Birdsall

I miss the Italian fouettés when watching the Bolshoi version!

I want to remind people that Stepanova is a soloist being compared to two Principals and she has been under scrutiny for a while and there are a lot of anti-Stepanova people due to what I think is their negative reaction to an online personality who loves her dancing but just because people may not like that person, they shouldn't kick Stepanova, in my personal opinion.

I agree with Drew about the fifth position issue, but I find Shipulina's arms very stiff compared to Smirnova and Stepanova. Smirnova has a very regal, almost haughty personality on stage, in my opinion, which works well in this role. However, I feel Stepanova is very regal while still giving off sweetness. Out of the three Stepanova has the most beautiful flowing arms. Smirnova's arms would look stiff compared to most Vaganova dancers (I know she graduated from Vaganova), but at the Bolshoi she looks flowing. I do think Stepanova looks at very slight moments (like 5th after a turn and right before one of the arabesques) a bit hesitant but I would take her any day over the others.

I understand those are the rules, BUT I am no tattle tale. I do not like to report people without giving the person a chance to edit or correct (although I agree it is not really my place), and I think that is the human and right thing to do morally even if it breaks the rules, but that's fine. I have had problems with co-workers in the past, but I never go to the "boss" before first giving my co-worker a chance to correct herself or himself or apologize. But since you brought my attention to the rules I guess I should do that in a private message in the future.

I am sure her many fans would love to have your Corsaire ticket, so you will probably be able to sell it to someone.

I think overall what Drew means is correct, because in opera some singers project better than others somehow......but I often wonder if it is more an ability to command so much attention that they are actually drawing us in as opposed to really projecting. Of course, this is splitting hairs and don't mean to do that. I can say that when I saw Stepanova's very 2nd Swan Lake in person at the Mariinsky I felt she did that. I was moved by how she moved away from Siegfried near the end of the love duet after they sort of embrace and she does a back bend. This is before some more turns and the iconic ending with the fluttering turns. She also opened my eyes to the final act. Until I saw her do it I always viewed the final act of the Sergeyev (Mariinsky) Swan Lake as just an act for closure. All the best, most beautiful and exciting choreography is over and Act 3 is just closure, so normally it is sort of boring to me (in the past). But she did specific moves to show Odette's anguish and loss of strength that made the act fascinating, and since then I have enjoyed Act 3 even better, even if a ballerina is not acting as well. So it is subjective how a dancer moves us. I found Stepanova very moving and almost flew to London to see her in the Bolshoi's Swan Lake, but it was already sold out by the time I thought I might skip a training that was scheduled. So I am being a good boy and actually attending the training this week that I should attend. I have viewed almost every role she dances in alternative ways and I think she's wonderful and glad that Vaziev apparently agrees.

I personally prefer a ballerina who acts and responds to her partner and other characters more than looking at the audience. I think there are key moments where a ballerina looks at the audience like at the end of a bravura moment that elicits applause and a couple of other pose-type moments, but for the most part I want the ballerina to act and pretend the audience doesn't exist.

It looks like Irina Golub has moved down to Second Soloist (she was a First Soloist). I mentioned earlier that Elena Yevseyeva has been promoted to First Soloist. Anastasia Lukina and Vitaly Amelishko have been promoted to Coryphees.

I loved her Kitri. I feel that her Kitri was as spicy and fiery as Osipova (when she was first making shockwaves around the world), but with an added femininity that made her Kitri even better. Whereas Osipova was fiery and tomboyish, Yevseyeva was fiery and feminine.

Very surprised, but pleasantly so, that Elena Yevseyeva is now listed as a First Soloist at the Mariinsky. However, I feel her repetoire, although large in secondary and soloist roles, lacks a lot of major roles. I have seen her in person as a spitfire Kitri, a great Gulnare who is in love with her looks, and a very smooth peasant pas de Deux in Giselle (mastering the very difficult turns that end in linking arms with the male without coming off pointe)...... Anyway, congratulations to her! Maybe her recent appearances in the Bronze Horseman helped promote her. My gut feeling is that she is limited in her roles, but I hope she proves me wrong. I would like to see her succeed in more major roles.

Meant to add that Levin is practically non-existent in the ballet. He is a very minor character whereas the book could just as easily been named after him!!!!! But many movie versions have done the same to his character because the "scandalous" love story is what everyone remembers.

