Kathleen O'Connell

From the New York Times:

Pam Tanowitz Joins Lineup for City Ballet’s Spring Gala

I happen to be a Tanowitz fangirl, so as far as I'm concerned, it's about time. Apparently, Tanowitz had originally been tapped to choreograph something for the Fall 2019 gala, but her commission was accelerated when one of the Spring 2019 choreographers had to drop out for personal reasons. Her work will be set to Bartok's Fifth String Quartet. 

Tanowitz was a student of Viola Farber, and some of that Cunningham heritage shows in her work, although she is very much her own choreographer. I once heard her declare "Oh! I LOVE petit allegro" during a post-performance Q&A.

18 minutes ago, vendangeuse said:

Argh—what a shame. It really is lovely. 

I'm not a big fan of Bigonzetti, but will give him full props for his making sure that we get to listen to Bruno Moretti's music now and again.

10 hours ago, Rock said:

As to Porte et Soupir, she's the door, he's the sigh and it's nothing like Agon or The Cage. It's not like anything else. Go see it, you won't be sorry DC Export.

I second Rock! And I highly recommend seeing Porte et Soupir while Kowroski is still dancing it. She is droll without being jokey, which is absolutely what this ballet requires. I've seen it danced by other ballerinas, and Kowroski is the only one, IMO, that made the ballet more than the sum of its decor and its rather literal response to the music. 

16 hours ago, canbelto said:

I was very disappointed with Sara Mearns' Mozartiana tonight. I thought her footwork look labored and this most daring of dancers seemed like she was holding back. I'm willing to chalk it up to a bad night since I;ve seen her dance this much better. I really enjoyed Harrison Ball in the Gigue. Russell Janzen did look awkward in the theme and variations solos. 

Janzen is a vast improvement over Finlay, who absolutely butchered the role when I saw him dance it last year, so I enjoyed watching him tackle it even if he hasn't quite nailed the whole thing yet. Although Mearns looked better last night than she did last year (partnered by Finlay), I still don't think the ballet flatters her.  I know Mozartiana is a plum role that's generally given to the company's senior ballerinas, but it just doesn't suit Mearns' particular gifts. She! Tends! To! Put! An! Exclamation! Point! after every one of the ballerina's telling little throwaway gestures and it just ruins the effect. Mearns shines in a role like Walpurgisnacht, where being bigger than life is the whole point.

1 hour ago, canbelto said:

She was better than Saturday night but seemed to tire towards the end. But the corps was very sloppy last night. Arms and legs in totally different positions. I was frankly shocked at how sloppy they looked.

I can't speak to whether Reichlen was better than she was on Saturday, but she certainly didn't dance the role with the kind of take-no-prisoners attack, authority, and musicality that I've come to expect from her in this ballet (Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2). I actually thought she looked a bit better by the third movement simply because she appeared more relaxed and happy than she had in the first movement — she finished the ballet smiling what appeared to be a real smile, not a stage smile. 

And yes, the corps was a mess, although they did seem fully charged. 

Re the costumes: I know Marc Happel built them around the beautiful blue brocade he fell in love with, and in general there's nothing wrong with following one's passion wherever it may lead one, but I do think the lead ballerina at least deserved her own color, even if it meant that she didn't get to wear that particular brocade. That said, the new costumes are an improvement, especially for the corps women. I like the dusty blue, but agree that the hue of the cyclorama now needs to be adjusted to accommodate it.

53 minutes ago, fondoffouettes said:

Piano Concerto No. 2  is one of my all-time favorite ballets, so I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually felt bored at times watching today's performance. I'm not sure it's a great role for Reichlen. Yes, she certainly looks very regal and glamorous, but I was missing a bit of energy, dramatic presence, or something from her.

The last couple of times I saw Reichlen dance Piano Concerto No. 2 she absolutely blew the doors off of it. Perhaps it was an off night? 

24 minutes ago, Fleurfairy said:

NYCB seems to be having the same problem as ABT right now - a dearth of male principals (or lead role-ready males). ABT most needs shorter males to go with Lane, Copeland, Trenary, and Brandt. NYCB needs tall males.

NYCB has some promising taller men in its ranks, which is a good thing because it happens to have a bevy of promising taller women in addition to its taller principals. I'm sure it's not lost on the current team that they need to bring these young men along with as much dispatch as a sane development plan allows. 

