Old Fashioned

There's an interesting side to her personality that I wish her website would reflect more of. I do adore the rehearsal photos, though. That hair!

have never seen Veronika Part look better than her opening-night Aurora, but she’s still a bore. A handsome, tall woman, she wears the same air of terminal nobility from first to last, apart from her irksome habit of letting her audience know which bits she finds difficult. Even when she’s on the music, she doesn’t seem to know why. She seems temperamentally wrong for Aurora, as does Michele Wiles as the Lilac Fairy, a role that needs a generosity that must encompass the whole world onstage.

One thing I've learned about dance criticism, or any criticism for that matter, is to not bore with the word "bore." I believe Margot Jefferson said something along those lines. Handsome is a word I would use to describe Joan Crawford or Maria Alexandrova, NOT Veronika.

Mary Cargill wrote an amusing review for Dance View Times.

Add Romeo and Juliet to the list:

Instead of a court unified in mourning, saved by the Lilac Fairy, the new version has the Queen run to the center stage and indulge in a Lady Capulet fit of rending and chest-beating, while everyone watched, completely ignoring Aurora in the corner.

This in particular made me laugh out loud:

For some reason, she never showed him a vision of Aurora, and the yearning, triumphant music where he begs the Lilac Fairy to take him to see her is wasted in some vague gesturing. He did get to see yet another pop up version of Aurora’s castle. It may be that this touch is designed to appeal to New Yorkers, where a glimpse of choice real estate is certainly far more spiritually enticing than any pretty face, but presumably the Prince has his own 18th century palace, and an old medieval castle shouldn’t be that exciting.

In response to jilaney and MJ: the plot synopsis in the program says that the King and Queen are told by Lilac Fairy that they must leave the kingdom and leave Aurora to her destiny, and the Queen cries a river of tears that Prince Desire will drink from. It was sad to not include their presence at the wedding.

I too knew of the story's plotline, though when I saw the dance I focused more on the dance itself and less on the love story. I find that the viewing the performance with the bias of overlaying romantic notions over the dance itself makes me less attentive to the dance technique and artistic interpretation, which is quite important to me as a ballet student. Of course, that's not to demean someone who watches and 'reads' the plot into the dance interpretation; it is simply how they choose to experience the ballet performance.

I'm not sure how artistic interpretation can be separated from the storyline, and I wasn't suggesting I only pay attention to the plot, or there wouldn't be any reason for me to go to the ballet since I already know it. The magic Gomes and Part create on stage is so powerful that for 2 and a half hours I'm completely immersed in that world. How is that not artistic interpretation? While Part's technique is not spectacular, it is sufficient enough for me to overlook her flaws. Her feet and center are weak but she has worked hard to improve these. I really shouldn't say her technique is poor, and instead say she is no virtuoso. There are other aspects to her dancing that I find exceptional: her arms, back, and line are the most exquisite that I've seen. During last night's Sleeping Beauty performance, the girl sitting next to me clapped or let out a sigh of awe whenever Part dipped into a penchee. While I found her behavior slightly abnoxious, I could understand why she found Part so exquisite. Her arabesques, developees, and grand jetes seem to stretch on forever, but she doesn't overextend, refusing to indulge in pyrotechnics.

Is it too early to poll which production people like more: McKenzie/Kirkland/Chernov's or Martins'?

I can only echo what Susan has already mentioned. Watching Veronika's Rose Adagio was as heart-poundingly exciting as watching Olympic figure skating. All the talk up until that moment about whether or not she could do it made for an unpredictable, on the edge of my seat performance. She not only succeeded in executing the steps and balances, she exceeded everyone's expectations for what she is capable of. People stood up and applauded when she completed the Adagio.

The sets were gorgeous, but they could do without the shower curtain in the Prologue. I thought it was odd that Carabosse handed Aurora an undisguised spindle; other productions I’ve seen has the needle hidden in a bouquet of flowers. It doesn’t make sense…one would assume people would have warned her about playing around with spindles or someone would have snatched it away from her earlier. Carabosse’s minions looked like space creatures covered in florescent paint, and I thought the fire rockets to signify the witch’s entrance and exit were unnecessary. Many of the costumes were over the top, especially the period costumes, and the tutus would be better if they shook off some glitter.