I don't really like Ratmansky's Anna Karenina either. I find Ratmansky much more inventive when he is choreographing comical scenes or group (corps) scenes but his love duets bore me. And Cristian is right. The novel includes philosophical and social thought as well as technological and social progress (and whether it is progress).....women's situations in society.....conserve vs. liberal....basically it is a microcosm of the whole world and you can see communism approaching as imperial Russia was no longer quite working in the modern age. All written and discussed so the reader sees many sides to every issue. The novel could almost be named Konstantin Levin just as well as Anna Karenina because it is devoted just as much to his life as it is to Anna Karenina. But most movie versions and now this ballet focuses on the tragic love story because it would take a ballet as long as Wagner's Ring Cycle to tell the whole thing!!! The chapter in which Anna jumps between cars of a train to kill herself are written in her voice and you literally "watch" as she's literally losing her mind. I interpret it to mean she was a "modern" woman and society was still finding its way figuring out life as the ongoing behemoth of "progress" rolls forward (train motif)....I do think Tolstoy might have thought societal "progress" makes for unhappy people but he writes with thoughtfulness about the people on both sides of the spectrum which is why the novel is incredible!

One thing Radvanovsky seems to have in spades is LOUDNESS...at least when I've seen her. She made the Luisa Miller ensemble moments seem like a solo with the entire cast just her back up singers!!! I don't know if she is still blasting like that but it would help her in Wagner if she decided to go back to that repertoire! Even that early in her career she had a strange vibrato. I am stunned that so many people (and many I respect) think she's wonderful in bel canto and Verdi. I am at a loss for words that she continues to sing Norma (my favorite opera) all over the place. If she were singing it at the Met and I were walking past Lincoln Center right before it started with no plans for the evening and someone offered me a free ticket for her Norma I would decline.

I must have seen Seo on off nights then.....Gamzatti in 2012 and now Aurora in 2016......both times she seemed like someone I would have no problem with at a regional company, but she was not dancing at a high standard those two times. Same with Misty Copeland, in my personal opinion. I want to like both dancers because I think it is refreshing to have diversity, so I really want to like both of them, but I have not been impressed by either dancer at all.

Lidewij, That video is the June 14 Vaganova Academ graduation concert at the Mariinsky, so you are right that it is at the Mariinsky and not the Kremlin. Bart

What I meant was maybe instead of Seo or Murphy there could have been Vishneva (or someone else) in at least one of those two performances. Then, in Swan Lake maybe Tereshkina could have had one performance, etc. Just a couple more stars but spread out so as not to keep anyone from getting a chance. I don't mean fill up the week of Swan Lake or Sleeping Beauty with stars but have at least one in each ballet run and the other slots could be for homegrown. So Trenary could have still gotten her chance in SB and another star would have been in another ballet. Seo did two performances and that to me was overkill considering the talent level. And I really doubt the name Seo or even Murphy (as well known as she is) really bring in the out-of-towners......One of the Seo performances could have gone to a well known ballerina. I think there are ways to do it so that both homegrown and international stars could have chances and maybe once the homegrown talent have names that are known around the world maybe then jettison most of the international stars, but for right now I think they need some famous stars to keep buzz alive. To me this past season had a few stars but it seemed like it went from too many to not enough. There should be a happy medium to please various types of people. But that is just my opinion.

I do think "stars" are always going to help sell. I agree with someone above who said that it will be a long and maybe painful process of mainly using homegrown talent, b/c most of us outside of NY do not really know the corps members or up-and-coming dancers. Trenary was a complete delight to me in Sleeping Beauty, although two friends who frequent ABT had said she was probably going to be good, because there is buzz around her. I thought it would be a good debut by a young dancer and was not prepared for just how good it was! So I see value in the homegrown talent. And I mainly flew up to see the "work" (the reconstruction) out of curiosity, so I did not really care about "stars," but if I were going to fly up for Swan Lake or something I have seen many times and was not flying up to see the "work" itself, I would probably choose performances with "stars." I guess I have too much opera fan left in me (although I never go to the opera anymore...things are so bad when Radvanovsky gets all the bel canto roles, in my opinion). In opera STARS are very important. It is one of the reasons the Met has such a huge reputation. I think it is going through some problems currently, but in the 80s and 90s and early 2000s you could fly up and see huge stars in every show you attended. If someone canceled usually a fairly decent star jumped in. Most opera lovers I know want to see the big stars in all their roles. Yes, an up and coming singer (or dancer) is always exciting when they give a performance that is sometimes better than a "star," but the performing arts do tend to revolve around stars. I think it is more blatant in opera and Hollywood. Ballet dancers have a much less nomadic lifestyle (they guest here and there occasionally but usually stay most of the time with a home company), so I think it is more normal to have homegrown talent in a ballet company, but until ABT has very recognizeable homegrown talent that are buzzed about in London, Paris, Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc. I think a good approach might be to have SOME stars (maybe a couple more than this past season) while also using a heavy rotation of homegrown talent to give them experience and exposure and prove to the world that a trip to ABT is as exciting as the Mariinsky or Bolshoi.

