Marta

19 hours ago, dirac said:

The desire to be adored by the masses can be unhealthy. I wonder if the Lovable Fat Guy image sort of took over, to his detriment in all kinds of ways. YouOverThere, did "Yes, Giorgio" get a mention?

That's lovely, tha;nk you. Did anyone else see him live - early, late, whenever?

I saw him live twice in the early 80s,  in Ernani at the Met and in a recital. Both were unforgettable, thrilling.  The voice was so beautiful, so expressive, and the diction flawless, every word intelligible.

No "Yes, Giorgio" was not mentioned.  The documentary was really fantastic.   Although I knew most of the facts, I thought it was extremely well done and Pavarotti's own words were very welcome.  I thought his dedication of an aria to Lady Diana was touching and they really seemed to have a rapport.

1 hour ago, ClaraFan said:

@Marta That I don't know. I'd be guessing corps. I know she has had a few injuries, IIUC. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I looked on the BB site but don't see her yet.  There's been a noticeable exodus from the company.  Kuranaga went to San Francisco Ballet; Breen Combes retired and also Chalendard.  Of the soloists, Burassi is going to Canada and it looks as though a few other soloists left too.  I don't yet see any new principals or soloists.  I would love to know if there's a specific reason for the drain.

On 7/18/2019 at 1:47 PM, Kathleen O'Connell said:

Divert was the very first Balanchine ballet I saw at the theater formerly known as State w-a-a-a-a-y back in the late 70's. It holds a very special place in my heart, and I wish the company performed it more often. 

I'm completely with you!  I had the same experience seeing the first Balanchine ballet in person, Divertimento #15, June 1979, Suzanne Farrell, an unforgettable performance.  I too wish they would do it more often. Leaving the theater I checked the program and casting for the next day's matinee: Baryshnikov and McBride in Other Dances. Fabulous again!  I know NYCB did this recently, but this ballet also seems not to be performed often enough.

29 minutes ago, ClaraFan said:

https://www.instagram.com/powi295/

Pauina Waski has arrived in Boston. Not sure when she starts.

Do we know if she's in the corps or soloist at BB?

35 minutes ago, nanushka said:

Personally, I think Balanchine's works are great enough to withstand imperfect performances by an overall strong (if not at present top-tier or world-class) company of dancers and still give a lot of enjoyment. I'd much rather pay to see Balanchine done at 75% than a lot of other things done at 100%.

I'm with you all the way.  

I also agree with Kathleen O'Connell, as  a 40 year veteran NYCB watcher,  that the corps often looks anti-geometric and does not move as one when it should.  

5 minutes ago, Roberta said:

I had the opposite feelings as you on the Hallberg/Part APOLLO. I loved Hallberg's lines and stoic rendition. I could not stand Part's every-smiley Terpsichore, typical of Mariinsky-trained dancers in Balanchine roles. Different strokes for different folks.

in fact now that you mention it, although I love Veronika Part, I remember being irked by the too smileyness.  I  also recall an earlier Apollo with Part and I think Beloserkovsky, where she smiled too much.  

On 6/27/2019 at 3:21 PM, abatt said:

I think McKenzie would give Copeland Terpsichore.

Oh puh-leeze!   

I saw Hallberg in Apollo at ABT 6 or 7  years ago and was disappointed. I was really eager to see him too because I was thrilled by his Albrecht  to Osipova's Giselle.   I wish I could be more articulate but Apollo didn't seem to fit. Not danced badly, just not convincing. I felt I was watching him execute steps. Veronika Part was Terpsichore; I couldn't take my eyes off her so I don't remember who the others were.

I would love to see Cornejo as Apollo!

On 7/6/2019 at 10:15 AM, cobweb said:

I attended last night with Mr. cobweb, our second time seeing this production. Herman Cornejo was absolutely stunning, overwhelming almost. The minute he comes on the stage he commands attention and brings a whole new level to the proceedings. What had seemed somewhat light and frivolous becomes serious and searching. He is a great artist. And that's even before he does any dancing! The beauty of his variations in the wedding scene is hard to fully describe, honestly I was overwhelmed. Blistering speed and intensity and elevation, along with scrupulously formed shapes, you could clearly read every position in the air and on the ground. Note to self/note to all - on to Apollo! 

