Kathleen O'Connell

Next week's New Yorker will feature a special cover in Prince's memory.

They've also started a running "remembrances" feature online. Plus links to Prince-related content from the archives, including this Sasha Frere-Jones article entitled "Dorian Purple".

Dead at 57. Here's a link to Rolling Stone's obituary.

Back in the 80's I commuted into the city from NJ. More often than not, the soundtrack for the trek from Port Authority to my office was a Prince mixtape in my Walkman.

It's a beautiful day ... perhaps a memorial stroll down 42nd Street with "Kiss" blasting in my ears is in order. (Warning: it's a Prince video; it's just barely SFW.)

Truly one of the great pop artists and a superb musician. And a supporter of arts education, too, including ABT & the JKO school. He gets some of the credit for bringing Misty Copeland to the attention of a wider audience.

PS: I just have to add this quote from Copeland in the New York Magazine article linked above: Prince “prefers to see me in the really classical stuff, with the tiara and a tutu,” Copeland says laughing. “He saw me do a gig where I was doing Sugarplum in the Nutcracker, and he absolutely loved that.”

I prefer a well executed Rose Adagio with the Fonteyn touches. If a dancer can't do them all, she shouldn't do the role.

I feel the same way about T&V, if the dancer can't do all the steps in the principal role, and do them beautifully then she shouldn't be cast. And if no one in the company can do the steps beautifully, they shouldn't dance T&V.

Some ballets are meant to have fireworks, or have evolved to have fireworks over time. SB, SL and DQ all have fireworks because principals are expected to have those skills!

For me it depends on whether or not the steps are essential to the role. A ballerina who can't execute all "the Fonteyn touches" can nonetheless dance a lovely and expressive Rose Adagio. Maintaining a beautiful line throughout her balances is far more important to creating the desired effect than getting both hands up over the head.

I'm privileged to live in a city that supports two major ballet companies and can play host to any number of first-rate visitors in any given year: I have the luxury to be picky about who should or shouldn't be performing ballet's great masterworks. But what if I lived somewhere else — a smaller city with a not-exactly-in-the-first-rank regional company, say, or a place where no first-rate company ever toured — should I be denied the opportunity to see SB just because the ballerina who was available to dance Aurora couldn't do all the steps with the level of perfection that a Fonteyn could?

I'd argue that SB, SL, and DQ have fireworks because audiences clap hard for them, not because one must have 32 fouettés to be a principal ballerina.

Jayne, I'm definitely with you re preferring singles done well -- especially when they are absolutely bang-on the music.

But, like it or not, there's always the element of excitement on technical tricks at the ballet. Yes, some struggle, but how beautiful to suddenly be faced with a ballerina who DOES NOT struggle. And THEN is when the step in question gets spoiled. Every time you see a butchered rendition, you will think.."Ahhh, I remember so and so doing this...and it was SO great...".

Ah, to each his own! I don't find the kind of de rigueur, stand alone technical tricks that Aurora's balances and Odile's fouettés have sadly become particularly exciting in and of themselves. (I don't even like them as choreography, but that's a whole 'nother discussion ... ). Nothing makes my heart hurt more than watching a dancer whose artistry I respect struggle to execute a few seconds of stunt choreography that isn't really essential to the role. The things we need to know about Aurora's budding royal poise aren't conveyed by her getting her arms en couronne during her balances. Ditto for Odile's fouettés. If a dancer can execute the trick with artistry and aplomb, then great, do it! But otherwise I'd prefer to see something expressive and beautiful.

I nether expect nor particularly like routine 180 degree extensions. To my eye they sometimes have the counterintuitive effect of closing a ballerina's body up against itself rather than extending her lines out into space. I find that foot-grazing-the-ear battements and développés can have the same effect: instead of opening the body up and out they kind of snap a cover down on top of it. With the understanding that the stills linked above capture mere microseconds of a phrase-in-progress (especially the one of Allegra Kent, whose arm position clearly suggests that she hasn't completed her arabesque yet) I actually think Heather Watts' position is geometrically the most satisfying because the lines of her extended limbs radiate out into the fullness of space in rather than just up and down. Those 12 o'clock penchées are biomechanically impressive, but not always beautiful as choreography. (Ugh. Especially with winged feet, which really do bend the line back on itself.)

I'd like to see Trusnovec revive the section of Episodes that Balanchine choreographed for Paul Taylor. (Variations Op. 30).

