Kathleen O'Connell

I blew right by it too - thanks for the link!

I loved this quote from Morris:

When I start a piece I have some idea from doing loads of homework, studying the music, thinking, thinking, thinking, procrastinating, which is a big part of my work, the not doing it, and then you get in. And then I make up stuff with my dancers and then I throw it away.

Emphasis mine - can you tell I'd rather do anything today than attack the huge stack of administrivia that I'm supposed to be clearing a path through.

My brush with genius: Mario Batali was one of the cooks at a local pizza joint in the town where I went to grad school. Who knew.

I think Deborah Jowitt's article in the Village Voice puts several fingers on some of the salient points (as she usually does), especially in the cultural differences between ballet and modern dancers and their expectations about choreography. Whether it's hard wired into people drawn to modern dance, or inculcated in the training, there is an expectation that everyone in the field will at least try to make their own dances as well as performing the works of others. This makes the founding of another ensemble more of an evolutionary step and less of a battle -- it's less fraught. Many, if not most, fail -- that's the nature of attrition in dance, but if there are more people trying, there are more groups that do have success.

Ballet doesn't necessarily have this freedom anymore. It seems to me, looking through old newspapers and magazines, that there were more little startup groups in the 40s and 50s, and even into the 60s, that wanted to be what Wheeldon seemed to be hoping for -- a chamber sized ensemble with a mixed repertory. At that point, though, the whole regional ballet movement seemed to shift the attention to community based groups with larger ambitions, and things evolved as they have.

Sandik, are you saying that ballet no longer has the freedom to start smaller touring ensembles - either focused on the work of a single choreographer or on mixed rep -- because regional companies now fill the space that a smaller touring company might? In other words, if you want to see the latest from a given modern choreographer, you pretty much have to wait for his or her own company to come around since there aren't regional mixed rep modern companies that mount works by many choreographers in the way that, say, PNB does? It's an interesting thought.

From Morphoses' 2008 Form 990:

Accomplishments from the past two years include fostering collaborations between the world's finest dancers and important artists from numerous disciplines; commissioning new works; presenting nine world premiers; and serving as a platform for existing works from other choreographers.

Aside from the sheer number of world premiers (we can leave aside the matter of quality for now) and the fostering of dancer / artist collaborations (and I'd be interested to know how deep that collaboration actually was at the dancer level), this description sure sounds like an ambitious regional company; in fact, it sounds like a major company.

Here's the organizational mission, just for the record:

Dancers collaborating with important artists from all relevant disciplines. To be an innovative, multi-disciplinary dance company infusing the art form with vitality, energy, and vision.

Sigh - I know it's a function of having to put stuff on grant proposals and the like, but change just four words and I could have written this as my departmental mission statement when I worked for a big multi-national corporation ...

I think what I'm trying to figure out here is what actually constitutes a dance company.

A very good question ... and possibly one that Wheeldon and Lopez should have discussed more often when setting this whole thing up.

Out of curiosity on this very point, I started trawling the dance company IRS Form 990s and other filings posted on the New York State Attorney General's Charities Bureau website (www.charitiesnys.com). It's a fascinating exercise. A factoid: in terms of revenue, Morphoses and Complexions were about the same size in 2007. Morphoses had total revenues of $1.47 million ($729K in contributions /grants and $740K in performance income); its expenses totaled $796K - i.e. it socked away $674K. Complexions had total revenues of $1.3 million ($652K in contributions /grants and $689K in performance income); its expenses totaled $1.14 million. (Someone at Complexions has real fund raising mojo: contributions /grants shot up to $1.2 million in 2008.)

One can see via the filings how much Complexions paid its dancers in 2007 ($522K) - what isn't available is how many were under contract and for how many weeks. (Thirteen are listed on its current roster, along with a ballet master and assistant ballet master.)

