Kathleen O'Connell

Well, they do have a commitment to regular year-in-year-out touring that no other major US ballet company has. If I'm not mistaken, they've performed in all 50 states.

Same issue on my computer: Mac Air OSX 10.9.2 Chrome Clearing invisionzone cookies makes no difference But everything looks fine on my phone, however, in both the mobile and full versions: iPhone iOS 7.1 Chrome

Interesting to see Maria Kowroski debuting in Namouna. I assume she's being cast in Jenifer Ringer's role -- the one with the cheeky duet for ballerina and cigarette. Kowroski is one of the company's deftest comediennes, and I'd love to see her in it.

Namouna is absolutely, hands down, by far and away my favorite Ratmansky ballet. It's one of those works I make a point of seeing whenever it comes around. But there's no denying that it's odd. There's a kind of narrative that seems to operate by the rules of dream logic -- you can almost put together a coherent story. The costumes are pointed, but peculiar -- think art deco adventure flick meets Busby Berkley review. And it's all very witty, but very affecting too. Frankly, I'd take Namouna over Union Jack any day. The Year of the Rabbit -- especially the way Peck uses the corps -- is well worth a look-see, too.

But I LIKE the tattoos. Maybe the AD's do, too. ABT's revival of Clear was much improved by them, IMO. And they certainly don't strike me as out of place in Acheron.

Adams was phenomenal in that role - Kathleen I could not agree more. I left the show just blown away by her. It really had to be seen. Extraordinary lines that the lighting picked up, and a movement quality that Scarlett really displayed, as well as a classical structure, in the limbs and feet like Maria Kochetkova only on a bigger woman. Do - or will - the powers-that-be at NYCB have any idea what to do with her? That's another topic I guess. But before last week they had used her very little. One lead in a pas de deux in one cast of the Wheeldon "Soiree de Ballet" with Zach Catazzaro and another in a Justin Peck ballet; but she's not a girl for the corps de ballet - I mean she can dance there sure (and a Rosemary Dunleavy will of course want to keep her there) - but there are lots of good women who can do what she does there. But very very very few, maybe no one else, who has the unique qualities she showed in the Scarlett ballet. Adams was one of Swanilda's friends in the Sunday 2/16/14 performance of Coppelia -- she was lovely, of course, and now that Scarlett has let us see what she can do, I couldn't resist the temptation to watch her even when I should have been watching someone else. It would have been a real delight to see her in one of the Act III's allegorical divertissements. (Prayer would do nicely.) Let's hope the Powers-That-Be let her bloom.

I haven't heard her live yet -- now's my chance ...

I'm putting in a plug for Shostakovich's Lady McBeth of Mtsensk. The Graham Vick / Paul Brown production is one of those "updatings" (from 1865 to what looks to be about 1965) that really works. Not that it should matter one bit, but when I did a quick search on tenor Brandon Jovanovich, one of the firsts things that popped up in the search box was "shirtless" ...

I'm not too proud to admit that I enjoyed that part ...

New Combinations Program - Tuesday 2/11/14 I don’t have time for a full account of last night’s program, but I did want to rave about Sara Adams’ beautiful performance as one of the leads in Liam Scarlett’s Acheron. I saw the second cast, and I believe Adams took on the role danced by Rebecca Krohn at the premiere. Adams has Krohn’s brand of lovely, long-limbed grace, but she dances with more juice—at first I thought she might have been cast in Mearns’ role! Anyway, she looked terrific in the part, and I’m glad I had a chance to see her in it. It was my first look at Acheron, so I’m only guessing, but here’s how I think the two casts line up: Rebecca Krohn & Tyler Angle = Sara Adams & Andrew Veyette Ashley Bouder & Amar Ramasar = Meghan Fairchild & Gonzalo Garcia Sara Mearns & Adrian Danchig-Waring = Tiler Peck and Robert Fairchild Anthony Huxley = Antonio Carmena It was my second look at Preljocaj’s Spectral Evidence. This one’s going to be a guilty pleasure. It’s hooey, but hooey of the very highest order. I love the selections from Cage, and Preljocaj is not shy about working a theatrical effect for everything that it’s worth. Oh, and I like the we get to see Gretchen Smith in a featured role. Bigonzetti’s Vespro doesn’t even rise to the level of hooey, but everyone looked good in it anyway. There seemed to be an awful lot of shout-outs to several of Balanchine’s leotard ballets—especially in the big duet danced (gorgeously) by Sterling Hyltin and Amar Ramasar. Has anyone notified the Trust?

