Olga

Thank you Vendangeuse!!! This is just what I wanted to know. 

There are discrepancies between the Met and ABT cast lists for the Ratmansky Trio. Has anyone contact ABT about this? Is there a definitive answer? Shall I assume ABT list to be most accurarate? 

21 hours ago, nanushka said:

Is this correct? The set and costume designs of Ratmansky's production were based on the Bakst designs, but I understood his choreography to have been an attempt to reach back earlier, not to replicate what was danced in 1921. 

This is correct.

Kathryn Morgan is an inspiring story. Brava!

1 hour ago, nanushka said:

Was Diamonds one of the ballets that was swapped into the upcoming season last spring, sometime after the schedule for this year initially came out? I remember some of us noting a few switches on here back then.

Yes. It replaced Brandenburg.

Hallberg’s most recent Instagram post is in both Russian and English and he says he cancelled because he had some pain and wanted to avoid the risk of a muscle tear. I took that as a positive indication for April with Osipova but one never knows.

Thanks for posting this. 

I got a great laugh out of your review of Infra. Thanks. Glad to hear there are some British balletgoers who haven’t bought into it.

Thank you for these reports, MadameP. I am jealous!

Drew, yes, that is what I was referring to. There are indeed significant differences, but why I felt a shorthand reference would do is that they both line up on the same side of the epic Martins drama, albeit their cases are quite different. Likely or at least possibly, that is a drama  that bears on the selection process by the Board, as well as on the opinions of others, not on the Board, as to their preferred candidates. One can make excuses, and you have, for what Whelan said in that film, but in my view what she said about the connection between  Martins taking her out of Sugarplum and her injury and how she said it, was enough to make the Board think twice or more — and not just because it was hostile to Martins, but because it may indicate a temperment and judgment unsuited to running the company. 

I can’t believe how many posts I have made about this - I thought the paragraph about Wendy was juvenile and ridiculous. As I said, Wendy could be problematic as director but if she does get the post I wish her well. 

Ditto for Dance Magazine grammar/editing: “...an impresario and a unfailingly kind person.” 

1 hour ago, Helene said:

Whelan has produced her own shows.  I haven't read anywhere that the designers, choreographers, and venues have worked or been used for free or that she is independently wealthy and could write checks out of a trust fund to pay for them.

Her first show, in 2013 at the Joyce theater, was a co-production with the Joyce. Thst is how the Joyce described it on its website. They may have funded it, as I think they do for some of their shows. i don’t know if this was true of the second show, or of her show at BAM. But I mentioned the funding as a side note about the definition and etymology of the term. None of this changes my view that the description of Whelan in that piece is quite puffed up on the positive side, mute about the negatives and structured as an argument that she is, all in all, the best choice. 

I am not sure Whelan produced Hagoromo, the show she was in at BAM. BAM’s website says it was “Conceived and directed by David Michalek” who is her husband. Therr is no producer credit. She and Jock Soto danced it. 

19 minutes ago, FPF said:

I'm with you on this--I was trying to consider what the author might have been thinking in choosing to use the word, perhaps not fully understanding the connotations.  

Yes, hard to know but does seem to support that the article over inflates Whelan’s qualifications. Historically, I think an impresario provided financial backing.

Then there is the  entire structure of the article, with pluses and minuses for most everyone else, or ruling them out because they can’t or won’t take the position,  and concluding with only positives for Whelan who of course is pretty available. Whelan has many positives but she also has many negatives and there is no mention of them. 

I guess I am just tired of hidden agendas and this article seemed to have one.

I do wish Wendy the best of luck if she gets the position because I love the company and want it to continue to be successful.

13 minutes ago, FPF said:

She's no Diaghilev, but if you go by the definition of a person who manages a performance, Wendy has done that.

I  thought that this article was generally favorable to everyone discussed...

e.g,  Lourdes Lopez is described as  "an eloquent, visionary leader," and Jennifer Ringer is described as "one of the most sought-after master teachers in ballet" and "just the kind of principled, considerate leader the company desperately needs."