Morphoses' 2007 and 2008 "Performer Fees" were $305K and $273K, respectively. I assume that some or all of this was for dancers. IIRC, there was at least some live music on its 2007 programs - I don't know whether musicians are included in "Performer Fees" or whether they are included in "Direct Production Fees" ($122K / $193K) or "Artistic and Performance" ($37K / $51K) Travel expenses were $112K / $113K .

Keep in mind that 2007 was Morphoses' first year; it was Complexions' 13th.

Morphoses' 2008 990 (go here) contains a multi-page summary of the year's activities - where it performed, who it commissioned works from, etc - and some prose about its mission.

Deborah Jowitt has some comments on Wheeldon's announcement here.

And all of this was eminently predictable had there been any significant critical conversation about and research into establishing this company. But who in the nonprofit arts world listens to those who came before them (especially if they imagine themselves to be "special")? Such hubris on all sides of the table.

Wheeldon was in a position to make the experiment and it failed, as often happens. But I don't think he and his backers were wrong to try.

(I don't see how Morphoses survives without Wheeldon.)

I don't, either. It must be tough for Lopez to see all that hard work go down the drain but without Wheeldon the troupe has no raison d'etre.

Dirac, I wholeheartedly agree that Wheeldon was right to give it a shot. It may be that he was never able to settle in his own mind what Morphoses’ mission really was. Or it may be that as a practical matter he wasn’t able to bridge the gap between what he wanted Morphoses to be and what circumstance forced it to be. Or, it may be that like Dr Casaubon in Middlemarch, he was surprised to discover that being married (in Wheeldon’s case, to his own organization) wasn’t as profound a state of being as he had anticipated. But he wasn’t wrong to try. (Let's hope that Lopez doesn't feel obligated to soldier on with Wheeldon's original project the way Dorothea Brooke felt obligated to finish Casaubon's "The Key to all Mythologies.")

Wheeldon appears to have put a lot of faith into the notion that working with a dedicated company of dancers would allow him to be creative in a way that working with a pick-up troupe or with an institution like NYCB did not. He may have been right, but it’s hard to see now how he was going to get that company without some sacrifice, at least at the outset—e.g., by committing most of his creative energies to it, or by committing himself to a less stellar roster of dancers who could reasonably be expected to commit themselves to him for the requisite number of weeks per year, or by basing himself in just one city, or by basing himself in a city that wasn’t already stuffed full of dance companies, or by electing to focusing on creating dance rather than curating it etc, etc, etc.

I think Morphoses sans Wheeldon might have a future if it sorts out what its mission is, gets the right AD, and finds some financial supporters that want to make it happen. Perhaps it could be an “incubator “of sorts (stealing shamelessly from Biotech): Lopez contacts a promising choreographer and says “I’ll give you the infrastructure, you give me a ballet. Here are 10 good dancers, rehearsal space, a production team, and tour schedule. You don’t have to worry about any of that–just give my dancers something to dance and the audience something to watch.” Maybe that audience is in college–town auditoriums instead of City Center. Maybe it’s in smaller cities. Maybe Morphoses only comes to NY when it’s got something than NY needs to see and isn’t getting from anyone else. (There are ballet choreographers whose names aren’t Wheeldon, Ratmansky, Millepied, or Elo …) Maybe it forges alliances with folks like Leon Botstein: “Let’s augment that Bard [insert name of less-well-known or “difficult” composer here] Festival with some dance.” Or am I being hopelessly optimistic?

Nothing Wheeldon did for Morphoses really looked any different than what he did for other companies. None of Morphoses' non-Wheeldon rep really looked any different than what was being made elsewhere: "Softly as I Leave You" didn't need Morphoses to happen, for example. Morphoses' gesamtkunstwerk aspirations were tepidly realized at best. So what was the point?

Perhaps having "a cadre of full time dancers to work with ... who know just how you like them to move, the way you want them to cut shapes in space, the way you ask them to respond to music" would have resulted in something startlingly new, but I'm starting to wonder.