I never made that connection either! Rest in Peace.

Jenifer Ringer's farewell performance 2/9/2014 Although I’ve been in the audience for at least half a dozen farewell performances, it’s always been by accident rather design. Final performances are not how I want to remember dancers I love. But I want to remember Jenifer Ringer exactly as she was yesterday as The Girl in Pink (Dances at a Gathering) and, especially, The Pearly Queen (Union Jack). She was the quintessence of herself — of what she was as a dancer — at its loveliest and most radiant. And she looked as if she could have kept dancing as beautifully forever had she chosen to.

Apollinaire Scherr's review of Acheron is now up on the Financial Times' website here.

Respectfully, atm711, I tend to agree with those who have said that this wasn't intended as a put-down. It's also a trope I've seen in other profiles of artists (e.g., "Some not familiar with his work might find it hard to imagine, given X's cherubic face, bright eyes, and cheerful outlook, that in his writing he is preoccupied with the grimmest of subjects, torture and murder." ) I took it as a tactic employed by a writer on deadline in search of a lede in the wee hours of the morning, and nothing more sinister than that. Were McCauley writing on a different schedule, I suspect (or at least I hope) he'd jettison some of the tools he relies on to crank out timely copy.

But it's a such good line and has such perfect tone – And [so] this is the Stygian gloom one has heard so much about. It sort of calms Scarlett’s portentous title, allows Macaulay to say "Are these characters [really] dead, as the title “Acheron” implies? They’re still creatures of sexual and sensual behavior." In the underworld of Homer, unlike Scarlett’s, remember that Odysseus has to bring a liter of blood or so in order to revive the shades he meets and to get any sort of intelligence out of them. It is a good line, and I stated as much. I nonetheless find the way it was introduced into the review clumsy at best. And just to be clear, I'm not grinding some sort of anti-McCauley ax. I've found real value in many of the things he's written. But he can be infuriatingly facile at times: and that's exactly how his opening contention that the darkness of Scarlett's subject matter was somehow "curious" given his "cherubic" appearance struck me. One's looks are hardly a marker of the subject matter one is drawn to probe. (Unlike atm711, I didn't read it as a put-down.)

I don't either, for the record. It's appropriate to discuss a work's title in a review, especially one that seems a pointed as Scarlett's. What I did mind was the tangent on Tom Stoppard, "The Invention of Love," and A. E. Housman, which, on a first reading at least, struck me as being there mostly to let us know that McCauley has been to a play. The quoted material -- "I'm dead then. Good. And this is the Stygian gloom one has heard so much about." -- could actually have been deployed with real wit. But McCauley prefaces it with "Soon after the curtain rose on “Acheron,” I remembered how Tom Stoppard’s play ... " which pulls the focus away from the ballet under discussion to an unrelated work in another discipline and to McCauley himself. (And I mean to him as a person, not to his critical response to a work, which I'm very much interested in.) But he's writing under deadline and this stuff is hard to do. But that's why there are editors. "Iambic footwork" may be a pun too far, but a little mischief never hurts ... He comes from a critical practice that is much more accustomed to cross-references (literature/dance/music/art/history) than the more direct, observation and description criticism that we mostly see here in the US. One of the many plusses of the internet is our access to many more critical voices from around the world -- I'm always interested in seeing what colleagues have to say about something, especially if it's a performance or an artists I've reviewed myself. But I'm even happier to see other approaches to writing itself. I have absolutely no issue with dance critics cross-referencing other works of art: ballet doesn't happen in a vacuum and a good critic will draw our attention to the meaningful (or interesting or enlightening or just plain fun) connections between one thing and another. In this particular case, however, there doesn't seem to be any real connection between the work under review and the work referenced. McCauley brings up "The Invention of Love" solely to tee up "Stygian gloom" and apply it to Mark Stanley's lighting. If there is a deeper connection between Stoppard's play and Scarlett's ballet, McCauley didn't elaborate.