Sigh. It's a birthday party, not a final exam. I know I'm on the radical fringe here, but every time I watch that video (or any video of the Rose Adagio, frankly), I can't help but think how much nicer and more musical the choreography would be if each suitor just took Aurora's hand in turn and presented her in a lovely promenade with out the requirement that she get both hands up over her head and back down again first. Heck, I'd be just fine with a nice musical descent off pointe and a pretty relevé in between, too. I simply cannot stand to watch all the "Can I let go now? No? OK, I won't let go yet ... Now? ... Now? YES! NOW! WHEW!" fiddling around between Aurora and her suitors while they try to pull it off. The final effect is never worth it, IMO, and stre-e-e-e-e-tching the music out until everyone is secure makes my heart hurt.

OK. Rant over.

Where do I put Merce?

All joking aside, my early years of dance watching consisted mostly of Balanchine and Cunningham, with some Robbins and Taylor thrown in and a bit of downtowny flirtation with early Trisha Brown. I didn't learn how to watch three-act story ballets until ... hmmm ... maybe a decade ago. I loathe Swan Lake to this day. So, not your typical balletomane.

Sticking with ballet:

1) Four Temperaments

2) Apollo

3) Divertimento No. 15 (The only tutu ballet I really liked until I was a thirty-something)

4) Dances at a Gathering

5) The divertissement pas from Midsummer Night's Dream.

ETA: I forgot to name the one that was most important to me: it's a toss up between 4 Ts and Apollo.

Looking at the "Agon" video with Diana Adams, it becomes clear that big extensions in the role, particularly the pdd, were not part of the original but developed over time.

It seems that certain individual flourishes get baked into a role over time and are eventually assumed to be de riguer -- such as touching the head to the knee in penchée in the "Symphony in C" Adagio, for instance, which is something Allegra Kent didn't bother with in this performance, at least.

The same thing happens in opera; someone interpolates a high note or two into an aria and a decade later singers who don't include them are deemed inadequate.

She also delivered a 100% committed account in the "Bransle" section of Agon on Saturday evening, alongside a stellar Joseph Gordon and Harrison Coll. Can't wait to see more of those two. Isaacs practically dragged them along as she flew across the stage.

Unity Phelan made an authoritative debut, with Craig Hall, in the Concerto, opus 24 section of Episodes. She may have been a better choice for the big debut in Agon, rather than Miriam MIller who, IMHO, is getting more thrown at her than she can handle just yet. Needs more polish and poise. Give her a little more time.

I was at Saturday evening's show and I thought Ashly Isaac's take no prisoners performance in the "Bransle" section of "Agon" was one of night's real standouts. Because she was so musical, her swift, pointed attack seemed brilliant rather than fraught or forced. Andrew Veyette looked like he was getting through the "Sarabande" section on heart alone, but his phrasing and the shapes he made in space turned it into a very interesting performance; I haven't seen anyone else -- even Veyette himself -- approach the role quite that way. With the exception of the pas (more on that below) it was overall just about the most full-tilt "Agon" I've seen in an age. Bravo to all, but especially Isaacs, Veyette, Joseph Gordon, Harrison Coll, Ashley Hod, and Gretchen Smith.

Miriam Miller has long legs and promise, but at the moment, that's mostly all she's brought to the two big roles -- "Midsummer's" Titania and the "Agon" pas -- that I've seen her in. Both of them require authoritative, Capital-B ballerinas, and the very young Miller just isn't one of those yet. (This isn't a criticism; she's barely out of apprenticeship and needs time to grow into the lovely dancer she promises to be.) If Martins was hell-bent on throwing a woman from the corps into the "Agon" pas, he had plenty of more seasoned dancers who are at least as talented as Miller to choose from ... like Lydia Wellington, who looked particularly strong in the first theme from "Four Temperaments" or Ashley Hod, one of the evening's "three-peaters," who pretty much burned up the stage in everything.

Unity Phelan's "Episodes" debut was indeed very, very good; she brought out some lovely little details I'd either forgotten about or never noticed before, and I remember thinking that she had very eloquent feet, which is not something that usually crosses my mind when I'm watching "Episodes"! And it was so good to see Craig Hall again.

Teresa Reichlen was a last-minute sub for Savannah Lowery in the "Five Pieces" section of "Episodes." As far as I'm concerned, Reichlen has no peer in Balanchine's tall-girl roles: she absolutely blew the doors off of the "Choleric" section of "Four Temperaments."

Ashley Bouder dances a very compelling TPC2. Size alone doesn't matter: she has both the technique and temperament to succeed in the role, and presumably other not-tall dancers do as well.

