bobbi

BW, how very sexist of me to use only the male pronoun in referring to you. My profound apologies. As a woman, I should know better!! I'm very glad that your husband (and you too) enjoyed Tracey's performances; I really can understand why she had many, many fans, just not me. What upset me about her dancing -- and why I so agree with Robert Gottlieb's comment -- was that, although Tracey was a beautiful woman and was a good technician, her dancing -- to my ears -- had absolutely no relationship to the music. So when Gottlieb said "Teach what," I understood him to mean that Tracey has nothing to offer about the art of phrasing. After more than thirty years of going to NYCB, I have absorbed Balanchine's dictum (hear the dance, see the music). With Tracey, I felt deprived indeed. And, yes, I too have very much enjoyed Yvonne Borree in Duo Concertant. However, as Ms. Borree herself said in a profile appearing in one of NYCB's recent progams, she admits to not being a technician. So Gottlieb's comment (why is she there), just hit home for me. One gets a little upset at "white knuckle" (will she get through it?) performances from a NYCB principal dancer. But, BW, I'm going to get a copy from the library of the book you liked!!

When I read Robert Gottlieb's article, the two comments to which BW took great umbrage -- about Tracey ("Teach what?") and Borree ("Why is she there?") -- are the very ones about which I said to myself, "Yes, yes." Maybe the comments were indeed terse. However, if you agree with the comments, I think the right word is "succinct" (i.e., they just pinpointed with total accuracy one's view of those dancers). BW uses the word "cruel" (perhaps he likes those dancers?), but I would use the word "realistic" (because I don't care for those dancers). It's like preferring chocolate or vanilla: individual tastes. But I'm sorry that BW was offended (as I enjoy his many interesting posts). Just my two cents. . . .

When I read Robert Gottlieb's article, the two comments to which BW took great umbrage -- about Tracey ("Teach what?") and Borree ("Why is she there?") -- are the very ones about which I said to myself, "Yes, yes." Maybe the comments were indeed terse. However, if you agree with the comments, I think the right word is "succinct" (i.e., they just pinpointed with total accuracy one's view of those dancers). BW uses the word "cruel" (perhaps he likes those dancers?), but I would use the word "realistic" (because I don't care for those dancers). It's like preferring chocolate or vanilla: individual tastes. But I'm sorry that BW was offended (as I enjoy his many interesting posts). Just my two cents. . . .

I was there for Wednesday night's Bayadere and enjoyed the evening very much. Having been forewarned that there was little or no "dancing" in the first two acts, I thought it would be boring. But Act I and II were like historic photographs come to life. The scenery in particular was executed beautifully, and at times I thought I was looking at a painting come to life. The pagentry was surprising moving; the costumes were beautiful. It was fun to think that this might have been what the Tsar and his court might have seen, and to see what a ballet audience enjoyed 100 years ago. I will say though that none of the principals stood out for me, with the exception of Igor Kolb. The evening's Nikiya, Sofia Gumerova, seemed to me to have awkward phrasing. I'm hoping for something more at Saturday matinee's Swan with Daria Pavola. And I will say, as an aside, that given the choice of sitting through another almost four-hour Kirov Bayadere and sitting through an evening of Diamond project ballets, I'll take the 100-year-old ballet hands down.

I will be at the Kirov, in the Dress Circle, on the following dates: La Bayadere on Wednesday, July 10; Swan Lake matinee on Saturday, July l3; Jewels on Thursday, July 18; and closing night Jewels, Saturday night, July 20. My suggestion for a meeting place/time is the "Kneeling Lady" statue on the Grand Tier level (just at the head of the stairs) at the first intermission. However, I am open to other suggested meeting places/times, and would very much like to meet other Ballet Alertniks.

Two of my favorite Martins ballets are Eight Easy Pieces and Scarletti Variations. I would particularly like to see Eight East Pieces come back for Janie Taylor, Ashley Bouder and Carla Korbes; they would be marvelous in it. As I remember the Scarletti piece, it was very much in the "classical" mode, not only a pretty work but one that showed off the dancers too. Martins seems to have abanoned this style of choreographing, which seems a shame.

I pretty much agree with Leigh Witchel's comments and would add special kudos for Janie Taylor and Jeny Ringer. I am also really looking forward to seeing the growth of some of the corps kids: namely, Ashley Bouder, Dana Hanson and Antonio Carmeno. Every time I've seen them dancing, they are dancing their little hearts out and are a joy to watch for their solid technique and musicality. I'm also hoping that next season will bring more Balanchine ballets for them to grow in. (For me, the "pretzel" ballets of the Diamond Project don't allow for dancers to grow much.)