Lopez is quoted as saying she has the resources to hire 8-10 dancers; Wheeldon says that isn't enough. Is this a reasonable objection?

When I first started seeing NYCB regularly in the late 70s, the dancers did seem very adult -- but then they were all older than me, or at least my age. Now that they're all young enough to be my children and then some, they look like kids. It's that simple.

Which does not mean there were no surprises in this performance. Chase Finlay, as has been noted by prompter posters than I, was the name on everyone's lips as we left the theater. But also surprising (and I'm surprised no one's mentioned her so far) was our Carabosse -- Marika Anderson, filling the stage with her villainy. Who'd have guessed that this young, sweet-faced corps dancer who had never caught my attention before could chew the scenery like that? I expect that with time, she'll deliver her mime with finer articulation, but she was off to a brilliant start. And having Sara Mearns (replacing Rebecca Krohn) as her nemesis was a fortuitous accident, as the two, with their wide, Nordic faces, resemble each other a little.

Agreed! I saw Saturday evening's performance, and Anderson's Carabosse was truly, terrifically demented -- not purely evil so much as off her meds and dangerously deranged. Reichlen (Lilac Fairy), Gilliland (the Queen) and LaCour (the King) -- all very tall and regal -- looked like Borzois startled by a Jack Russell terrier on fire and in for the kill. It was over the top in exactly the right way, and I loved it. I've enjoyed watching Anderson in the corps the past few seasons -- I hope the company gives her more to do soon.

Megan Fairchild and Andrew Veyette's Bluebird pdd was very fine. For sheer charm, I can't remember a better Florine

Fairchild was a delightful Florine - musical, swift and precise without any brittleness at all, and sweet without being cloying. My husband's comment during the curtain: "She's got it all going on."

Someone dropped a garland towards the end of the waltz, but a couple of quick-thinking little ballerinas deftly got the thing up off the stage and into the right pair of hands like real pros. Well done!

All in all, a fine night at Koch Theater!

Ben Huys was a fine Apollo. The stereotype of the Apollo Belvedere was the

last thing Balanchine wanted in this role;I in fact, Peter Martins was only the

second dancer of this type whom Balanchine cast. He is quoted more than

once as saying 'Everyone dances Apollo like a statue; he's a devil, a rascal..!'

and the deviations from classical positions, epaulement, and deportment which

are extremely conspicuous in the role make this emphasis even more obvious.

I realize this is off topic, but a recent (sort of) rascal at the 2004 free ALL

BALANCHINE day at Symphony Space, Rasta Thomas was the epitome of this potrayal. He had been coached by Jacques d'Amboise, and IMHO, he was amazing. His face was so alive with character. He is one gorgeous dancer, although IMHO totally on the wrong aesthetic track. (Too bad for us.)

You might find George Jackson's danceviewtimes review of Thomas' 2004 performances of Apollo and Prodigal with Dance Theater of Harlem interesting. It's here.

Here's a quote to whet your appetite:

For the record, Cooper's Prodigal on opening night was very likeable, and Thomas's two nights later was astonishing—danced big and acted ravishingly. When, peering over the tabletop, he first sees the Siren, his eyes lit up like a little boy's. As the naughty Prodigal, he gains our sympathy. As the penitent Prodigal, he displays the pain of martyrs in Gothic carvings.

A terrific Apollo from Thomas wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Many BTers may not be aware that Macaulay's recent end-of-decade roundup sparked a lot of animosity in the world of contemporary dance (in AM's anachronistic phrase, "downtown dance"). Here's a recent blog posting by Eva Yaa Asantewaa that exemplifies the fracas.

My personal sense is that more blame needs to be put at the feet of the NY Times than Macaulay himself--he's just a single critic with singular interests, and sounds worst when he's asked to travel outside of his comfort zone.

The NY Times has three other dance critics who do cover contemporary dance with diligence and respect: Gia Kourlas, Claudia La Rocco, and Roslyn Sulcas.