Sarah Lane danced beautifully, I found her especially fleet in the wedding scene, and I loved the repeated low arabesque motif. Beautifully shaped. I agree with MarzipanShepherdess about her strained facial expression, and her characterization could show more of a development arc. Still, I'd gladly choose to see her again (especially as compared to some of the other current Auroras).

This is my first time seeing Catherine Hurlin this season, and as others have noted she looks outstanding. She is gifted with a body beautiful and expressive for ballet, and a wide open face. Very exciting to watch. 

Thanks cobweb for your thoughts about Friday night's performance. I agree almost completely.  Cornejo commands the stage simply by appearing on it.  His variation was out of this world!  The elevation, ballon,  speed, clarity, were stupendous.  He is a great artist and the  greatest current male classical dancer.  He and Sarah Lane are fantastic individually and together.  I was astounded by ... everything. She has beautiful line, a light buoyant jump,  fast feet, lovely slow arms.  That she may have looked strained occasionally didn't disturb me.

Hurlin was astonishing. I had never seen her and can't wait to see more of her. Joo Won Ahn was new to me also and a sensational Bluebird.  Yes, it's uncool to say so but I could do without all the divertissements after Bluebird PdD, particularly Red Riding Hood and the Ogres.  However, I do think Ratmansky's work is exceptional.  It was my first time seeing this version and while there are definitely aspects of it I dislike, I accept it for what it is: a glimpse into the past creatively rendered with imagination and deep knowledge of the art form.  No, I did not love the chainés on demi pointe, but the low passés, lower extensions, etc.  are part of the whole.  I did dislike most of the costumes especially for the ensemble dances. They are ugly and bulky and the individual tutus for the fairies for example, are sometimes lovely, but all together don't look harmonious.  I did think Aurora's tutus were beautiful.  I think the stage picture is visually overstuffed. If I were the decider, I'd remove some of the ensemble dances.   I'd be surprised if Ratmansky yielded to some of our balletomane opinions about what should go!  It would be fascinating to see his interpretation of Swan Lake.

5 minutes ago, angelica said:

Isn't Siebert mostly a modern dance guy?

He does review ballet, but mainly reviews modern dance. He also wrote a book on tap dancing.  Gia Kourlas seems to be getting more space in the Times.  I don't think they really intend to have a chief dance critic.  I find it unacceptable that there has been barely one review of ABT. 

3 minutes ago, vipa said:

The whole restoration aspect is an interesting discussion. I've heard Kevin M vehemently defend the choice as an opportunity to see the original intent. I saw 2 performances it's first season and will never go again, I don't care who the cast is. Do first time viewers understand that this is a restoration from more than 100 years ago, and not a typical Sleeping Beauty that would be presented by most ballet companies? 

I do understand it's a restoration, and frankly I'm not sure i'm going to like this restoration!  I have to admit I AM going for the cast so I'm trying to maintain my curiosity and an open mind.

6 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

Sigh. I'm going to have to plead guilty to felony hypocrisy. I'm not the least troubled by ballerinas who substitute a musical, well-executed manège for Odile's fouettés or who elect forgo arms held en couronne during their Rose Adagio balances in the interest of embodying a composed, confident, gracious young princess. But lordy I do love the éclat of those fish dives. 

Have to agree-- I love them!  I have tickets to the performance of Lane and Cornejo. I thought I had read a few years ago that some dancers DID do the fish dives, maybe even these two.  I don't love  some of the bulky looking costumes, but I'm really looking forward to seeing Ratmansky's reconstruction for the first time.

4 hours ago, canbelto said:

@FauxPas who is at the performance just texted me:

Misty for the white acts, Sarah for black swan.

How  very peculiar.  That's got to be a first for ABT.  I would love to see Lane with Cornejo in a full SL.

On 6/7/2019 at 3:42 PM, balletforme said:

Noticing a number of departures in Boston Ballet Misa, Kathleen Breen Combs,. . .. are there others? 