I don't either, for the record. It's appropriate to discuss a work's title in a review, especially one that seems a pointed as Scarlett's. What I did mind was the tangent on Tom Stoppard, "The Invention of Love," and A. E. Housman, which, on a first reading at least, struck me as being there mostly to let us know that McCauley has been to a play. The quoted material -- "I'm dead then. Good. And this is the Stygian gloom one has heard so much about." -- could actually have been deployed with real wit. But McCauley prefaces it with "Soon after the curtain rose on “Acheron,” I remembered how Tom Stoppard’s play ... " which pulls the focus away from the ballet under discussion to an unrelated work in another discipline and to McCauley himself. (And I mean to him as a person, not to his critical response to a work, which I'm very much interested in.) But he's writing under deadline and this stuff is hard to do. But that's why there are editors. "Iambic footwork" may be a pun too far, but a little mischief never hurts ...

Marina Harss’ review of Archeron* Acheron is now up on DanceTabs. (I didn’t notice it in “Links” – did I miss it?) She seems more enthusiastic than McCauley. (She also spends considerably less time clearing her throat than he does. He squanders a whole paragraph to set up the adjective “Stygian,” a word that requires no introduction, frankly, especially after “Asphodel” and “Acheron” have been explained.) She’s spied a reference to Symphony in C. The passage I believe she’s referring to starts at about 1:48 in this clip, featuring Allegra Kent and Conrad Ludlow in the Adagio. Note: I can’t say enough good things about Harss’ dance writing. I admire (and envy!) her disciplined eye and keen ear. I don’t always agree with her critical assessments, but I always trust her to give a lucid and honest account of what happened on stage. In this she reminds me of the great Deborah Jowitt. [Oops! Edited to add the link to Harss' review!] [*Ugh. Edited for a howler of a typo. Archeron is of course a Galactica type battlestar in service with the Colonial Fleet during the First Cylon War.)

Interesting. I have to say that Dancers at a Gathering is one ballet I will never sit through again. I've seen it several times, and had vowed - never again. I decided to give it another chance. For the first 20 minutes or so, I loved it, and couldn't imagine what my problem had been with it. After another 10 minutes I wanted to shout out - All right you can stop now. 5 minutes after that I was willing to beg - Please, please stop now. Each to one's own I suppose. You're in good company. Arlene Croce on Dances at a Gathering: "I would like to see it cut by fifteen minutes--though not the same fifteen minutes--at every performance." (From "The Relevance of Robbins," first published in Ballet Review as "Waterloo" in the Spring 1972 issue, and republished in her first review collection, After Images.)

In memoriam, PBS / American Masters is rebroadcasting "The Power of Song," a film about Pete Seeger. Check your local listings for broadcast times. You can also stream the film in its entirety here on the American Masters website. I don't know how long they plan to leave it up, so if you're really interested in watching it, don't put it off for too long. While you're there, you can see what other full episodes are available for streaming here. One of them is "Joffrey: Mavericks of American Dance."

I saw NYCB's "Harlequinade" in January of 2004. It was performed in two acts with an intermission. The program opened with "Apollo." I remember thinking at the time that "Harlequinade" could easily have been edited down to a single, if longish, act, but I liked it anyway. Benjamin Millepied danced Harlequin, Alexandra Ansanelli danced Columbine (she was divine), Joaquin De Luz danced Pierrot, and Amanda Edge danced Pierette. If I recall correctly, De Luz had joined the company not long before, and was still a soloist. Oh, and Peter Boal danced Apollo ... Edited to add: and just for the record, Sofiane Sylve danced La Bonne Fée and Jennifer Tinsley led Les Alouettes. I think it was one of the first times I saw Sylve, and I remember the experience to this day: her take-no-prisoners authority just blew me away.

Thank you for enlightening us on the benefits of being an uneducated laborer in New York. Just to be clear, I made the distinction between technicians coming out of theatrical production programs and workers from the skilled trades because they are likely to be differently credentialed, not because one group -- or one set of credentials -- is more worthy of a good paycheck than another.