NYCB actually has more principal men than principal women (eleven and nine, respectively). 

For the record, I'm agnostic as to whether Stafford (or any member of the current interim team) should be appointed as the company's new AD. There are a number of viable candidates and I hope that they each get the consideration they deserve and that the situation warrants. That being said, it's time to make a decision and let the company move on.

Based on my own professional experience — which wasn't in the arts, but was for a time in academia — co-leadership arrangements were fraught with peril, and never worked out as intended. (Per NYCB's 12/9/17 press press release, Stafford leads the team, i.e., it's not a co-directorship. I don't know how much actual decision-making authority he has or whether he could overrule the other members if he believed he needed to.) Bu my experience is only anecdata, and I'd expect the Board and its search committee to do some research on the potential benefits, perils, successes, and failures of such arrangements in other arts organizations before making a decision.

51 minutes ago, DC Export said:

I think there is a way to freshen while still maintaining a tie to Karinska's original designs. My biggest beef is with the male lead's shirt, which I think looks like  an old-fashioned little boy's costume. Little Lord Fauntleroy style. That bow needs to go.

OMG, yes. I have hated that shirt since forever. (OK, at first, in my earliest newbie days, I was mostly puzzled by it. "Why is that grown man dressed like Tsarevich Alexei?") I've assumed the costumes were a nod towards the kind of idealized peasant garb that's become so firmly embedded in productions of the 19th century classics that it's practically a uniform. I think that at some point (after Balanchine's death?) a sort of satiny peasant corset was added to the ballerina's bodice, which added to that impression. (Compare what today's NYCB ballerinas wear in the role to what McBride wears in the video with Baryshnikov.)

I was just getting ready to post this. It's about time! The current costumes are just ... blah, especially the lead ballerina's, which appears to have faded into a, bland, nondescript, and very un-regal kinda pink, kinda peach.

This looks gorgeous. 

1 hour ago, cassieallison said:

Besides Reichlen and Mearns who were the previous Lilac Fairies?

Savannah Lowery performed the role a few seasons back. 

44 minutes ago, vendangeuse said:

I love that podcast. I much prefer it to the one put out by the MetOpera guild. Even if it's an aria I'm already familiar with, Rhiannon Giddens always makes me think about it in a new way, or from another angle.

Argh! I can't believe I misspelled Giddens' name. She is one of my favorite artists. 

On 1/8/2019 at 9:28 AM, abatt said:

Rachelishvili will be singing Delilah in Samson & Delilah at the Met.  I think her performances are in March.  

WNYC & the Metropolitan Opera have started jointly producing a new podcast called Aria Code, hosted by Rhiannon Gibbons of Carolina Chocolate Drops fame. Each episode examines a different (famous) aria in detail. The January 2 episode is about “Mon coeur s’ouvre a ta voix” from Saint-Saëns' Samson et Dalila. I've started listening, and it's pretty good.

Here's a video of Elīna Garanča, who is featured in the episode, performing the aria at the Met. 

You can hear Rachvelishvili sing "Mon coeur s’ouvre a ta voix" on her new album. 

12 hours ago, Josette said:

The casting at last! I'm in New York to see the performances on January 23 and 24, as well as the opera, Pelleas et Melisande, on the 22nd! 

I really, really like the Met's production of Pelleas et Melisande, although I don't think  it's universally beloved.  I hope you enjoy the show!

I last saw it on New Year's day in 2011; Simon Rattle was conducting and the great baritone Gerald Finely was Goloud. He stole the show, IMHO. That ticket was some of the best money I ever spent. 

I'm embarrassed to admit that I only stumbled across Anita Rachvelishvili the other day! (Via this NYT article.) A few seconds into my first clip I wanted to run, not walk, to the Met box office and throw all my money at them for tickets to her performances.

10 minutes ago, Helene said:

If they're competent, they will find someone who can do some big core of the job and is smart enough and humble enough to find other people to do the rest.

Yes, and secure enough to neither take all the credit nor pass along all the blame. 

1 hour ago, Quiggin said:

It'd be interesting to see what kinds of Alfred Barr-like outline for City Ballet's past and future the prospective candidates for AD would imagine and construct – especially those of Damian Woetzel and Lourdes Lopez.