I'm very sorry to hear of these two departures as Kuranaga and Breene Combs were the dancers who most attracted me to BB.  Cornejo and Conti were two others I really liked.  I look forward to seeing the Giselle.

3 hours ago, Roberta said:

Thanks, Marta. No need to see the documentary to see a great 8+-minute clip of Nureyev dancing Taylor's Aureole with the RDB:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0q-ztXxdG_o

 

Also, isn't it Nureyev in this complete performance of Appalachian Spring? first of 4 parts...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmgaKGSxQVw

 

Thanks for the links.  The Aureole is fun to watch, even if it seems too jolly  for his temperament.  That's not Rudi in Appalachian though.  it's a 1959 film of Graham, Stuart Hodes and Bertram Ross.  I'm not particularly a partisan of Rudi but for anyone who is, I think the doc. is worth seeing.

5 hours ago, Roberta said:

A review of the 2019 Nureyev documentary:

https://trustmovies.blogspot.com/2019/06/dont-bother-with-nureyev-too-often.html

Ouch! Not so promising. Which begs the question, "Why?"  How many documentaries on Nureyev have we had, since the great one by Patricia Foy? Why was yet another one needed, if it has so little new information or footage to add?

Thanks for the link.  The review is right on!  It focuses on the chief irritant, in my opinion, of the Nureyev doc:  The  dances by Maliphant that  are inherently uninteresting, don't add anything and are an intrusion.  I saw the documentary the night after seeing The White Crow, and what a disappointment.  I wouldn't say it's superfluous though. It's still worth seeing for the very brief footage of Taylor and Graham, the scenes with Fonteyn and Bruhn, and parts of the interview with Cavett. Even though I had seen the original interview, it was great to revisit it.  

On 6/6/2019 at 1:42 PM, NinaFan said:

Good point.  I just read several reviews, and yes, they are positive for the most part.  I have to assume Marston was satisfied with ABT's interpretation and dancing.  So what's changed? 

I think what's different is that British reviewers and Americans have different criteria and ideas about what a good contemporary ballet inspired by literature  is. That was my impression from reading those reviews.  It's possible too that American balletomanes who love NYCB  simply don't love these story ballets.  I'm not trying to say that all American dance lovers are City Ballet partisans.  I didn't see Jane Eyre and had no desire to see it even before I read the responses here. I'm just not a fan of new ballets with literary sources.

6 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

2. I found a lot to like in Bartók Ballet and look forward to seeing it again. I know and love the Bartók string quartets, so I didn't find the music to be a barrier to enjoyment: it's not pretty, but I think it is very beautiful. I also know and love Tanowitz' choreography: some of the things I like best in her work turned up in Bartók Ballet. I might not have enjoyed the ballet as much as I did if I had to simultaneously wrap my head around both Tanowitz' and Bartók's pointed departures from, for lack of a better term, "common practice," but I walked into the theater knowing what to expect, and that might have made all the difference. (I listened to String Quartet No. 5 just before I left for the theater, and was interested to see how Tanowitz would deal with certain aspects of the score, e.g., its folk rhythms, the sound effects, the way it ramps up tension and barely releases it, etc etc etc.) I liked seeing how the dancers dug into everything Tanowitz gave them to do. Gretchen Smith, who has worked with Tanowitz before, and Devin Alberda looked absolutely terrific; Bartók Ballet is very much an ensemble work, but Smith and Alberda seemed to be in the point of focus a bit more often than their colleagues. But really, everyone shone.

I've been intrigued by your reviews in general and also what you have said about Tanowitz.  I didn't see Bartok, but wish I had.  I liked and admired very much her Goldberg Variations and hope to see more of her work.  You seem to be one of the few on this forum who found aspects to appreciate.

Roberta said:  Martha, thank you for mentioning the newest documentary "Nureyev." I had never heard of it until now. If I may ask - who is the director, the country of production, method of circulation, etc.?

Jacqui and David Morris made this film, 2018.  There's a trailer on youtube.  They're siblings, and British I think.  I saw this film a few weeks ago at a one night only screening in a Landmark Cinema.  Maybe it will return for a longer run, although i doubt it because there were very very few people at the screening.  It would probably draw a larger audience at a museum or university cinema.