The bluebird divertissement was the highlight of the wedding scene. Thankfully, there was little to no fluttering from Princess Florine, but bringing her out in a cage does not help dispel the myth that she is a bird. Having the other fairy tale characters reduced to background is a major detriment. The comedic timing is very off.

I saw Part in Bayadere (MET, 5/18/07), and wasn't quite taken with her performance. There were moments, especially during the first act, when her expression didn't quite convey the emotion she tried to project. She also seemed to withhold her movements, something hesitant about the way she executed her dances. Maybe she was thinking or pre-planning her next steps too much??? Contrast that to Michelle Wiles who took no prisoners, and the interpretive styles and expressions really stood out.

I very much disagree with that. It's interesting how people can react so differently to the same performance, same performers. To speak the truth, I was so caught up in the love story between Part's Nikiya and Gomes' Solor that I was reluctant to see him with another woman--ehem--Nikiya.

Neither Vishneva-Stiefel nor Anianashvili-Carreno moved me as deeply as either of the Part-Gomes performances. I found the two of them so strongly connected by a common vision, exquisite musicality and the ability to luxuriate in every movement. I was always aware of Vishneva's acting, but Part went beyond portraying the emotion, she seemed to become its essence. When she delivers like that, you (or I, anyway) feel the magic, which is why her Third Shade tonight, looking like a studio run-through, was so crushingly disappointing.

I second that. I still had visions of Part and Gomes in my head, and as beautifully expressive as Nina is, Veronika remains my ideal Nikiya. She seemed tired tonight as the third shade, but I can forgive that. I didn't feel much chemistry between the Ananiashvili-Carreno pairing, and their most poignant moments I caught were when they did not dance together. Carreno had a rather strained look on his face when attending to the two leading ladies. There was no sense of abandonment in love.

My displeasure was further enhanced from sitting in quite possibly the worst seats in the house--last two seats at the end of row E orchestra, right side of the house. Yuck.

Wow. MacCauley's review in today's times. The first one to point out the the Emporer's son not only has no clothes, but just shouldn't be where he is, among other truths. He also praises where praise is due:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/arts/dan...amp;oref=slogin

His review echoes my thoughts on Friday evening's performance. Whelan was the only redeeming factor in Orpheus. I couldn't help imagining what Hubbe would be like in the title role...

I just finished reading the two Bayadere articles on Dance View Times. While Susan Reiter's comments on the Part/Gomes/Wiles performance are a good summation of the majority of reviews I've read here, Michael Popkin had a rather negative opinion of the Vishneva/Stiefel/Abrera performance.

The flat dancing began with Vishneva, whose performance was emotionally disengaged and distant in a way I haven’t seen from her before. In Act I, in particular, she seemed to be going through the motions, and this was unfortunate in more ways than one...She’s a dancer with more than a few grand ballerina mannerisms but is also an unusually passionate performer and the effect of the passion is to make you less aware of her mannerisms. They then seem part and parcel of the passion. When she dances without emotion, however, as she did in this performance, the mannerisms are all too visible. Her cool performance was more acceptable in Acts II and III, when Nikiya is a shade and where her emotional distance was at least consistent with her character, although the scarf dance in Act II fell flat without a strong sense of Nikiya’s emotion for Solor.

I did not get a chance to see Vishneva in this, so is there anyone who can enlighten me as to what her "grand mannerisms" are?

I would love to go grocery shopping following an evening performance, but I can't think of any grocery store around my area that stays open that late (unless it's a hole in the wall 24-hour deli, which aren't usually my first choice). To answer your question, it's home. If we don't need to be home immediately, then we sometimes stop by French Roast or a bubble tea cafe in Chinatown.

Both she and Gomes gave more passionate readings than they did on Wednesday.

I'm jealous that you went to both. Didn't there used to be a green with envy smiley?

At this point, it's time for her to prove to us, the audience, that she has what it takes to become a prima ballerina and to give consistent performances. Ballet is a punishing job, I think everyone acknowledges that, and dancers endure injury, pain, inadequate rehearsal, hostile management all the time. The best way to sidestep all of that is to blow the audience away onstage.