I happen to prefer Teresa Reichlen in TPC2, but for reasons of overall style, not height. But I'd happily watch Bouder dance it too.

Also, I am to blame for how this discussion came about, not Kathleen O'Connell. I apologize.

No need to apologize to me, and I don't believe it was your intention to offend.

We may differ on what makes Sleeping Beauty a great work of art, but we both agree that it is a great work of art.

Tess and Tyler Angle were amazing last night in TP2. This is one of my favorite ballets and it's so good to see it again after so long out of rep. I think the last time they did this Tess was a soloist still. She has gotten even better in the role, if that's possible.

I saw Reichlen perform TP2 in January 2013, by which time she had been promoted to principal. If I recall correctly, Scheller and Angle made their TP2 debuts in that same performance.

Reichlen was terrific then, and even better last night.

On Friday night, Reichlin, who has been doing this role for a few seasons, was breathtaking. Her command and authority in Tschai Piano Concerto was a marvel. This has been her best role of the Winter season, and I would say she now "owns" the role in the same way she owns the tall girl role in Rubies. Beautiful and fearless. It was a blissful performance.

She was pretty darn magnificent last night too.

Would you consider the novels of Jane Austen as "idealized depiction of the mating rituals of the landed aristocracy"?

Are ballets like Giselle, Swan Lake, and The Sleeping Beauty included in these swaths?

In your view should Jane Austen's novels and the works of the classic ballet repertoire be considered as great art?

Isn't all great art --one way or another-- "rooted in reality"?

Austen's characters weren't for the most part members of the landed aristocracy, although some of them (Mr. Darcy and Mr. Knightly, e.g.) possessed substantial estates. The mating rituals of the "our hands have not been sullied by trade" gentry, perhaps. (Although it's worth pointing out that Mr. Gardiner -- Mrs. Bennet's brother and and one of the few genuinely admirable characters in the novel -- is in trade.)

Why wouldn't I consider Austen's novels, "Giselle," "Swan Lake," and "Sleeping Beauty" great art? I have very little regard for the class system Austen's novels and Petipa's ballets are rooted in, but I won't deny it's all great art -- and ("Swan Lake" aside) I take great pleasure in them.

Just because something's "rooted in reality" doesn't mean everything depicted in it is true.

Indiana Woodward was absolutely lovely tonight in her debut performance as The Sylph: Brava!

It sounds that from your perspective the company is not in a position right now to present a truly first-rate performance of Theme and Variations.

Not at all! NYCB happens to have some wonderful dancers in its ranks at the moment, and at every level, so worthy performances of T&V are certainly not beyond its reach. Besides, I'm not convinced that I've ever seen a "definitive" performance of T&V, and I've been a regular ballet-goer since 1978. And let's be honest: I was in my early 20's then and didn't have a clue. I mean, I saw Merrill Ashley in T&V and remember hardly a thing about the performance -- not even who her partner was!

I'm always happy to see Peck in T&V. Do I think she dances it flawlessly? No. No one dances anything flawlessly. (Hmmm ... maybe Teresa Reichlen dances the tall girl in Rubies flawlessly ... ) But I don't have enough dance-going years left to me to let the perfect be the enemy of the good: I'd prefer to celebrate all the good things we are privileged to see now.

I compared Peck to Somogyi for the following reasons: 1) both are exceptional dancers, 2) they have been cast in a lot of the same roles, and 3) both are "not tall" although Somogyi seemed tall until she stood next to a taller dancer.

Finally, as far as I'm concerned, whole swaths of classic ballet repertoire boil down to an idealized depiction of the mating rituals of the landed aristocracy and is rooted in reality only to the extent that such a class existed -- which doesn't mean I don't enjoy the show.

Are human grandeur and its evocation dependent then on a set of physical characteristics alone?

No, of course not. That's why I said this: "without considerable artistry and a healthy dollop of authority a dancer with those proportions -- even if they aren't necessarily shorter than their peers -- will have a harder time pulling off a role that demands some measure of grandeur." I'm less convinced than you are that we can see "what is in a human being's mind, heart and soul" when they dance so I'll settle for artistry and authority. (As far as I'm concerned a performing artist can be an absolute sh*t in real life and still have tremendous affective power in the theater.) There are also dancers with absolutely exquisite proportions who don't have the kind of authority and imagination to convey the kind of grandeur that a ballerina must in, say, "Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2."