Steve Wolfe's painting of the Barr chart:

https://www.moma.org/collection/works/81386

You can view and download the whole text of Cubism and Abstract Art on MoMA's website. (Amusingly, there are a ton of proofreader's marks in the copy MoMA has posted, which is from its own library. I don't know if these were Barr's own corrections intended for a later edition or if someone on the curatorial staff was being cheeky, but some of the corrections aren't wrong. 😉)

As a Matisse and Kandinsky girl, I'm not entirely enthusiastic about the whole "It Started with Picasso" theory of modern art, but no one is going to take my word against Barr's!

And yes, I'd love to see the Barr chart of ballet.

50 minutes ago, Rock said:

Jon Stafford was a principal dancer but not a "star", and if they hired him it would look as if they hadn't "done" anything. The best choice is already in place? Yes, he is.

I honestly don't know if Stafford is the best choice or not. It was simply my intention to point out that if experience doesn't matter, then the lack of prior experience alone wouldn't be an argument against his candidacy. (If he is indeed a candidate. He may not be interested.) 

Re gender: I'm sure I've lost track of this, but has anyone on the Board actually come out publicly and said they would prefer that the next AD be a woman? 

ETA: Sometimes the whole purpose of hiring a search firm — especially when it's done with some fanfare — is to give the in-house candidate legitimacy: "Well, we hired a search firm and carefully considered every candidate they brought us, and what do you know, it turns out that the perfect choice was right on our very own or chart all along!" I'm not saying that's what's going on here, but I've seen it done more than once.

24 minutes ago, Barbara said:

I think a co-AD situation would work with Jonathon Stafford and Wendy Whalen. 

Respectfully, I think that sounds like a nightmare for both parties. How would the AD's duties be divided between them? Who would have the authority to make decisions regarding repertory, casting, hiring, promotions, and commissions? I can easily imagine the formation of Team Stafford and Team Whelan, with plenty of behind-the-scenes lobbying for influence undermining company cohesiveness, regardless of how amicably the two co-ADs tried to work together. It's my understanding that the "Co BalletMaster-in-Chief" arrangement between Martins and Robbins worked because Robbins was mostly interested in making and maintaining his own ballets, not running the company. 

In addition, it would be perfectly reasonable for either of them to look at the Board and say, "Wait a minute, why don't you trust me to do this job on my own? If you don't have faith in me, why should the dancers, the donors, and the audience?" 

42 minutes ago, Helene said:

From my impressions of him in Reset, I think hiring someone an adult attention span would go a long way to avoid a Millepied-like situation. 

Well, Jonathan Stafford certainly danced like a man of steady habits. 

(And I mean that mostly as a compliment. From the house at least, he looked like a terrific partner, but he also tended to look like the lead ballerina's Prime Minister rather than her Cavalier. ETA: But his droll Prince Ivan in The Firebird was *chef's kiss*. )

The institution NYCB mostly reminds me of is MoMA. It started out scrappy, and with a bold vision of the new, but now everyone shows up for the permanent collection.

9 hours ago, nanran3 said:

But did Peter Martins ever run a company before NYCB?  Not that I know of.  He learned on the job, watching Balanchine all those years.  Maybe they will pick a bright, ambitious, competent and engaging person who doesn't necessarily have the experience, but who can learn as she goes, as did Martins.

Both Kirstein and Robbins were alive and actively involved with both the company and the school when Martins assumed the role of "Co Ballet Master-in-Chief." Indeed, Robbins was the other Co Ballet Master-in-Chief and Kirstein was President of SAB. The current Board does not have that luxury. 

If prior experience leading an arts organization doesn't matter, why not just keep Jonathan Stafford and his team in place? A year on, this team does in fact have some experience and from the outside, at least, seem to be doing a fine job. 

By the way, I stumbled across this 1985 NYT article while I was confirming Kirstein's involvement with NYCB / SAB post-Balanchine:

Art and Money in a Ballet Conflcit

"The current conflict between Lincoln Kirstein's supporters and those who have recently challenged his authority in the School of American Ballet - which he and George Balanchine established before founding the New York City Ballet - has raised issues faced by arts groups throughout the nation.