Pville, I'm so glad you took another look at Jeny R.'s T&V. Yesterday afternoon, she and Damian W. gave a wonderful account of this fiendishly difficult ballet. This time around, she gave a "tighter" account of the allegro work in her solos and looked more in commond of those sections, even playful. The pas was just exquisite. This pair are two people who working in tandem and musically as one. Damian in his solo work was his usual insouciant self, making it all look so easy. Kudos for all.

AT, at the MET's own website, they have the reverse casting of what you list for the July 10 matinee and evening La Bayadere. I was hoping to see Pavlenko in this (as well as in the 7/13 Swan matinee) -- and actually bought a pricey ticket. Are you sure she's not doing the evening rather than the matinee on July 10?

I was there at Saturday matinee's debut of Jeny Ringer in T&V, and I can happily report that she was wonderful!! I had been a little apprenhensive as I don't think of Jeny as a technician and my gold standard for T&V is still Gelsey Kirkland. No, Jeny didn't have Gelsey's "sharpness" in her solos, but nothing -- nothing -- was left out. Jeny even did those marvelous leg beats in the pas (which seem to have disappeared in some of the recent T&V's from ballerinas at both NYCB and ABT). In addition to coming through with flying colors on the technical side, Jeny's performance -- it's Jeny after all -- was a model of rubato and lyricism. In fact, during the pas (Askegard was her partner) you could see her almost "leading" her partner to make sure she was with the flow of the music. And talk about the "grand manner"!! Jeny was the Grand Southern Belle (think Scarlett on pointe). For me, this performance was one of the highlights of NYCB's spring season. I have another chance to see her at next Saturday's matinee, and am really looking forward to it. I would urge those of you who love ballet in the grand manner not to miss her T&V (this Wednesday and Saturday mat).

I too was at last night's Corsaire and enjoyed it very much. The "competition" between Corella and Acosta made great fun for the audience: you kept expecting each to outdo the other for the audience's favors. Yes, you could say it was a bit like a circus. But that sort of thing is great good fun once and a while. But I would like to ask those dance historians on this list about the garden scene in the last act. The Delibes music is some of the same music that Balanchine used for La Source. Each time I see ABT's Corsaire, I keep wondering: Is this what Balanchine saw as a child? In other words, is this relatively authentic Petipa? There is one moment in La Source which I particularly love -- where the corp girls have their backs to the audience and are boureeing toward the front of the stage. In the Petipa version, the scene is so static -- very, very pretty (lots of people on stage, including children) but I keep thinking of what Balanchine did with that music. For me, he filled and matched that music with just a handful of corp girls. I'd really like to hear from the experts about the differences. Another question: were those children from SAB or ABT's school? And aren't they awfully young to be on pointe?

This is a hard question because I really do enjoy both. However, that being said, if my life choice would have to be either or, I voted for the Balanchine version. With a fresh performance at ABT last night (with Kent and Acosta) in mind -- and having enjoyed it thoroughly -- I will list, in no particular order, why I choose Balanchine's version over Ashton's. (1) Over and above all, Balanchine visualizes that wonderful music better than Ashton; the main example for me is what Mr. B did for Oberon with the Scherzo music -- highly original and a challenge for the very best dancers (remember Misha couldn't really meet the test). Ashton divides the Scherzo music between Oberon and Puck. The choreography for Oberon is standard danseur noble stuff; and Puck and this music are just not a match. (2) The transition from actor to donkey is very awkwardly handled in Ashton's version. You literally see him at the back of the stage for quite a while getting into his donkey outfit. In Balanchine's version, it's just magic. Also, the moment when Tatiania falls "in love" with the donkey is not particularly funny in Ashton's version. In Balanchine's version, after more than thirty years of watching, I still chuckle when the donkey looks straight at the audience holding the fairy queen and seems to say, "What's this?" (3) Of course, Ashton's version of the love pas de deux does not equal in my view what Mr. B did in Act 2. To me, that pas is one of the most exquisite of pas in all of ballet. Ashton's doesn't come close. (4) The earthly lovers in the Ashton version have too much violence during their quarrel scenes: They actually slap each other. There is only one hint of that in Mr. B.'s version when one of the lovers pulls back on a kick. I found much of the stage business awkward in Ashton's version. (5) Of course, there's so much more actual dancing in the Balanchine version. I'm sure I could come up with more specifics, but all that being said, I'm really glad we will have two versions in New York now, but I really do prefer Balanchine's version.

