Bored_on_Wall_Street

8 hours ago, Helene said:

I'll post more later, but there are two things I want to mention now, having seen the second of two performances from the back half of the Second Tier boxes:

1.  The corps was magnificent!  Every pattern, transition, and spacing was clear and disciplined while remaining natural.  In both acts.  There aren't enough  for them and the people rehearsing them.

2.  Madison Rayn Abeo has every reason right now to be over the moon.

I haven't come out to see a show at PNB since Carmina Burana in 2019, and there have been a lot of changes in the company since then (let alone when they last did Giselle) but this really remains the showpiece for the company.  While there were parts of the saturday matinee that were underwhelming and my worry about a degradation in the particular style this production needs,  sunday made up for it.  In addition to what you mention, the acting/miming--which is really important to the restored production-- was more refined, complementing the natural articulation of the corps.   Also, as opposed to saturday's casting, Iliesiu's Myrthe was imperious with touches of sadness.  Very nuanced.

Last night's Fille was basically the greatest thing ever. Marcelo Gomes' Widow Simone was absolutely a joy to watch, as were Abrera, Whiteside, and Scott. More thoughts here, plus impressions of Wilde Times:

http://poisonivywalloftext.blogspot.com/2016/05/magical-fille-mal-gardee-not-so-wilde.html

Very nice writeup. I don't have much to add to the superlatives you and others have provided in this thread other than to emphasize how alive this production was, particularly last night's performance. Ashton's fluid choreography moves the narrative forward by itself (particularly with the ever-present use of props), but the way that the cast embraced it was a site to behold. I often grumble about how ABT has turned some of their big warhorses into dusty museum pieces, and this was a great antidote to that.

And to any ABT marketing people in this thread: i went last night with a friend who has only seen two ballets, and she loved La Fille. This is the kind of ballet that could be a big hit, I think, with many demo groups. It was a fairly grey crowd for the performances I went to, but this has cross over appeal to families, younger people like my friend who want to see a ballet but are inclined to see something with a story, or something "fun" (and not too long...), tourists who couldn't get tix to a broadway show, etc.

I can only hope we don't need to wait 12 more years until this excellent production returns...

Head scratching. I come in with a bias, as (a) I think nutcracker is one of balanchine’s weakest works that gets regurgitated by too many companies each year at Christmas and (b) I loved the character nuance, staging and metatextualness (and plain ol’ weirdness) of the Stowell version. I tried to put that bias aside when we saw the Friday, December 11 performance but…I just don’t understand the purpose of the new production.

Artistically: The changes from the NYCB version of George Balanchine’s Nutcracker (TM, all rights reserved), are more of a different shading than a meaningful change (which of course is a result of the Balanchine trust’s “protection” (ossification?) of their IP). Yes, there is the video intro, the different design of the forest during the snowflakes, costume changes, a chistmas tree that doesn’t seem to have heard balenchine’s view that the tree should be impressive, etc, but it seems weirdly regressive to go back to the future with a 1954 version in which the individuality of the company is suppressed and, in my opinion, you’re left with a less appealing version of the production for the non-ballet going masses due to the lack of dance in the first act of Balanchine’s. (For example, you may not agree with Stowell’s inclusion from the Queen of Spades (? I think?) to tell the story of Prince Pirlipat, but aside from me being one of the three people who think it was a clever artistic decision, it also just includes some dance for people expecting to see dance in a dance barren first act.)

Financially: Perhaps it was cheaper to do the Balanchine than restore the 30+ year old Sendak sets. And I’ve no doubt there will be a short term bump in revenues (the theater seemed a bit more full than when I saw it last year or 2013). But I am genuinely curious to see what the reaction and sales will be in 1-2 years. Traditions are a gamble to mess with, and this risk seems enhanced when it comes to Christmas, a holiday that is all tradition. Based on comments I heard during intermission, and the admittedly probably biased results of a poll that the Seattle Times has, showing ~55% preferred the old version (biased as the disgruntled are the ones more likely to fill out a survey like that), this gamble may not pay off.

And, as an irrelevant aside, the audience in the lower grand tier was truly one of the worst audiences i have ever seen any live performance with. Constant talking, FB updating. I should not have to be telling grown-ass, middle aged people much older than me to NOT carry on full conversations during a show. I always liked how boisterous the PNB crowd could be for applauding, and Nutcracker obviously brings in non-usual ballet goers, but it was like a herd of people on a coke binge stumbled onto an envelope of free tickets...