Actually, the Rothbart fight is not what I was referring to. In the Mariinsky/Sergeyev version Odette comes onto stage dancing and does quite a lot of things including about 4 high attitudes that I love (not in a row but one stage right then stage left and then the same thing again later). She also goes down onto the floor and does a great back bend. During the duet she and Siegfried do almost a retelling of their first meeting (not exactly but a lot of steps, poses, moves that are similar to in the first swan scene).So apparently none of this is "original," but I love much of it, and I miss it when watching the reconstruction clip above. But the reconstruction also has its fascinating and beautiful moments too. It is funny about Rothbart b/c I was just semi-debating another friend on this matter. To tell you the truth Rothbart does not bother me, even when he is writhing around on stage which I admit does look silly for the most part. My focus is mostly on Odette and what she's doing (although at that point she is just lying in a fainted state LOL) and even Rothbart's antics do not destroy anything for me. I do like that in the Mariinsky version Odette attempts to protect Siegfried when Rothbart comes back out. It is a chance for Odette to show some spunk. She goes in front of Siegfried and puts her arms out to shield him with her body. So for me that is one positive about the Rothbart/Siegfried confrontation although that happens very early in it. It is "possible" that in 1895 the dancers acted the way they do in the clip above, but I am suspicious about it just like Canbelto and you are. It does seem very 21st century to me. Hard to believe acting in 1895 was the same as 2016 and then in the 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s became very stylized and now 2016 is back to 1895 realism. That doesn't quite make sense. Maybe someone with more knowledge about the history of dramatic acting could fill us in on what was likely or not likely. Regardless of whether the style of acting is correct or not, it does actually make it charming.......it does sort of make Odette more human. I agree with you, Drew. I think there are swan arms.

I don't know why that posted twice. Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed that clip very much, and I would love to see that SL reconstruction just as I fully enjoyed the SB reconstruction. I think it is important to know what might have been what the originals looked like. However, in that clip I miss the lovely high Russian attitudes as Odette comes out. For me personally this reconstruction hardly has any dancing in it! LOL But it is lovely and fascinating to watch. What strikes me about this clip is how I expected it to be totally 180 degrees different from the Mariinsky's version, but I actually found it pretty similar in spirit except the reconstruction has less dancing.

I wonder about the acting style in both the Sleeping Beauty and Swan Lake reconstructions by Ratmansky. It fits in with 2016 acting and when you look at 1920s poses, 1930s silent films, 1940s and 50s acting was more stylized and not realistic like 2016. So I have my doubts acting in ballet in imperial times was this realistic even though I wasn't there.

I wonder about the acting style in both the Sleeping Beauty and Swan Lake reconstructions by Ratmansky. It fits in with 2016 acting and when you look at 1920s poses, 1930s silent films, 1940s and 50s acting was more stylized and not realistic like 2016. So I have my doubts acting in ballet in imperial times was this realistic even though I wasn't there.

Personally I think it might be part of the point of this Sleeping Beauty to fill the stage because photographs of 19th century performances do look really crowded. Of course, those are still photographs so maybe they just wanted the whole cast on stage for photos. Also, my experience with Ratmansky is that he does like to keep things on the busy side. In his "new" ballets there are moments when the corps is doing two different things and soloists are also on stage doing different things than the corps...so very busy stage. So my interpretation is that the original is already busy and Ratmansky tends toward busy, so...... I have to say I was won over. Loved seeing 4 performances in a row because I kept seeing things I missed. I think Sleeping Beauty is about complexity (forgiving people even evil people), and it is the opposite of black and white (evil needs punishing/people pay consequences). It is a multi-layered work and even the multiple layers of taffeta and masks put physical layers as sort of a metaphor. To each his own....

I used to find the final act a complete bore until the final Aurora/Desire pdd but after falling in love with the Mariinsky and seeing their Sleeping Beauty both in person and numerous bootlegs and all other classical ballets they do I now consider the character dances (or in this case fairytale dances) part and parcel of imperial ballet and have come to enjoy the various dances as almost a gala within a ballet. It was interesting to see the Cinderella dance because the Mariinsky doesn't really do it in their Sergeyev SB. They have Cinderella and Prince do more of a walk on...

I am heading home tomorrow but wanted to say that I rate the Trenary and Abrera performances the best, with extra nods for the excitement at Trenary's amazing show. Murphy seemed serviceable. Nothing bad, but no magic, in my opinion. Seo seemed over parted all night. Not a favorite. She can be decent in lyrical moments but for me it looked like a performance at a regional company, not a major one.

I forgot to write that the thing that stunned me (happily) was how she looked at each suitor as she raises her leg a la seconde. For the first time it made sense. She looked down shyly but met his eyes with a smile and then looked up to go for the next suitor. Most ballerinas do this mechanically and do not treat it like an acting moment. Granted, it looks like Ratmansky wants this in the choreography, but no one did it like Trenary. She was remarkable living in the moment. A case of personality and role (plus talent) matching wonderfully.