Here's one of the paragraphs in Macauley's piece that triggered the outcry:

Dance critics like to look for hope in the best modern or postmodern choreography being shown in downtown Manhattan. I've seen good material there too and among young modern-dance choreographers elsewhere, and yet — amid a field too large for anyone to keep complete track of it — I sense that too little of late has amounted to anything historic. Instead I think it's worth drawing attention to the continuing and growing vitality of older forms: African dance, Indian dance, flamenco, tango and tap. (Recent festivals of Arab and Muslim art and dance in Brooklyn and Washington have made me wish we saw more from there.)

The field may indeed be "too large for anyone to keep complete track of," but the NY Times has four people in position who could collectively watch, report, and assess - and three of them already do. Macauley might have found a graceful way to delegate the "downtown" decade wrap-up to them. (They might not be any more impressed with it than he is, of course.) One could argue that the senior dance critic of the paper of record should be in a position to provide an informed assessment of dance in all its variety, but if something is genuinely "too large for anyone to keep complete track of" then there should be no shame in calling in reinforcements.

Here's the link for the press release, now on the NYCB's website, announcing the retirements.

Each of the dancer's will give a farewell program -- a chance for the audience to show them some love (so to speak).

I would guess that still doesn't rule out others retiring without fanfare or an announcement -- now or in the future.

The powers that be must be pretty certain that they can fill the seats for a farewell performance.

http://www.nycballet.com/news/press/pr01-12-10.html

My goodness! Four Sunday matinees in a row - they could practically build a subscription program out of those farewell performances!

Philip Neal looked wonderful in the Midsummer Divertissment last week (with Whelan, who was wonderful, too). He's always been a favorite of mine, and I'll be sad to see him go - but it's better to leave when we're wondering why he's going rather than when we're wondering why he's still there. He'll be missed for sure.

I just got back from a performance of Wally Cardona’s “A Light Conversation” — an hour long work for two dancers without scenery or costumes set to a BBC Radio 4 panel discussion on Kierkegaard*, plus a few snippets of Jefferson Airplane. Someone brought along two very young girls – I’m guessing 5ish and 7ish. There aren’t many adults I’d drag along to see Wally Cardona on folding chairs, but the young ladies were absolute models of decorum; the older one got a fit of the giggles when we got to the “Kierkegaard and Love” section—not an entirely irrational response from a seven year old watching two sweaty grown-ups flinging themselves around the floor while three professors explicated Kierkegaard.

*an episode of Melvyn Bragg's "In Our Time"

Just an update: here's a list of the first round (Thu 1/7/10) of $20 performances:

Evening Performances:

Big Apple Circus at 6:30 pm

South Pacific at 8:00 pm

Lincoln Center Theater

A Midsummer Night's Dream at 8:00 pm

New York City Ballet

See my first post for the drill to get these tickets ...

I hope this doesn't mean that they will be charging subscribers for all three seasons at once. If so, I will probably drop my subscriptions.

Perhaps they'll put some sort of multi-payment plan in place. I seem to recall someone allowing subscribers to spread the cost of a subscription over a couple of payments ... can't remember if it was NYCB or Carnegie.

If you’re going to the Joyce this weekend to see PNB (or even if you aren’t) consider tacking on a visit to Dance Theater Workshop (just a block away) to see either Tere O’Connor’s “Wrought Iron Fog” or Pam Tanowitz’ “Be in the Gray with Me, ” both of which premiered at DTW in 2009.

They’re each about an hour or so long and tickets are only $15. “Wrought Iron Fog” will be performed on Thu 1/7 and Fri 1/8 at 6:00 PM, giving you ample time to grab a quick bite or drink before you head over to the Joyce for the 8:00 PM show. “Be in the Gray with Me” will be performed on Sun 1/10 at 7:00 PM and Mon Jan 11 at 9:00 PM.