I don’t believe anyone here would be questioning Sarah Lane’s skills or presence on stage or alleged “8-weeks at the Met” nonsense had they seen her two years ago in her Wed. matinee performance in the old Sleeping Beauty. This was a tour-de-force of skill, stamina, energy, expressiveness and lyrical beauty like none else. Her Rose Adagio was so strong and secure that applause broke out while she was still with the third suitor, and she appeared not to need any of them to maintain balance. This was also the performance in which her partner, Simkin, almost dropped her twice in the third act due to his near non-existent partnering skills, nearly wrecking this great moment for her. She was the best Aurora that season, and this was only a year after her Swan Lake in Barcelona with Angel Corella, a tiny clip of which still can be seen on youtube, for those who don’t understand what they may have missed. This was absolutely the moment for her promotion, and why it was ignored and passed over is something only the AD can tell us. Lane is not an aggressive, muscular dancer like Boylston & Copeland, who attack each step with force and gusto, to the delight of audiences. If her beautiful poetic style is out of fashion these days, then it’s our loss.

I see a lot of ballet. So, sometimes (often) performances blur together. But Lane's performance on that Wednesday in July 2013 is still etched into my mind.

Sort of off topic, but I have two physical tickets for Tuesday (Murphy/Hammoudi are the leads) that i cannot use. Cost was $145 each (row F, aisle seats, grand tier) but willing to let them go to a ballet alert-ian for best offer. PM me if interested.

Thanks!

It's very likely that Misty completed the 32 fouettes in rehearsal, but strange, unexpected things happen in performances (especially a high-profile debut). The fact that she made the choice to do a pique circle and not totally bail shows quick thinking and professionalism.

And even though City Ballet's SL is not in the Petipa style, Mearns has made the excellent point that the fouettes - while important - are only a portion of the evening. It seems as though Misty's characterization of Odette was strong, which, frankly is the most important part of the ballet. The technical issues can be worked out in the studio.

I really don't care about the whole Copeland discussions that rumbles through this forum--she brings audiences in, I think she's a perfectly fine dancer, I will never go out of my way to see her (cf. other soloists Abrera or Lane), and ABT has way bigger issues to worry about than a popular dancer who may not be up to technical snuff to critical gaze. But the 32 turns--as goofy as they may be to the narrative--are an intrinsic part of the audience expectations of Swan Lake, like it or not. To say that a 33 year old soloist just needs some more studio time to work out this issue rings a bit hollow. This is not a like teenage Sara Mearns who had to bail. This was not a conscious decision to remove an awesome looking but narratively out of place series of moves. Instead, this was a soon to be principal (who is dangerously close to being mid 30s) who couldn't do the steps, and this was not the first time. Is that good enough for a company with ABT's delusional sense of grandeur?

.

Problem is, it was so inexpressive that she could have been dancing Manon, or the Thais pas de deux, There was no articulation of Juliet's personality in her dancing. She acted, she attempted to express emotion facially, but her dancing was blank. This Juliet was an empty suit. Blech.

Pretty much this. Much of the choreography just requires Juiet to be carried and/or dragged around, and Seo, as a great looking and skilled dancer, looked great doing so. But MacMillan's ultimately a dramatist, and Seo simply has no acting ability, and just follows the steps, alternating between HAPPY ( ) and, SAD ( ) face. I think she has improved as a dancer, and am not inclined to join the Seo hate parade, but it speaks volumes as to the state of this company, and the competence of the AD, that she is forced the perform this role 3x in a week.

but who wants to dance like it's 1890? Or, for that matter 1990?

Maybe those who would prefer something different to the god awful, empty dreck served up by the 2007 production?

Well, frankly, I feel like this SLEEPING BEAUTY is a big bore...

If this were an exercise in pure pedantry,I doubt the interpolated fish dives in the wedding PDD would be there. Instead, this seems to be more of a work of repair, to rid the production of empty gymnastics and emptier, de-contextualized panto. Sometimes, to move forward, you need to go back at first.

. Just goes to show you how much this new SB is like Bournonville.

When I was leaving Weds' show, my date (who really has only seen a few of the modern versions of the big classics) said that she really liked how this seemed more refined and less "jumpy", and asked if any companies do that style still.

My answer was immediate: yep, the Danes.