The concerns involve fund-raising versus directorial independence and the influence of major donors or board members on policy. Also involved is the clash between a corporate mentality brought into arts organizations by recently formed boards and the unorthodox spirit that guided pioneering arts enterprises such as the Balanchine-Kirstein ventures during the last 50 years."

La plus ça change ...

3 minutes ago, Helene said:

A search firm might explain the ten-page [j/k] job description that the company published.

Might? I'd say "probably." 😉

2 hours ago, nanushka said:

I found Gottlieb's criticism of the use of a search firm to be oddly narrow-minded, literal and out-of-touch, especially this bit:

"A search firm? How could outsiders to the dance community have the faintest clue about what it takes to be artistic director of a major ballet company...?"

It's a mindset that breeds institutional stagnation of the sort NYCB does not need.

In fairness to Gottlieb, the pool of candidates isn't a large one, nor is there likely to be a hidden gem of an AD tucked away in some ballet backwater that no one has thought of. Nor am I a fan of throwing handfuls of money at a bevvy of consultants for an answer your own team can give you in half the time with none of the folderol. That being said, there are more than a few viable choices, each with their strengths and weaknesses, and the Board needs a plan for choosing among them and negotiating the terms of employment. I don't have a lot of confidence that this particular board is up to the task.

2 hours ago, Helene said:

Given that the Board is a pro-Martins Board and that a prominent member was ready to take him back with open arms, it makes legal and optical sense for NYCB to outsource it to an outside team, which, hopefully, has done deep enough background checks that the organization won't torpedo itself by being slack.

 

Professional search firms can and do provide services that smaller organizations without a fully-fledged HR department, a team of in-house lawyers, a travel department, or big administrative staffs might find useful. They don't just draw up a list of potential candidates and hand it to the Board so it can start making phone calls.

They can help the Board and the relevant staff personnel prepare a robust and accurate job description and identify the most important qualifications a candidate would ideally have. You might think that this would be obvious in the case of a ballet company like NYCB, but it's not. The organization has changed considerably since Balanchine's death and Martins' ascension, and so have best practices when it comes to the appropriate separation of duties between the AD and the ED. Martins might have taken on certain tasks out of expediency or personal preference that would better shunted off to the ED — or vice-versa. A search professional can help the Board and staff think through what the AD job could and should look like, rather than simply replicating what it was under the previous incumbent. Since it's unlikely that everyone will agree on what the AD's responsibilities should be, or what the most important qualifications are, the search firm can also help the relevant decision-makers get on the same page. (You know, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a few Board members harbored the suspicion that Martins can only be replaced by a six foot three inch blond former dancer who speaks with an accent, danced for Balanchine, and once seemed to be a promising choreographer.)

A search firm can also impose some degree of objectivity when it comes to evaluating candidates. It can vet their resumés for accuracy, conduct discreet interviews with people who have worked with them or for them, or suss out their reputation in the community of donors, funders, and civic/governmental agencies. (Someone might be an absolute dream on paper but sheer hell to deal with.) And, as Helene pointed out, it can do the kind of background check that a Board might be ill-equipped to handle. It can also tactfully point out that the candidate everyone seems to want is not actually the one that is most suited to the job as described. (I can personally attest to just how valuable a  service this can be!)

Finally, a good search firm can relieve the organization of a ton of administrivia it either doesn't need to do itself or might not have the staff to handle efficiently: everything from the nuts and bolts of the application process, fielding inquiries, arranging interviews, to making travel arrangements, etc. etc. etc. 

ETA: The firm can also provide assistance negotiating things like salary, benefits, spouse / partner employment, the timing of the announcement, and what goes in it.

ETA 2: Remember the various communication debacles when Corella became Pennsylvania Ballet's AD? A good firm can help the Board and the staff plan how to rollout information about who's been chosen, when they'll assume the post, what happens next, as well as help them draw up ground rules for interviews, coach the new AD on what to say and how, etc.

17 hours ago, canbelto said:

As it happens I had a lot of time on my hands so I decided to compare the Balanchine vs. the Wright version:

https://humbledandoverwhelmed.blogspot.com/2018/12/comparing-nutcrackers-across-pond.html

Well, I for one am very glad you had the time to put this together - many thanks!