This is a hard question because I really do enjoy both. However, that being said, if my life choice would have to be either or, I voted for the Balanchine version. With a fresh performance at ABT last night (with Kent and Acosta) in mind -- and having enjoyed it thoroughly -- I will list, in no particular order, why I choose Balanchine's version over Ashton's. (1) Over and above all, Balanchine visualizes that wonderful music better than Ashton; the main example for me is what Mr. B did for Oberon with the Scherzo music -- highly original and a challenge for the very best dancers (remember Misha couldn't really meet the test). Ashton divides the Scherzo music between Oberon and Puck. The choreography for Oberon is standard danseur noble stuff; and Puck and this music are just not a match. (2) The transition from actor to donkey is very awkwardly handled in Ashton's version. You literally see him at the back of the stage for quite a while getting into his donkey outfit. In Balanchine's version, it's just magic. Also, the moment when Tatiania falls "in love" with the donkey is not particularly funny in Ashton's version. In Balanchine's version, after more than thirty years of watching, I still chuckle when the donkey looks straight at the audience holding the fairy queen and seems to say, "What's this?" (3) Of course, Ashton's version of the love pas de deux does not equal in my view what Mr. B did in Act 2. To me, that pas is one of the most exquisite of pas in all of ballet. Ashton's doesn't come close. (4) The earthly lovers in the Ashton version have too much violence during their quarrel scenes: They actually slap each other. There is only one hint of that in Mr. B.'s version when one of the lovers pulls back on a kick. I found much of the stage business awkward in Ashton's version. (5) Of course, there's so much more actual dancing in the Balanchine version. I'm sure I could come up with more specifics, but all that being said, I'm really glad we will have two versions in New York now, but I really do prefer Balanchine's version.

A talented young dancer will tempt me to see a program or ballet I wouldn't ordinarily go to see. As a matter of fact, I splurged on a Second Ring ticket this past Saturday matinee just to see Carla Korbes make her debut in Robbins' Interplay. I had remembered her in Midsummer last year, and then she was out for an injury. Although I had spotted her as a member of the corps in Fourth Movement Bizet this season, I wanted to see if my memory of her talent was valid. I wasn't disappointed, and am glad I went out of my way to see her. On the other hand, as one previous post pointed out, a dancer at the end of her career -- like Kyra Nichols -- will also tempt me. I already have tickets for two Midsummers, but if Kyra is in another, I will buy another ticket for that performance.

A talented young dancer will tempt me to see a program or ballet I wouldn't ordinarily go to see. As a matter of fact, I splurged on a Second Ring ticket this past Saturday matinee just to see Carla Korbes make her debut in Robbins' Interplay. I had remembered her in Midsummer last year, and then she was out for an injury. Although I had spotted her as a member of the corps in Fourth Movement Bizet this season, I wanted to see if my memory of her talent was valid. I wasn't disappointed, and am glad I went out of my way to see her. On the other hand, as one previous post pointed out, a dancer at the end of her career -- like Kyra Nichols -- will also tempt me. I already have tickets for two Midsummers, but if Kyra is in another, I will buy another ticket for that performance.

In reply to BW's question as to why does it have to be that former NYCB dancers can't be invited back to coach, I can only surmise that petty quarrels and jealousies -- as opposed to major disagreements in interpreting Balanchine style (Ari's theory) -- are the main culprit. Believe me, BW, I really want to see these magnificent ballets coached. But it appears -- just about twenty years after Balanchine's death -- that personality and turfdom have won over preserving great art. It would make an interesting new thread to ask all of those who have posted to think about what little nuances in both the Balanchine and Robbins rep have disappeared since April 30, 1983 -- you know, the little details that just appealed to you and you looked for in performances. My bet is that each poster could come up with at least five or ten. So add them up and, yes: Houston, we have a problem!

In reply to BW's question as to why does it have to be that former NYCB dancers can't be invited back to coach, I can only surmise that petty quarrels and jealousies -- as opposed to major disagreements in interpreting Balanchine style (Ari's theory) -- are the main culprit. Believe me, BW, I really want to see these magnificent ballets coached. But it appears -- just about twenty years after Balanchine's death -- that personality and turfdom have won over preserving great art. It would make an interesting new thread to ask all of those who have posted to think about what little nuances in both the Balanchine and Robbins rep have disappeared since April 30, 1983 -- you know, the little details that just appealed to you and you looked for in performances. My bet is that each poster could come up with at least five or ten. So add them up and, yes: Houston, we have a problem!