While as Helene notes, Bournonville and Petipa were working from a similar french background, I do recall that one of Bournonville's principals/soloists ended up teaching at the Marinsky, and I think this great production suggests there may be a little Danish DNA in it

As for the production itself, I have serious problems with ABT and many of their spring season warhorses, but for the reasons many have mentioned on this thread, I think that this is the best-presented full length the company now has in rep that wasn't choreographed by Ashton. Let's hope ABT can similarly revive Giselle, Swan Lake, et al from their ossified decrepitude.

The Queen's Wig looked like the Bride of Frankenstein.

The Fairies looked like Busby Berkley dancers.

Princess Aurora dies and her parents are barely responsive.

Lilac is a very demanding role, and ABT puts her in Character shoes?

Dream Sequence was an insult to the gorgeous Tchaikovsky score.

The Corps was good, Orchestra Exceptional.

Boring Choreography. No big leaps, no Bravura.

Awakening scene was BORING.

I've never seen a Pas De Trois with three Females before. Boy Girl Boy is the rule.

Pantomime in the First act was not recognizable. Hard to understand. Classic Panto, I did not get this.

3rd and 4th acts were better than the 1st and 2nd.

Seo in the Rose adagio was great.

Can we bring back the Disney Version of SB? Please? That was a magnificent production.

It will travel well, that is certain.

B-, C+ Worst SB I have ever seen.

We all are entitled to our opinions, but I find it a bit hard to reconcile your seemingly snarky statement that the show will "travel well" versus your annoyance at the interpolated "big jumps and bravura" being lost, among other things. Most folks view ballet as being something akin to gymnastics (a problem that even Bournonville railed against in his autobiography,and he died in 1879-ish), so it would seem that features you dislike also would limit the long term commercial viability of the production. This is not the production some expect, as it doesn't reflect what people today think ballet "is".

to me, that is one of this production's strengths. it seems more alive, as a cohesive, dramatic whole. The panto you dislike, for example, is what gives depth, and fills out features, from Carabosse in the christening, to the awakening scene. (While the plot of SB is pretty straight forward, I think, perhaps ABT should consider doing what PNB does for its Giselle and add a basic primer on mimetic gestures to the program?)

I can't quote on my phone, but Seattle_Dancer's remarks on Immler...she may not tick every box of what some people might want from a principal, but i'm always perplexed why this company doesn't feature her more. she's a god damned technical marvel!

Mixed views on the performance. "Dirty Goods" gave me flashbacks to the worst student film and theatre pieces I saw my friends do in undergrad--cringeworthy stuff--but Serenade was mesmerizing. The excerpts from Jewels were also top drawer; I expected we would get the polonaise portion of Diamonds--what better way to send off a ballerina than with Balanchine's idolatry of Farrell/exultation of a ballerina--but I was pleasantly surprised by the choice.

Tisserand had a problem one sees often at NYCB. Skilled dancing, but she didn't inhabit her character(s).

One other thing from this act – Otto Neubert has a great time as Von R here – almost twirling an invisible moustache waiting for Siegfried to mess up. As I watched him try to block Siegfried’s view of Odette by opening up his cape (not as big as his act 2/4 costume, but still impressive) I wondered if he was actually saying something in a semaphore language with all this cape manipulation.

I also appreciated Neubert's look of disdainful boredom during the national dances. I suppose if one was an evil wizard with an absurdly complicated scheme driven by peculiar motivations, you would be bored while various nations danced for your amusement,

Great write up, btw,

A bit tardy in this report, but...despite having tix for the Saturday night performance on 4/18, went ahead and got tix for the 1pm show, as well. as it was likely the last opportunity to see Korbes at PNB for at least these east coasters. It’s hard to believe that she’s going out at this level. She has such musicality that it seems almost effortless.

Overall, I have seen this production a couple of times, and there are many things to commend about it. It’s rare among modern SL’s of having a meaningful fourth act, Stowell adds interesting geometric shapes onto the traditional Petipa/Ivanov choreography, used but somewhat improves upon some of the Soviet intrusions (e.g., jester), and the simple set design in which the lake and palace are linked is effective. This version certainly seems way more alive than the moribund version ABT trots out each year, and has time to breathe unlike the comically sped up Martins version for NYCB.

