company's self-touting doesn't itself push me to think it'd matter. I always assumed it was mostly just a marketing tactic in the context of a struggling industry. But again, maybe not... I wouldn't worry about cans of worms — they're good to consider!

I have a hard time thinking it would make much difference, beyond an opinion piece in this or that newspaper. It's not as if most of America is aware of ABT or its self-proclaimed "status"; and it's not as if most of ABT's ticket-buyers are purchasing out of patriotic investment in their nation's homegrown institutions. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it would be much of an issue.