Thank you for enlightening us on the benefits of being an uneducated laborer in New York. You do need to revise your wording of take home pay. Your quoted amounts for take home pay are actually gross pay. Take home pay would deduct Federal income taxes, New Your state and city taxes, plus Social security/Medicare taxes. I am not knowledgeable on current New York state and city taxes, but my guess is that the take home pay amounts would be approximately, $ 60,000 annually and not near $ 100,000. Although, I consider the intelligence of construction workers and stagehands to be on a relatively low level compared to most educated professions, the arts are not immune to idiots in high ranking positions. Yes, it was sloppy of me to use "take home pay" rather than "gross pay." I was trying to draw a distinction between the employee's cash compensation and the amount of compensation received in the form of fringe benefits, and didn't choose my words as carefully as I might have. I hope my point was clear nonetheless. Re the intelligence of construction workers and stagehands: I come from a working class family. They were all plenty smart.

Some context: a skilled worker in a unionized trade can make a very good living in New York City. By way of example, consider the “prevailing wage” rates mandated New York State’s labor law. (Section 220, which covers employees of private contractors on public works projects has been on the books since 1909.) The “prevailing wage,” which includes both an hourly wage and an hourly benefits rate, is set annually at a level comparable to the going rate paid to unionized workers in the relevant trade. The rate schedule also establishes rules for overtime and holiday pay, shift schedules (e.g., “swing” vs “graveyard”) and the like. You can find a Powerpoint presentation summarizing the law here. You can find the current Section 220 rate schedule here, but by way of example, here are the 2013 hourly wage and benefit supplements for a few key trades: Carpenter - Building Commercial Effective Period: 7/1/2013 - 6/30/2014 Wage Rate per Hour: $48.08 / Supplemental Benefit Rate per Hour: $41.10 Assuming a 40 hour week – i.e., no overtime – and 50 weeks of work, the total compensation cost to the employer (i.e., including benefits) is $178,360 per year. The employee’s take home pay is $96,160. Electrician "A" (Regular Day) Effective Period: 7/1/2013 - 5/13/2014 Wage Rate per Hour: $52.00 / Supplemental Benefit Rate per Hour: $46.13 Assuming a 40 hour week – i.e., no overtime – and 50 weeks of work, the total compensation cost to the employer (i.e., including benefits) is $196,260 per year. The employee’s take home pay is $104,000. Plumber Effective Period: 7/1/2013 - 6/30/2014 Wage Rate per Hour: $52.36 / Supplemental Benefit Rate per Hour: $37.34 Supplemental Note: Overtime supplemental benefit rate per hour: $74.40 Assuming a 40 hour week – i.e., no overtime – and 50 weeks of work, the total compensation cost to the employer (i.e., including benefits) is $179,400 per year. The employee’s take home pay is $104,720. Overtime rates and holidays vary by trade, but here are the rates for a carpenter by way of example: Overtime Time and one half the regular rate after an 8 hour day. Time and one half the regular rate for Saturday. Double time the regular rate for Sunday. Saturday may be used as a make-up day at straight time when a day is lost during that week to inclement weather. Double time the regular rate for Overtime Holidays. Overtime Holidays = New Year's Day, Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Presidential Election Day, Thanksgiving Day, Day after Thanksgiving, Christmas Day Takeaways: 1) Forget law school. Go to trade school. 2) Join a union and keep it strong. 3) Find your calling in a job that can’t be outsourced to a low-wage country on the other side of the ocean. Leaving aside the technicians coming out of college theatrical production programs, this is the compensation environment that theater operators find themselves in.

Not exactly a specific casting wish list, but ... I'd like to see ABT extend its fall season at the Theater Formerly Known as State (TFKS) by several weeks so that we can see more dancers from the corps and soloist ranks in featured roles and in ensembles from rep other than story ballet warhorses. This fall's season there was a delight, but there just wasn't enough of it. I'd like to see them decamp from the Met for TFKS altogether, of course, though scheduling around NYCB's three non-Nuts seasons there would be a challenge. Plus Paul Taylor now seems happily ensconced at TFKS for a regular three week gig during the break between NYCB's winter and spring seasons ...