She has already proved herself to many people, including myself. Her good moments are not difficult to come by. I think this whole discussion over this one performance is overblown, and it wasn't even the entire ballet. I'm not making excuses for her, she still has a lot of work to do, but I feel like some of these attacks are becoming too personal. If she consistently gives disastrous performances like the one at the gala, then there's a problem, but I don't think she does. She may never gain everyone's approval, but that's okay because there are few dancers who do. I would take her good and bad performances over another dancer's technically secure yet ultimately boring performances anyday.

I didn't cry for Tuesday night's Sonnambula, but I did feel a lump form in my throat. Tears welled up for yesterday's Bayadere matinee.

One thing that always gets to me is a beautifully danced Rose Adagio. It doesn't matter who the dancer is--if it's done well, I'm overcome with emotion. The combination of the music along with everything I love about ballet is summed up in that single moment.

Wiles, although a fine technician ( who can spin like a top) did not grasp the character of Gamzatti who should not come off as a sweet girl.

I have to admit I like her interpretation. At first I thought it was odd that I should feel somewhat sympathetic for her character in Act 1, but then I understood what she was doing. Her characterization is more aloof than bitchy, and she carried a "higher-than-thou" attitude. I could almost hear her casually saying "Why would you want her when you could have this?" Wiles beauty has been likened to Grace Kelly's before, an actress I never warmed to because of her standoffish manner and passive expressions. For Gamzatti, Wiles is perfect.

Wow, Old Fashioned.

I'm glad you liked Kistler. It was harder for me. I've been watching her dance about 20 years and she was my ballerina for so many of them. I was in row K of the orchestra. I don't even want to say what I thought she looked like. I'm kind of sorry/glad you never saw her back when; at least you don't have to look at what she looks like now and compare it to what she was.

Ouch! Are we talking about her looks alone or her dancing, or a combination of both? This was my first live viewing of this ballet, so I don't know how her performance stacks up against others, but I didn't think it was all that painful to watch. Funny thing--I was in row K, too.

Brief Report on today's matinee, Part/Gomes/Wiles

After reports from the gala, I was feeling a little sorry for Veronika Part, and sorry for myself, too, having bought tickets to see pretty much every performance of hers this season. But whatever her faults, her beauty was on full display today, making me not at all sorry for having tickets to see her! She does look tentative and not confident, qualities oddly paired with an innate beauty, lushness and majesty.

Brava Veronika! She didn't seem to be the least bit timid to me (well, maybe a wee bit for those 2nd Act pirouettes, but she still managed to pull through beautifully). No, her technique is not as secure as Michelle's, but Veronika dances with her heart, and the music just seems to flow through her soul. That sounds corny, but I can't think of another way to describe it. I'm reminded of Antoinette Sibley's (?) description of Margot Fonteyn in Symphonic Variations--even when she stood still and another dancer took center stage, you could only watch her. I felt the same way about Part. Wiles' positions and movements were more textbook perfect and made an interesting contrast to Part's passionate lyricism. There was such an outpouring of love from the audience for her Nikiya, and she deserves all the praise she gets. I don't think I was the only one whose heart raced as the veil lifted from her head. She received the most enthusiastic entrance--guess she hasn't lost her fans after the opening night fiasco afterall. Her expansive line and arch of her back spoke of being caught up in rapturous love. Is there anyone who can developee the way she does? I couldn't help wondering if she might have been a silent film actress in a former life. I haven't seen that kind of theatricality from any dancer before.

The Shades were in okay form, but they didn't have the eery precision of the POB Shades. Ditto on Hee Seo.

On a side note, I spotted Maina Gielgud in the audience and last night at State Theater. If NYCB ever stages Giselle...

I missed the entire run of R+J due to stress from finals and lack of student rush availability, so I was happy to be back at the theater last night. The highlight of the evening was La Sonnambula. The woman next to me couldn't stop gushing about how lovely Kistler was as the Sleepwalker. I concurred. Ringer (the Coquette) always leaves an indelible impression on me. She has to be one of the most gorgeous creatures on stage...so easily recognizable, unlike the many bunheads I have difficulty telling one from the other. I would elaborate more, but I'm off to the Met for La Bayadere!