As mentioned above, we also had tix for the 8pm show. We feared we would OD on swans if we saw the production twice in one day, and despite there being a bit of cast overlap (the pas de quatre/cygents dance was by the same four—and done excellently!), we survived. O/O was Lauren Tisserand. I think I have only seen her once at PNB, it’s clear she has very good technical skills. However, it is notoriously difficult to draw distinctions between O/O, and she had the same struggle, in my opinion. But as what I understand to be her second performance as O/O, she was compelling if only to imagine what she can do with this role with more experience.

Before both performances, there was an appeal for donations. I only attend 3-4 shows a year, but the last time I recall seeing this was probably the Swan Lake performance in 2013; is this a Swan Lake thing? And whoever had the student in leg cast in full classical tutu stand by the money donation box for 1pm show by the main exit is an evil genius.

In any event, I really do quite like this company.

It's definitely a well-staged and commendable production. I've seen 4 live SL's over the past 18 or so months (NYCB, ABT, Pacific Northwest and this one), and while its not perfect, the Czech production (albeit smaller scale--I was afraid Odile was going to fly off stage during her well executed fouettes!) presented interesting solutions to some problems I've always had with the ballet (eg, the opening), and did a few things arguably better than the other productions (particularly, ABT's).

Also, from a technical level, I def am no expert (my knowledge comes from attending, reading some books and having some friends /etc in school who were dancers), but I thought much of the dancing was at a pretty high level. For example, the last SL I had seen live was ABT's, and, frankly, the Odile of the Czech production was a bit ahead of Hee Seo, who did O/O at the ABT performance. This is particularly in the more technically demanding third act; while Seo's fouettes and chaine turns were...wobbly...there was no such problem at the Czech performance. There probably is more depth in a company like ABT, but there seems to be a lot to recommend about the Czech company; if I ever go back to Prague, I would definitely be interested in seeing more.

Because I just learned that this company performs two version of Swan Lake, I wanted to update this thread to clarify that I saw the more traditional of the two, with staging by Pavel Ďumbala, a longtime soloist with the company. (The company also performs a version by Kenneth Greve.)

I've seen a few more "Swan Lakes" since I started this thread, and as I look back, one thing I have come to appreciate about Ďumbala's staging are its prologue and its ending, which are similar to those used by the Bourmeister version. The prologue shows Odette walking, as a girl. Her human status is made clear by the fact that she's wearing a regular skirt, not a tutu (as I recall, King wore a very pretty costume, an elegant but simple dress made from silk or something like it). Rothbart, here a towering figure, comes by and envelops her in his cloak. During the climactic tones of the overture, you see Odette bourre out of the cloak, a swan, as indicated by the fact that she now wears a tutu. The closing scene works in reverse. After the defeat of Rothbart, Odette once again appears in her dress, and she and Siegfried rejoice alone on the stage. This ending feels much more natural than some of the Soviet endings, and to date it is my favorite ending that I've seen live. I still remember how King's smile seemed to light up the whole auditorium. I'm planning to see a few different SLs in the next year, and it will be interesting to see how the endings compare.

I saw this production when in Prague in October, and really agree with your points on the finale tying back to the overture. At the end, you also have the stage covering sheet that appeared at the outset being used as the lake to sweep in Siegfried, who emerges (barely) alive for our happy ending: a very nice practical effect, in addition to providing a kind of parallelism. It was amazing to pay about $40 for a great seat for a show that did a better job than most SL productions in opening and closing.

It’s also interesting you noted King’s birdlike mannerisms. I don’t have the program any longer, having misplaced it at some bar/club in Prague or another that night, so I can’t remember who played O/O, but the O/O at the show I saw wasn’t King, but also had “bird” mannerisms that stood out. In particular, during the third act, when Siegfried is showing some basic level of brain function, thinking that maybe—just, maybe—this is not the same girl he met at the lake—this production did a great job of drawing him in by replicating those very same bird mannerisms, that were just a little 'different' (not that he noticed).

On the topic of ticket sales noted above, we attended last Saturday's performance, having bought tix 6 days in advance. When I bought them online, the mezzanine was barely booked, and were able to pick up aisle/center seats very near the balcony, with our pick of rows. But the mezz (andtheater as a whole) was utterly packed at the performance; so, unless there was a mad rush of people at the end, I wonder if there were some ticket distributions to schools/reduced price sales through Goldstar; etc. ABT have done that a bit at the Met, I understand.