If you haven’t been to DTW, it’s both an intimate space and a comfortable one – you’ll see everything no matter where you sit.

I reviewed both works last year for DanceViewTimes (here and here) and found them engaging, intriguing, and enjoyable. If you mostly see ballet or, for lack of a better term, “mainstream modern” (Paul Taylor or Mark Morris, e.g.) you might find “Be in the Gray with Me” the more accessible of the two, but “Wrought Iron Fog” is well worth a look.

An hour of your time and $15 bucks — even if you walk out unconvinced, where’s the downside?

Here’s a link to DTW’s website for more info and tickets: http://www.dancetheaterworkshop.org/

Here’s a link to Claudia La Rocco’s NYT review of “Be in the Gray with Me”: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/20/arts/dance/20tanowitz.html

Here’s a link to Gia Kourlas’ NYT review of “Wrought Iron Fog”: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/arts/dance/12fog.html

Here’s Apollinaire Scherr’s: http://www.artsjournal.com/foot/2009/11/go...companys_w.html

Here’s a link to a NYT preview of “Wrought Iron Fog” by Claudia La Rocco: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/arts/dance/08laro.html

Does this mean that there will effectively be three seasons, fall (Sept - Oct), Winter (Jan - Feb), and Spring (May-Jun), plus Nuts?

And I agree wholeheartedly with abatt - it would be terrific to see other companies in Koch Theater during the released Jan and June weeks. It's a much happier venue for dance than either the Met or City Center.

This just hit my inbox:

"Celebrate the opening of day-of discount tickets at the Zucker Box Office by taking advantage of $20 for 20 Days, during which $20 tickets to select Lincoln Center performances will be available for day-of purchase, starting at noon daily, first come first served, limit two tickets per person.* This special offer is available for a limited time and tickets are available only in-person at the box office for performances that day, so come to the David Rubenstein Atrium and experience Lincoln Center for less!

*Starting at 8:00 am on each day of $20 Tickets for 20 Days, numbered wristbands will be distributed from the Broadway entrance to patrons in the line for $20 tickets on a first come first served basis. A wristband does not guarantee a ticket, but only a place in line. Guests must be in line at the box office at 11:00 am, which opens at noon. "

Go here to learn more.

Here's the deal on day-of tickets generally:

"The David Rubenstein Atrium is now your destination for day-of discount tickets to all 12 Lincoln Center resident organizations. Choosing a show and getting your seats for less is hassle-free! Come to the Atrium Tuesday through Sunday to peruse that day’s performances campus-wide, or ask questions at the information desk, then step up to the box office to purchase your tickets for that same evening. Credit cards are accepted, though there is a limit of two tickets per person and discounts vary by performance."

When I was about six I had a ballet coloring book that I just adored. It was about a girl named Nadine who practiced hard and danced Odette when she became a grown-up ballerina. (I gave her very elaborate blue and green eye shadow.) Among my prized possessions was a ballet-slipper pink vinyl lunch box decorated with rather stylized early sixties ballerinas. (They were to real ballerinas what the poodles on poodle skirts were to real poodles.)

My parents got the hint and took me to see an outdoor performance by (I’m guessing) NYCB roughly in the environs of the Washington Monument. (We lived in DC then.) We saw “Afternoon of a Faun” and what must have been Balanchine’s one act version of “Swan Lake.” I remember that it was “Afternoon of a Faun” because my mother had to patiently explain to me that in this particular case the Faun was not a baby deer. I remember the barre on stage, but I’m sure everything else went over my head.

Every now and then I get the urge to do some research to see if was indeed an NYCB performance of “Faun” and “Swan Lake” that I saw in DC nearly 50 years ago … but I’d be sorely disappointed if it wasn’t!

The use of "youth-enizes" seriously makes me nauseous.

I can't for the life of me figure out whether the perpetrators meant it as a compliment or a put-down.