Roberta, you wrote an excellent review of The White Crow.  I enjoyed the film very much and it was beautifully done.  Ivenko was good; his dancing was good but not great and nobody could expect him to  have Rudi's charisma. I thought Fiennes was terrific.  He really evoked the films of Pushkin  teaching Baryshnikov's class. I wish there had been more dancing though.  The film was quite faithful to the bio of Rudi by Julie Kavanagh.  All the people you mention figured prominently in her book.  It would have been fascinating to see more of Sizova and especially Soloviev.  The night after I saw White Crow, I saw the current documentary film "Nureyev" .  Fascinating to see the contrast between them. I also wished there were  more actual footage of Nureyev dancing in the doc film. Instead there were scenes of  dancers performing contemporary choreography against a backdrop of a Russian birch forest, with the real Rudi pirouetting interminably off to one side.  The documentary covers his entire life with extensive portions of interviews with Dick Cavett and others.  Both films are worth seeing.

I didn't see the Tanowitz/Bartok ballet so reading the diverging points of view is intriguing. I read that it's her first time choreographing point work .  I saw her Goldberg Variations and thought it was terrific.  Four Quartets got even more favorable reviews.  I'm curious to see more of her dances.  

I don't understand why Garcia is cast in De Luz's repertory or in any ballet requiring virtuosity and fast feet.  

 I've never heard of this publication and wonder if it's still being published.  i assume you're not referring to Pointe magazine because I don't think it goes back as far as 1976.  You might ask at Ballet Review, based in NY. The writers there seem to know everything about ballet.  Or the Jerome Robbins Dance Division at the NY Public Library.  Good luck!

4 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

I remain agnostic as to the extent to which Ramasar and Catazaro participated in the most egregious of Finlay's group chats. (The details provided on page 12 of the complaint suggest that Ramasar did actively seek out explicit photos: "52. On May 21, 2018, another NEW YORK CITY BALLET, INC. principal, Amar Ramasar texted Mr. Finlay, "I love you! Text me those, photos/videos!!") 

Since I don't have to work with either man—and they are men, not boys—it's not for me to say whether or not his colleagues can or should "move on." That's for them to decide. 

"Agnostic" is a great word  to express your opinion on this story, and I agree completely.   Thanks also for the emphasis that they are men and not boys.

On 3/8/2019 at 3:21 PM, Jack Reed said:

  On 3/7/2019 at 1:16 PM, Drew said:

Acocella wrote so little on dance in the New Yorker—whether by choice or editorial policy— I am mildly surprised she said she was concerned about repeating herself.

My impression is that she wrote more frequent columns years ago when she first became the dance critic. There 's been a significant reduction in both the dance  and music reviews or articles over the last several years.  I assumed it was editorial policy.

On 3/9/2019 at 2:23 PM, Kathleen O'Connell said:

I did a little googling and came across a 2011review of Apollo's Angels by Marina Harss for The Nation. Among other things, Harss points out that by making Apollo her touchstone for all that is both right and proper in both Balanchine and ballet in general, Homans loses sight of (or perhaps refuses to see) the corresponding throughline exemplified by Prodigal Son. Read the whole thing, as they say, but here are some representative quotes:

I for one would not have been unhappy if The New Yorker had given Acocella's slot to Marina Harss.

On 3/9/2019 at 5:15 PM, Rock said:

You would not be alone.

I third that motion.

Do we still not know who Macaulay's successor is or have I missed something?

17 minutes ago, nubka said:

So, we have Jonathan Stafford and Wendy Whelan.  Happy thought indeed.  Not.

Curious as to why you say "not"?  I'm not surprised at this choice.  Nor can I say with complete conviction that it should have been X, Y, or Z chosen instead. I  AM  surprised that there haven't been more comments here on the board.  I wasn't a partisan of anyone in particular, although I thought Woetzel would have been great if he weren't already taken.  Is it significant that the announcement came now,   soon after the clash between Martins and Stafford, rather than at the  gala in May.