ABT has only 4 weeks at the Met now, and mixed programs do not generally sell at all well there. I think it makes sense for them to focus on full-length ballets and save the mixed programs for the Koch. And even there, I hope they'll continue to do one full-length each fall. I also hope that under Jaffe's leadership they'll find some additional opportunities to perform in NYC — and to perform more in general. Maybe then they can return to more of the shorter pieces they used to do.

6 hours ago, canbelto said:

The fairy variations during this run were the slowest I've ever heard them. In fact, the whole evening was longer -- both nights the ballet was about 2 hr 45 minutes total. Friday night it was close to 11 when we finally got out.

Not this afternoon, at least. I left the auditorium right after Tiler Peck brought on Andrew Litton, and I remember it was 3:36 when I checked my phone.

The first three fairy variations were fine, but the fourth and fifth were definitely too fast, distorting the choreography. The Lilac variation was faster than I like, but not as bad as the previous two. Parts of the final act were also too fast — one or two of the jewel variations, I think, and part of Bluebird (I think it was the coda where I noticed similar distorting effects on parts of Florine's choreo).

I loved Marcelo Gomes' Carabosse in Ratmansky's production at ABT.

I don't think of them as expectations; I think of them more as standards of excellence and personal taste. I think they're an important part of what makes some dancers become excellent and makes certain rare dancers become exceptional.

23 minutes ago, Quiggin said:

When Kay Mazzo and Peter Martins were doing the second aria, at least in the taped version, the size difference between the two dancers made the gesture seem potentially violent.

It doesn't read as potentially violent to me, but it's definitely something. Arthurs suggests that the size difference of the traditional casting gives it a "creepy kid-sister feel." That's a little closer to my feeling, but still a bit different.

1 hour ago, bellawood said:

Finally, I read Faye Arthur's review of this same program from last week in Fjiord Review, and I wanted to offer something up for discussion. She calls the end of SVC's Aria II "problematic", which echoes the Russell Janzen's opinion about Agon's PDD in his Times op-ed from last spring. To me, to suggest something is problematic is to say the creator is offering an endorsement  -- i.e. Balanchine believed that the ominous and heartbreaking hand-over-eyes moment at the end of this PDD would provide a clue to the audience about how he thinks men should treat women. But, in my view, this moment --and the whole Aria II -- captures a moment in a couple's relationship without judgement. Not every relationship is healthy! Not everything ends well! I enjoy reading Faye's reviews but felt this was a misrepresentation of the work. I should add a caveat that I've never done any outside reading about SVC and there might be plenty of information I'm ignorant of. 

Having read this, I sought out the Arthurs review, and I think her point is a subtler one than what's often meant when calling a work "problematic." I don't think she suggests that Balanchine is endorsing a "problematic" relationship, just that he's showing us one (or showing us a relationship that has an aspect she finds "problematic"). Even if the work itself is without judgment, that doesn't mean that our responses need to be. We're allowed — even invited — to have feelings about what we're shown. Arthurs says that Aria II can be "uncomfortable to watch," but she doesn't suggest that the work should have been different or that it shouldn't have made her feel that. Indeed, her being "thrilled" to see the passage come across in a different way suggests that she's excited to see a new layer of potential meaning in a work that has made her experience one feeling in the past but that is not inherently defined by that difficult feeling.

Since reading the full article requires registration, here's the paragraph in question:

Quote

The odd ending to the Aria II was also completely transformed. In this sequence, the man stands behind the woman and opens his arm out to direct her gaze, then possessively clasps her back to him before palming her forehead and guiding her into a backbend. It frequently reads as if he is trying to dominate her or force her into submission in the final pose, which can be uncomfortable to watch. But Janzen has a pensive and humble stage presence: he is noble, but without an ounce of machismo (which worked beautifully in the pas, though he could be a little more assertive in the opening group number). Instead of playing the Svengali, he appeared to open her eyes to new vistas with the gesture—as if promising her a better life. When he tipped her head back and shielded her eyes, it read as an act of protection rather than coercion. I was thrilled to see a new take on a passage that I often find problematic.

2 hours ago, GB1216 said:

I’m in advertising/marketing and while I agree with the assessments above my guess is that budget is an issue.  To put together a shoot is exceedingly more expensive than an animated spot.  Considering all the budget issues of the last few years, lots of things had to be cut and marketing was absolutely one of them.  Compared to the older sleeping beauty spot which was fabulous this one was done at probably less than half the cost while also trying to preserve funds for a media buy.

Now could there have been a way to incorporate some animated point work from the rose? Probably.  I’m sure it was considered but for whatever reason scrapped.

It's the Peck-Copeland ad that I find most ill-considered. Sleeping Beauty is at least familiar to veteran ballet audiences, whereas NYCB must appeal to audiences unfamiliar with this new work (except for its recycled content). Two minutes of the same two dancers repeatedly performing the same dull cliche movements (all those clasped hands and cross-hatched arms) with (we're meant to assume) intensely meaningful earnestness. Not impressive, and definitely not something that makes me excited to see a new work.

6 minutes ago, BalanchineFan said:

One the other hand, if you always play to your strongest audience (and only to them) what does an art institution do when that audience dies off? How do they get younger people or new people in the seats? I imagine an institution’s strongest audience is going to show up regardless of advertising. That’s how I am as a balletomane. I know what I want to see and adverts aren’t going to change my mind or exert much influence. The advertising is for the newbies. 