Someone at New York Magazine must have a serious thing for NYCB. In addition to three 2009 hits on The Approval Matrix (links below) it’s garnered a slot in this week’s “A Million Little Pieces: a Smattering of the Moments that Changed the Way we Entertain Ourselves”

The entry? “February 22 [2006]: Peter Martins youth-enizes New York City Ballet, casting spunky Tiler Peck, 17, in his virtuosic Friandises; later, stages age-appropriate Romeo and Juliet.”

The hard copy of the magazine features an illustrated timeline of the decade and an OK pic of Sterling Hyltin and Robert Fairchild in R+J encircled by headshots of Stephen Colbert, Perez Hilton, Tina Fey, Borat, the Brokeback Mountain cowboys (yes, I know, technically they’re sheepherders) and Tina Fey. The online version is text only.

I dunno – If I were choosing an 00’s ballet moment to feature on the same page as CBGBs reincarnation as a John Varvatos storefront or SNL’s “Dick in a Box” guys, I might have gone with Swamp Thing or David Hallberg’s Citizen bustier. I’m sure both have their NYCB equivalents, but I’ve undoubtedly repressed them, although my subconscious keeps flashing "Balanchine Centennial," "Boris Eifman" and "newly-commissioned ballet" at me for some reason.

Approval Matrix Links:

Adrian Danchig-Waring Promotion

Corps Layoffs

Dancer's Choice - Rebecca Krohn & Adrian Danchig-Waring in "In G Major" (Never mind NYCB - Someone at NY Mag has a serious thing for Adrian Danchig-Waring. And why not? one might ask.)

Wonderful news--an early Christmas present. Now all ABT has to do is dump the City Center and have their fall season at BAM.

Boy would I like to see ABT do its fall season (or any season) at BAM. Of course, it's an easy subway ride away for me, but would likely be more of a trek from NJ, Westchester, and CT than City Center is. I wonder if that would limit attendance for a non-Nuts season?

I also wonder if the supertitles (sounds like a horrible distraction to me) aren't resulting in an expectation of a very literal depiction of what they describe, preventing one from being caught up in the drama.

I found the surtitles more of a help than a hindrance; they don't suck you into the story, but then that's something that shouldn't be left up to surtitles in the first place. Graham's "Clytemnestra" is difficult to follow even if you know the Oresteia backwards and forwards and have braved Graham's own program notes to boot. The original score (composed by Halim El-Dabh) includes chanted text for a man and a women to provide some context, but it's not much of a road map if you get lost. The work is structured as a non-linear series of flashbacks with multiple takes on the some of the incidents. The cast is very large; there are about a dozen named parts and not all of the characters are easy to identify. Keeping track of who's doing what to whom and why is a challenge and I think it can make it difficult to experience the work as a drama. The big solos and set pieces are plenty vivid, but would be an eyeful even if they were presented as excerpts. If you worked them up as a trailer, everyone would want to go see the show.

Favorite overheard comment at the 11/1 performance of Morphoses Program B, as the third film clip began: "What, again with the Vineyard?"

I just saw a posting on the NYTimes website announcing that Tyler Angle, Robert Fairchild, Tiler Peck, Amar Ramasar and Tess Reichlin have all been promoted to principal. Kathryn Morgan has been promoted to soloist. Great news, and the promotions are well deserved.

Reichlen in particular seems overdue for this promotion, but yay, nice news all around. I've been fans of some of these dancers since they started in the corps. (I guess i should feel old, then.)

I was a fan of Darci Kistler's when she was in the corps; I think this means I'm older than dirt ...

Congrats to all the newly promoted dancers - well done! I've seen memorable performances by all of them, and I'm looking forward to enjoying many more as I drift away into my dotage.

Re Kistler - I'm sad to see her leave, even though I know it's time.

Money ruins everything it touches.

Oh, I think there must be a few exceptions. It didn't seem to ruin Lincoln Kerstein.