What I took away from today's article was the detrimental effect of the break in coaching ballets at NYCB by Balanchine-era dancers. In fact, one of the most satisfying "revivals" of late for me was the Liebeslieder Waltzes, which I understand was coached very intensely by some of the Balanchine-era principals who danced it. And what a difference!! The little nuances that are so vital to that (and any ballet) were there. As a matter of fact, at Saturday matinee's Cortege Hongrois, while watching the ballet, I remembered what Patty McBride said Balanchine told her. He used the image of "begging for money" for one of her hand movements during her solo variation while turning on pointe. Although Jeny Ringer was lovely, I so missed that one little detail. It's just lost now -- as so many, many other little details are. And don't get me started on details lost in The Four Temperments!! That being said though, I only find "boring" performances by those dancers at NYCB today who -- because they are not coached -- do not go out of their way to find out how the ballets should look. So, yes, it would be ideal and wonderful to have Balanchine-era dancers coach today's dancers. But it's not going to happen. However, those enterprising dancers can find on tape and through interviews some sense of what the ballets should look like. But I agree with Ms. Homans that the break in the human chain is very real at NYCB and very sad. What is that saying, "it's all in the details." How true for ballet.

What I took away from today's article was the detrimental effect of the break in coaching ballets at NYCB by Balanchine-era dancers. In fact, one of the most satisfying "revivals" of late for me was the Liebeslieder Waltzes, which I understand was coached very intensely by some of the Balanchine-era principals who danced it. And what a difference!! The little nuances that are so vital to that (and any ballet) were there. As a matter of fact, at Saturday matinee's Cortege Hongrois, while watching the ballet, I remembered what Patty McBride said Balanchine told her. He used the image of "begging for money" for one of her hand movements during her solo variation while turning on pointe. Although Jeny Ringer was lovely, I so missed that one little detail. It's just lost now -- as so many, many other little details are. And don't get me started on details lost in The Four Temperments!! That being said though, I only find "boring" performances by those dancers at NYCB today who -- because they are not coached -- do not go out of their way to find out how the ballets should look. So, yes, it would be ideal and wonderful to have Balanchine-era dancers coach today's dancers. But it's not going to happen. However, those enterprising dancers can find on tape and through interviews some sense of what the ballets should look like. But I agree with Ms. Homans that the break in the human chain is very real at NYCB and very sad. What is that saying, "it's all in the details." How true for ballet.

I agree with Dale about the Nutcracker excerpt. As someone very used to the Balanchine choreography, I was very pleasantly suprised to find how much I enjoyed it and attributed that to the seamlessness and grandeur of the performances which both Kent and Carreno exhibited. A real treat. One other thing I remember as having enjoyed were the light landings in all his variations from Malakhov. As a matter of fact, that was something I missed from the new kid on the block (Acosta) in the evening's last excerpt. For me, it's not how many turns a male dancer does but how he lands. I also agree with Dale about doing the Rose Adagio as an excerpt. It really loses something standing alone like that.

The program was Mozartiana, Twilight Courante (the new Baynes ballet) and Vienna Waltzes. The two book-end ballets were given the deluxe treatment by the casts. Again, it was Wendy W. and Damian W., who turned in another one of their superb performances. Disappointingly, the leads were to have been Maria K. and Philip N., but because of "illness and injury" Wendy and Damian replaced them. Not exactly shabby substitutions, but I had wanted to see the other cast (and I hope all are well soon). I do agree with a previous post on Mozartiana about the second male role. Although Tom Gold was very nice, the gold standard for me in this role continues to be Victor Castelli. Some day I would like to see a taller dancer (Antonio Carmena??) "take back" this role. The Vienna Waltzes was a total delight. Highlights were: (1) Monique M. in the first movement, whose acting was just as good as her dancing; (2) Peter Boal and Alexandria Ansanelli in Patty and Helgi's roles. Peter Boal was at his most elegant last night and Ansanelli actually made me forget (almost) about how Patty McB. did the role; (3) Darci debuted with Askegard (who was to have been Jock Soto) in the Merry Widow; I expected this role to fit live a glove on Darci K. and it did. She is glamor personified!!; and (4) last but not at all least, was Kyra N. in Suzanne's role. Wow!! I urge all ballet lovers to catch as many of her performances as they can. A true prima ballerina!! The best thing about the new ballet for was that it was actually a ballet (and not modern dance). The music (Handel) was nice and the costumes were lovely. However, it was lighted very dimly (it was named Twilight Courante) and was difficult for "old" eyes to see in the Second Ring. That was a shame because the dancers gave it their all. Of particular note was the variation for Jeannie Somogyi, which really played to all her gifts of speed and musicality. All in all, a nice evening at the ballet.