Next came Veronika Part in the Rose Adagio who managed to turn this into an endless train wreck. Despite her fine lyrical qualities, I think McKenzie should fire her after tonight's performance or else his Board should fire him if he insists on entrusting her with the premiere. She missed every balance. She fell off pointe while desperately clutching one of the cavalier's arms. She was way off balance on most all of her supported pirouettes. No question she was pretty. She was very pretty and smiled and walked and developeed with great grace. But plain and simply, she can't do the job, and hopefully she will be replaced by June 1st. If she isn't, I'm exchanging my ticket.

Eeek--I'm sorry to hear it was that painful. I'm still crossing my fingers she'll be able to pull it together by the premiere, and hope she won't be replaced.

I don't mind commuting by public transportation, but the subway system could use an update. The one in DC is cleaner, easier to get in and out of (escalators), and let's you know when the train is arriving.

You must not have been here that long, because the subway was updated and enormously improved in the late 70s and early 80s. Those who were here in the 70s know the monumental achievement Mayor Koch can claim with all these new subway cars. Half or more of them had no AC in the hot summers, and the lights went out in them constantly--you never see those restful dark trains anymore.

You found me out--I wasn't born yet. I knew of the vast improvement made to the city, even though I've only been here for the past two years, and quite the transition for someone who has lived their whole life in a suburb where driving is practically the only form of transportation. I hope I don't sound like too much of a whine-o; I really love the fact that I don't have to spend $100+ a month on gas money along with other disadvantages to driving. However, it would be nice if people could learn how to dispose of litter in the metro properly and if they refrained from eating and drinking on the train cars. It would make the environment infinitely more tolerable. As difficult as it is to implement those rules, I've seen them enforced elsewhere.

Oh, I don't have any respect for that survey, and don't care what it thinks. New York is easily the most fabulous and perfect thing in the history of the world, and I even lived in Paris a year. I also love Los Angeles more than almost anything, and have been there 9 times in the last 5 years. It's the only other place I'd really choose to live in, but you need big dough so as to live well in the Hollywood Hills or Beverly Hills (at least) and not get lost in questionable behaviours...New York is the best of all. I'll DIE if I ever have to leave! It's also the MOST BEAUTIFUL CITY IN THE WHOLE WORLD! It also has the best ballet, because the Kirov is coming in 2008, and the Royal is close enough in Philadelphia, not to mention all the usuals...

I'm not going to dispute with you how fabulous New York is, but like bart mentioned before, there's a difference between "liveable" and "interesting." Apartment rentals around the greater LA area are still much cheaper in comparison to NYC. I'm not a huge fan of DC, either, I only wanted to point out one area of improvement I would like to see occur in New York. Montreal has a nice subway system, too.

I know many former New Yorkers and people who have lived here for extended periods tell me that they love the city and love visiting...but they would not want to live here again.

True, it is a great city, in many ways the best on the west coast (including Vancouver), but since the survey in question looked at criteria that fall under the category of "livability" (whatever that means), I suspect SF fell out primarily because of the cost of living-- in particular housing...Also the population density in California is oppressive.

I suspect those are the same reasons New York didn't make the list. As much as I love New York, I live in a tiny, dingy apartment and I miss having a car around (mainly because the nearest grocery store is several blocks away). I don't mind commuting by public transportation, but the subway system could use an update. The one in DC is cleaner, easier to get in and out of (escalators), and let's you know when the train is arriving.

If liveability goes by cultural institutions alone, Havana would be up there.

I enjoyed reading everyone's input. I'm especially curious to see Graf now; she looks so exquisite in photographs.

Aesha Ash was one of those who never made it out of the corps but nevertheless managed to attract a large fan base, much like Deanna McBrearty. That may have to do with factors other than the dancing itself, but goes to show that they could still serve as role models for aspiring young dancers. It's understandable that the competition kept her from a promotion--and that NYCB is very much sink-or-swim--but could the management have "fought" for her, so to speak? Did she have the opportunities to show herself to be more than just a lovely dancer? Was technique a hindrance?

Here's a link to photos of Ballet de Camaguey's production of Giselle.

editing to add: somehow I failed to see this in Bart's post. Oops