But if it's for the newbies, is it really giving them a good sense of what the pleasures of ballet (or even of these specific ballets) are going to be? Even if they're not playing to their strongest audience, I'd think it'd be a good idea to play to their true strengths — the experiential elements that really make the art form engaging and worth attending.

Ratmansky’s Tempest ballet was set to music by Sibelius.

But didn't ABT used to start their Met season almost immediately following the Met's own final performance of their season? The Met finishes on Saturday, June 10, but ABT doesn't start until Thursday the 22nd. Unless things have changed on the Met's end, they could presumably start as early as Monday the 12th. Ending at the same time, that would then be a six-week season.

Last year they did five full weeks; this year, they're not even doing that.

I imagine that if she'd wanted to do that, they would have let her. But I'm not surprised if she didn't. Having made her peace with the way her performance career ended, I would guess that she wouldn't want to revisit it three years later.

From a June 2020 article in the Times:

Quote

But she’s gratified that what turned out to be her final performance was a memorable one: a “Giselle” with James Whiteside, who would have partnered her at the Met. It took place at the Kennedy Center in February, on a stage that she loves. “Before the curtain went up,” she said, “I also had told myself, ‘This might be your last show,’ and you know what? It was.”

Ms. Abrera sees it almost as a blessing. Thinking about her final show, she said, “I imagined it was going to be fraught with emotion and nerves — just a very intense experience. So I was preparing myself for that. And now that I don’t have to sit through to that or I don’t get to do that — I guess it depends on how you look at it — I can feel really, really grateful that I had that ‘Giselle’ in D.C. with a lot of my family who came to that show. And with James.”

When Misseldine gets her first O/O I will absolutely be there.

I think Fremantle announced (publicly — I just don’t have the links because not regularly on sm these days) when leaving SFB that he no longer wanted to do ballet full time.

The choreography is Balanchine's. Who holds the rights? My program from 2020 only indicates the Balanchine Trust for the entire piece (minus the no-longer-performed Graham portion).

Interestingly, the Trust's page on the ballet incorrectly states that the "Variations" section was no longer performed at NYCB after 1960, when in fact Peter Frame danced it between 1986 and 1989.

Regarding Episodes, it's too bad they're not continuing to do the Taylor solo (assuming that from the casting sheet, though I didn't get to see the piece this season), since Jovani Furlan performed it in 2020. (I remember that was the last performance I saw before the shutdown.) It seems a shame to let it fall back out of the repertory, if that's what's happening.

Why not just give Ulbricht the role, I wonder. Seems a little strange, as if there was some reason they wanted Ball to be onstage for the final section.

39 minutes ago, California said:

Not entirely clear from this Instagram that OLAR will be programmed next Met season, but I would assume something by Ratmansky would be included. They do have a big investment in OLAR, which makes it seem likely.

Frenette ends the post "I can't wait for OLAR to come back next Met season."

Interesting. IIRC the summer casting made it seem they were testing his potential. Seems he didn’t impress?

I really hope they're looking at the spring tour of R&J as an extension of last summer's production, not precursor to another run next summer. Please not that—especially with only 4.5 weeks.

6 minutes ago, cobweb said:

Intermission report. Another great showing for the scintillating Divertimento No . 15. The yellow and blue tutus are so beautiful. I did a quick online search for a closeup of the costumes but came up empty. Back when I was on instagram years ago there was someone in the costume shop who used to post closeups of the intricate costumes. Does anyone know who that is and is she, or the costume shop, still posting? 
 

There are some great closeup shots on the new video they have up with Emilie Gerrity.

14 minutes ago, NinaFan said:

Duo is correct btw.

It actually depends on the date; they're doing Tchai Pas on Sept 24m and 29e.

There's an excerpt in the current issue of The New Yorker:

Quote

Life and Letters

September 12, 2022 Issue

George Balanchine’s Soviet Reckoning

New York City Ballet’s 1962 tour of the U.S.S.R. forced the great choreographer to confront the regime he’d fled and the people he’d left behind.

2 minutes ago, California said:

I wonder if there is a connection to the Vilar Performing Arts Center in Colorado! In the US, the desperate search for donors, rewarded with naming opportunities, is also widespread.

https://vilarpac.org/

Yes, there is. Vilar's fall was notorious.

Quote

A lasting effect, however, clearly came from the severe decline in his personal fortune due to the crash in technology stocks around 2000. It is documented that Vilar still continued to make pledges even as his personal and his company's fortunes continued to plunge. Among the pledges were $5 million for money for voice loss research after meeting Julie Andrews and $30 million to a Berlin opera company: "Asking Alberto for money was like offering an alcoholic a drink".^[8] However, many of his pledges were never paid.

...

Many of the organizations to which Vilar had pledged donations gradually began to remove his name from parts of their institutions where it had been prominently placed.

In July 2005 the Royal Opera House announced that, following Vilar's failure to maintain the agreed payment schedule, his name would be removed from the building. Later his name was removed from the young artists program when a new donor stepped forward.

At the Metropolitan Opera, where his name appeared on the "Vilar Grand Tier", it has since been removed. The Washington Opera's young artists program has also been renamed (after additional support was found) as the "Domingo-Cafritz Young Artist Program", and the Kennedy Center's "Arts Management Fellowship" program has similarly dropped the Vilar name.

7 minutes ago, Susu_nyc said:

I believe single tickets for Fall 2022 go on sale today.  Does anyone know what time?

 

Noon, according to the website.

30 minutes ago, FauxPas said:

Again, some political and cultural corrections could be integrated into this new production.

It would all depend on whether Ratmansky renews his contract with ABT.

And whether Ratmansky is on board with such “corrections.”