Regardless, I'm disappointed to see this production go. While I appreciate Balanchine's (and we're still hemming and hawing about whether to catch NYCB's this season), it was nice to have the choice of heading over to Brooklyn to see a top drawer alternative that took a different approach in several interesting ways. With this final season, and PNB's decision to shelve their Stowell/Sendak Nutcracker (I travel to work for Seattle regularly) in favor of their "exciting" and new" approach of presenting...uhh....Balanchine's...it has been a vaguely depressing nutcracker season!

I caught Saturday night's production. I have seen the staging a few times, and will miss it immensely. I won't maintain its a great work of choreography (although some pieces--the snowflakes, in particular---show real geometric intelligence), but the strength of this production is the design and staging. I think the meta-textual elements of it have probably been written about to death, but, wow, do I love the ending, with the layers collapsing back on themselves with the music, as the stage and reality reset back to where we started.

While I very much like elements of Balanchine's, and respect its spot in American culture, I think we're all losing something very unique by PNB mothballing this, which (heresy as it may be for me, as a life long new Yorker to say), is my favorite nutcracker.

the fun pretty much went out of their Balanchine in Spring 1986, and I've rarely watched the company since.

Well,as I was born in the 80s, i can't speak from first hand evidence in the same way you can, but I think there's been a real development in NYCB over past 5 years or so. I wasn't there back in the day, but based on video snippets, and my interpretation of what people remember balanchine being like, i think the company is closer to that now than it had been, or at least closer to presenting in a more artistically cohesive way. At the least, NYCB certainly seems more interesting to me than it was 5 or 6 years ago, and would encourage you to give it another shot when you're next in NYC ;)

Alastair Macaulay was at tonight's post-performance Q&A as well.

I have always wanted to go the post-show Q&As that seem a uniquely PNB thing (at NYCB we get interns doing well-intentioned mid show talks for big rep pieces, and ABT does...uhhh....) but always seem to need to catch a monorail back downtown for dinner or something. I was walking down the steps when I heard the announcement re the talk, knew i was meeting friends in belltown for sushi, but i almost wanted to march back up to ask how the hell did they turn my least favorite jewels piece, Rubies, into something that turned me into a grinning bufoon, wanting more? I mean, there were technical flaws others could latch onto to criticize, but it stripped away the dustiness and formalism of NYCB's, and just felt like fun at a very high technical level.

I just saw the Saturday evening performance. Through a weird array of circumstances, i managed to see NYCB's Jewels three times during their winter/spring season this year, and tonght is my fave jewels of the year. Rubies had a directness/verve that was slighly lacking in NYCB's and while it may be a result of this being the first/seemingly last time I'll see Korbes in the role, her performance and musicality in diamonds were exceptional, even if she seemed to be carrying a slight injury/hesistancy at times. (Emeralds always leaves me perplexed so i need to leave that aside for now.) I can think of other parts of other performances that i preferred, but on the whole tonight was the most initially satisfying.

I noticed alastair macaulay hard at work during intermissions (he's generally a socially wandering about type at NYCB intermissions), so, as he seems to be one of PNB's go-to critics for quotes (see, e.g., tonight's program), will be interesting to see his thoughts.

I would like, respectfully, to refute the assertion that the term "racist" should be used sparingly because it makes people feel uncomfortable. This assumes that the discomfort of some people is more important than the feelings of alienation and the often very practical consequences of job less and underpromotion of other people. In this instance, while calling ABT racist may make Kevin McKenzie and the board of ABT feel uncomfortable, surely that is a small price to pay for making them question their attitudes and practices regarding black women in their company. How can we worry more about upsetting this group of people than we worry about not giving jobs or roles to Misty Copeland, Michaela dePrince, or the legions of other talented black ballerinas?

I would suggest that, since racism is such a stain on society, one should only throw the term around when one has some crumb of evidence of a person being treated differently because of his or her race. You have none. More importantly, the idea that KM and the wealthy, generally liberal trustees and major donors would not promote a media savy soloist simply because she's not white is laughable. In case you don't know, major companies are funded by rich people who tend to be fairly liberal (or want to pretend to be so, for the sake of their conscious), or corporations who want to be appear as inclusive as possible. Copeland fits into that. KM knows that. The fact that even he can't promote her (yet) speaks volumes.

Ugh. I already arranged a work trip to fly to seattle to see jewels; i probably should have bought season tix, as I'll be trying to make evey piece PNB is doing to catch one last chance to see this marvel as much as i can before she goes. What a loss.