.... with the exception of Suzanne Farrell:

Her relationship with the company is a bit complicated, and though she has an unparalleled mastery of the Balanchine technique, she doesn't have much experience—or interest, it seems—in programming contemporary work. And when asked about NYCB's sexual harassment problem in 2017, she responded with "no comment": Not exactly the hard stance against harassment that the new director needs to have. 

For everyone else, the negatives were primarily ; 1) reasons that they might not leave their current positions (Woetzel, Wheeldon, Lopez, ; 2) that they have indicated lack of interest (Peck); or 3)  that they fit the company tradition, but the company might want to go in a different direction (e.g,, not hire another choreographer--Wheeldon, Millepied).

For shmoozing and fundraising power, I suspect that Woetzel or Millepied  are the best-connected.

I agree that Stafford has been doing a good job--I've been really happy to see a number of dancers getting new opportunities. 

On the whole, I wish they'd just pick someone already.

I agree they need to pick someone already. And that Stafford has done a good job, in fact a pretty great one particularly under the circumstances.  I think in this context there is a lot of light between managing a performance and being an impressario; and I did check the definition before my last post. Of course she did manage a few performances where she was the star performer and the choreographers were all men. I believe they were all men because, according to a published interview she gave, she is more comfortable with a male choreographer. She also has an assistant position at City Center - I don’t know the extent of her role there or vis a vis those performances but they do have a pretty good lineup.  

2 hours ago, vipa said:

Totally agree. They brought up the idea of Lopez not wanting to leave Miami, but didn't mention the possibility of Boal not wanting to leave Seattle. Whelan's lack of experience in running a company wasn't touched upon. I was hoping the article would mention someone we hadn't thought of!!!

Wendy Whelan an impresario? That is a BIG stretch. The piece reads like a plug for her, though Boal comes off well. Both Whelan and Boal (through his wife) have something in common on the Martins front.

“Alexander Robert Nigel Parish. For services to dance and UK/Russia cultural relations.”

It’s all extraordinary, start to finish.

My guess is Lovette would like more,not fewer, principal roles. Her dancing in Spring and Fall 2018 was exquisite and I believe included some NYCB debut roles. Hope to see her Aurora in Winter. 

Thanks, Drew for intuiting and more articulately expressing what I was thinking. 

On 9/24/2018 at 4:29 PM, Pique Arabesque said:

I second this! 

“ This” being Marina Harss for NYTimes Chief Dance Critic. 

Whatever has London come to. Seems to have gone downhill. I was shocked and disapppointed by their last New York tour. They have some great dancers but their choreographic taste is awful. And Macgregor! ... not a real ballet choreographer imo. The company has wandered far afield. 

9 hours ago, Helene said:

Not liking someone and being compromised in the workplace by having sexual photos distributed among your co-workers without your permission is something quite different.

It certainly is quite different but does the complaint even allege that all three principals distributed non consenting photos of coworkers? 

Kyle Abraham has posted a lengthy (for Instagram) explanatory message about Runaway and Kanye. 

I saw RAKU a while ago, but for me it was also a “much richer experience” (to quote Pherank) than that described by Nagashima and elsewhere on this thread. And from my point of view, Fancy Free is also a richer experience — and a pretty accurate depiction, theatricalized, of the period. As they say, Robbins had a keen eye. We would have to throw out an awful lot of Western art if eliminating objectionable treatment of women in art is the goal. Similar culling of art (to meet other social/political standards) has not been shown to be effective long term in changing cultural norms, and it has resulted in stifling, if not crushing art. See eg, Soviet Socialist Realism, the Chinese Cultural Revolution and censorship in Italy and Germany inder Fascism. 

Brooklyn Mack replaces Amar Ramasar in Program 4.

Yesterday, at least three pincipal women posted to Instagram essentially praising the company and stating how glad they are to be in it. Lauren’s post was in an Instagram story in which she spoke directly to the camera. I can’t reproduce it. Here are excerpts from the other posts:

Maria: “NYCB is so strong and I’m so proud to be a member of this glorious company for more than twenty years.”

Sara”...nycballet is unreal and amazing. I feel so f**kin lucky to be in this company.”