All I can say is that Tiler Peck strikes me as being a beautiful woman and that that in conjunction with her exquisite dancing --I see the "fire of life" in her-- and what appears to be her strong commitment to excellence makes it a genuine pleasure for me to watch her work on stage. Ms. Peck, I believe, has shown "considerable artistry" and plenty of "authority" already.

If Peck does it for you, that's enough. You don't have defend your admiration for and response to her dancing, at least not to me. I happen to like her a lot in some roles and less in others, and that's OK too. [ETA: I think it's safe to say that we all have favorite artists who just do it for us, even if to other eyes they seem lacking. I think that's a performing arts feature not a bug.]

But if we were to examine her closely enough, wouldn't we discover something unqueenly in just about every woman? In the immortal words of a character from a classic movie: "nobody's perfect!"

The kind of regality I'm talking about is essentially a theatrical effect that dancers create through a combination of their technique, style, imagination, artistry, authority, and yes, their "look" -- an emulation, in essence, of our idealized storybook conception of what royalty is like. I'm not saying Peck can't look regal, merely that her proportions are such that she needs to rely on something other than her appearance to create that effect. And although a certain kind of grandeur is an important thing in some ballets, it's not the only thing: there are quite a few women in the company who look more regal than Peck, but I'd still rather watch her in Theme and Variations than any of them.

I totally failed to grasp your point in the juxtaposed Little Dancer photos.

Well, I was hoping to show that Peck's proportions are such that she can believable emulate a very young dancer just by standing there. The difference I was trying to point out between Somogyi and Peck was simply the relative proportions of their heads, torsos, and limbs - nothing more complicated than that.

Why shouldn't the height and proportion of a dancer determine how they are cast given the drift of your remarks?

Hopefully I've been able to clarify a little bit why body type, although it's a thing, isn't the only thing.

Just for the record, I don't think that a dancer's body type, ethnicity, height, age, or (and I can't believe anyone needs to say this) hair color should determine whether or not he or she is cast in a particular role.

It's not just height that matters, it's overall proportions -- things like the length of a dancers's limbs relative to the length of his or her torso, for instance, or the size of the head relative to height. A large head and shortish limbs suggest the proportions of a child rather than those of, say, an idealized Prince or Queen; without considerable artistry and a healthy dollop of authority a dancer with those proportions -- even if they aren't necessarily shorter than their peers -- will have a harder time pulling off a role that demands some measure of grandeur. Life ain't fair.

I very much enjoy Tiler Peck's dancing, but I don't find her proportions ideal for ballet, or at least not all ballets. She has a relatively large head and face, and reads younger than springtime as a result. Jennie Somogyi, who certainly wasn't any taller than Peck did read like a taller dancer from the stage at least in part because her proportions were more like those of a taller dancer.

(Compare this image of Somogyi with this image of Peck to see the difference. It's subtle, but real. Or, compare this image of Degas' Little Dancer paired with Peck in costume for the role in the musical.)

I'm not suggesting that height and proportion should determine how a dancer is cast, only that they have a real effect on how a dancer looks from the stage.

A quick update: There was a casting change at today's matinee performance of the Ballo-Kammermusik-Tchai 3 Suite program:

Tiler Peck and Andrew Veyette replaced Megan Fairchild and Joaquin De Luz in T&V.

Megan Fairchild replaced Tiler Peck in Ballo; Gonzalo Garcia danced the Ballo male lead as originally scheduled.

I believe Lauren King replaced Brittany Pollack as one of the demis in T&V. (Pollack danced in Ballo as originally scheduled.)

Peter Martins has been cranking out a ballet or two per year for how many years now? And mounting a big festival of some sort or another on a more or less regular basis. And running a school. Etc etc etc.

I'm not a big fan of Martins' ballets and the various festivals and projects have had mixed results, but they require considerable time and attention nonetheless.

Let us never forget that Balanchine had Lincoln Kirstein... which freed up a lot more of Balanchine's time/energy for creative work.... (Doesn't everyone wish they had a Kirstein?) Petipa had the deep pockets of the Tsar... Is much written about how much of his time was taken up managing the company? Ashton had de Valois?

Surely the head of the POB has an able administrative staff at his disposal?

(Alas, I couldn't find any info regarding the POB's staff anywhere on its website.)

(See Idris Elba and David Oyellowo.)

But as America becomes more diverse, that makes no sense.

Why the folks in charge of the James Bond franchise aren't chasing after Idris Elba waving a contract and a pen is beyond me.