Last night was one of those rare treats at NYCB now -- an all-Balanchine evening. This season out of nine weeks there are only four such evenings (excluding Midsummer). These evenings tend to attract those of us "of a certain age" and it's so nice to mingle at intermissions with so many of the long-time NYCB audience. In fact, many in the audience remember the original casts of at least four of last night's offerings: Kammermusk No. 2, Tschaikovsky Pas de Deux, Mozartiana, and Stravinsky Violin Concerto. So, you ask, did today's crop of dancers measure up to (or even outdo) their predecessors? Yes indeed!! First, Kammermusik: I always remember a review by Arlene Croce saying that although she saw how estimable this ballet was, she would never really like it. I was never sure what she meant by that remark other than that the choreography is -- like the music of course -- relentless. You can't lose your concentration in this ballet even once. The men's corps is riveting and today's dancers were just fabulous, every single one of them. The principals (Maria K with Charles Askegard and Monique M. with Philip Neal) turned in excellent performances. They definitely measured up!! Second, Tschaikovsky Pas: Two debuts here: Janie Taylor and Benjamin Millepied. Both (and Janie Taylor, in particular) turned in a dynamite performance -- evidencing a solid technique and dramatic phrasing. I'd like Janie T. to look at some old tapes of Patty McBride who made everything look like magic and could make the audience think "this was all so easy to do." I mention this because Janie T. has a tendency to have a rigid stage smile. Relax Janie T.: you have it all!! Third, Mozartiana: The fabulous duo of Wendy W. and Damian W. turned in the honors here. Now, unlike the corps work in Kammermusik, I always feel that the four demis -- however well done as it was last night -- are just marking time until the principals show up (think of the beginning corps work in Diamonds before Suzanne came on). I have seen this pair in Mozartiana many times and they always turn in a top notch performance. But I would rate it a A- by dancers who nine times out of ten turn in A+ performances. I had the feeling that they didn't have enough rehearsal time. But thanks Wendy and Damian!! Fourth, Stravinsky Violin Concerto: More debuts: The pairs were Ansanelli with Hubbe and Somogyi with Marcovici. Of the two pairs, I most enjoyed Ansanelli and Hubbe. In particular, in Ansanelli's case she was just terrific in her debut. With Somogyi, although I know she is a very good dancer, I quite often find while she is dancing I'm always thinking of other dancers who did that particular role. And last night, I missed Karen V. Okay, I've gone on too long. But my message to Peter Martins -- and to paraphrase that old Parks sausages commerical: MORE ALL BALANCHINE EVENINGS PLEASE.

Michael gave an excellent review of last night's gala, and from what I could tell he really enjoyed the evening. I am sorry to say that I did not enjoy it as much. As Michael pointed out, Peter Martins' new piece, Bach Concerto V, is a little bland. I do like many of Martins' pieces. As a matter of fact, I would really like to see the return of Eight Easy Pieces with the current "comers" -- Taylor, Bouder and Korbes. But I will say one thing about his piece: it was actually, well, ballet. That brings me to the new Vespro. It's really a modern dance piece. And I agree with Michael that the cast (particularly Maria K. and Alexandra A) gave their all. But I myself do not particuarly care for the conventions of modern dance, i.e., bare legs, dancers being dragged along the floor, sharp angular arm movements, pretentious poses, looks of angst, etc. I had high hopes for the Bigonzetti piece, as I had expected it to be a ballet. I am sure those who really love modern dance will be able to assess this piece better than I. In any event, it's not ballet. The Red Angels piece was very well done, particularly by Peter Boal and Wendy Whelan and quite enjoyable. Michael described the pas for Janie Taylor and Jock Soto very well. It was hard to take one's eyes off Janie T. The new Evans ballet was interesting up until the very last section when he seemed to run out of steam. But, in any event, it was so nice to see Carla Korbes back again. (Michael, she was in the corps in the Fourth Movement of Bizet for the first two performances of that ballet.) Evans has promise; he knows how to move groups of dancers around and keep the audience interested. I want to see this work again.

Thank you, Farrell Fan, for reminding me about the Sketchbook piece. That's exactly what I was trying to think of. And thanks too, Leigh Wichtel, for pointing out that it was Strauss music that Balanchine used. I drew a complete blank on that one.

I'm having some senior moments. Didn't Robbins do a ballet to this music? Also, who was the composer for the ballet Balanchine did for Rudy N. -- called Les Bourgeois Gentilhommes? Is this the same music? But thanks Morris Neighbor. I've already ordered my ticket for SAB's workshop -- one of the highlights of the ballet season. I attended a Jock Soto advanced class way back in February of this year, and can confirm that there are quite a few good young men in this year's class. Also, let's hope there's another Ashley Bouder there too!!