BalanchineFan

On 1/25/2019 at 5:37 PM, fondoffouettes said:

This video of Nilas Martins from 1993 shows him performing that section on his heels, while Guerin just barely does the steps on her heels:

Here, in 1968, Farrell dances on her heels but Martins doesn't:

And in this 1960 clip, both d'Amboise and Adams don't dance on their heels:

I guess it must be one of those details of Apollo that has morphed over time, either because of Balanchine's tinkering or the way the steps have been passed down. I prefer the look of the passage as danced by Farrell and Martins.

THANK YOU for the clips!

My guess is that the steps have not been passed down incorrectly.  In Merrill Ashley's book she said that when Balanchine was coaching her in Sanguinic there were a lot of things Balanchine asked her to do that other dancers hadn't been comfortable doing. She worked on them, sometimes successfully getting what he wanted, sometimes getting closer, other times finding another sort of compromise. I'm thinking some version of that is what happened here. He always wanted the stepping on the heels, but he wouldn't push for it if the dancer couldn't master it. I wonder if earlier casts mention that particular step in their memoirs.

2 minutes ago, cobweb said:

Thanks for posting those great photos. I wonder if the original panels could have been brighter, but faded over time?

Anything is possible, but honest to god, I don't think the panels were ever lemony yellow. They seemed beige before.

57 minutes ago, nanran3 said:

I just read the article.  It is a little disturbing to think that Taylor Stanley might eventually leave the company to seek artistic fulfillment elsewhere.  Frankly when they lost Ramasar, Stanley was my only consolation among the principal men.  Not happy with the Angle brothers... 

I love, LOVE, Taylor Stanley's dancing. Glad they're giving him new opportunities. He seems like he ruminates on lots of things. He could be talking more about taking outside artistic projects than leaving NYCB. Most of the dancers seem to have something else going on (even historically), whether it's school, modeling, guest gigs, or working with other choreographers. There's a long Nutcracker season where NYCB sells out regardless of casting. Principals often take side gigs. I'd really miss Taylor Stanley if he left.

And I still wish Amar could come back.

On 1/5/2019 at 2:29 PM, Kathleen O'Connell said:

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?" 

I see your point, Kathleen. I had such a different experience. I think co-directing is working well with the four interim directors, and they have all those same decisions to make. Any two, or four, people in that job will have different natural talents. If they're smart they recognize that the job is big enough for all of them. 

Certain ballet masters already have areas of the rep that they specialize in, that would continue with AD's. They would have to come to agreement on all issues where one person didn't have more say than the others. If you can't convince your other Co-ADs then it's not the right thing to do. And once you can convince your Co-AD then you can convince all the naysayers. At least that's how it should be. Seriously, good parents do it all the time.

That's how a workplace functions where there's real respect.

On 1/5/2019 at 1:52 PM, Barbara said:

I think a co-AD situation would work with Jonathon Stafford and Wendy Whalen. He's had the years experience and she is the much-loved former ballerina who could be the "face" of the company/fundraiser. I realize this is an extremely simplified definition and doesn't tick all the job description boxes.  But this would allow others in the interim team to get back to their original jobs full time and by keeping Stafford would recognize the effort they've put in over the last year. 

I've run a company with a partner. IT WAS WONDERFUL! If you have the right chemistry and can back each other up it can be like having three people; each of you as individuals playing to your own strengths, and then the two of you together on the things that are the most difficult. It's like parents, it helps if there are two points of view. But the Co-ADs have to really respect each other and recognize that the job is easier with two people.

45 minutes ago, nanran3 said:

SO excited to see Ashly Isaacs will be back, though she seems to be cast only in Times are Racing at this point.  Where was she?? 

Also, I totally agree about the weird bow on the man in Tschai Pas.

Saw the rehearsal today.  Looks like it was the cast with Gerrity and Wellington and I thought that was Erica Pereira but maybe it was Sara Adams?  Who were the men besides Harrison Coll, Peter Walker and Schumacher?  I saw Jansen in the background but he's in a different cast. Also in the studio from the other cast, Paszcoguin, Kretzschmar, and Reichlen.

 I thought Ashly Isaacs was injured. Glad she's back even if it's in tennis shoes.

On 1/12/2019 at 12:29 AM, wonderwall said:

I wish Laracey would get a shot at Aurora, but I definitely think Woodward would be great.

I know Ashley Laracey has her fans, but she doesn't  project enough for me. She seems kind of small and pretty and bland.

Miriam Miller reminded me of a baby swan in Agon (not incredibly commanding as nanran3 said), but she held the pencheé (when the man falls to his back) so long it showed real guts and determination. I'm interested to see  how she develops. 

On 1/9/2019 at 9:27 AM, DC Export said:

Anyone know which dancers correspond to parts in Orpheus?

I think this is the order, but someone please correct me if I’m mistaken:

Eurydice : Sterling Hyltin

Orpheus : Gonzalo Garcia

the Dark Angel : Peter Walker

leader of the Bacchantes/Furies : Unity Phelan

after looking at wikipedia, the Furies and the Bacchantes seem to have a different dancers leading them. I saw Orpheus on television in the 70's or 80's but I don't remember the ballet well. I do remember being shocked though. I'm not sure what roles the men dance who follow Phelan. Perhaps one of them is Apollo.

On 1/8/2019 at 10:00 PM, nanran3 said:

Agree with everyone else re: Stanley in Apollo.  He will be mesmerizing.

Also glad to see Pazcoguin getting a role in Agon, but Miriam Miller in the principal part?  (Head scratch here). 

Also notice they're casting LeCrone more than Peter had done in the last few years.  

All in all really looking forward to getting back into the theater!!

Miriam Miller has danced the lead in Agon numerous times. She danced it last performance of the spring 2018 season. That and Titania put her on the map as an apprentice, I believe. (Or maybe it was only Titania that she danced as an apprentice).  What’s the head scratch?

On 10/27/2018 at 10:24 PM, Fleurfairy said:

Exactly. Whelan has no experience running a company at all, let alone one of the biggest companies in the world. I hope the Board uses common sense in this regard not  political correctness. I think the interim team is doing a good job so far and wouldn’t be upset if they remained the Artistic Team permanently. 

From Whelan appearance at Balanchine at City Center (she spoke on opening night) I believe she worked on that festival. She was an artistic associate at City Center 2014-16 and both Restless Creature and her other projects have had considerable touring.

55 minutes ago, cobweb said:

... and as noted up-thread, there are very varied reactions to these programs. [...]

Sure, I suppose part of the point of this festival was to show how Balanchine is carried out around the world, but the grand manners/mannerisms, and milking the audience for applause, just seemed out of place in modern New York City. Still, it was great fun to see Kimin Kim. His effortless ease is wonderful to see. 

As for the Agon pas de deux, I see Maria Kowroski and Amar Ramasar. The couple from POB, Sae Eun Park and Hugo Marchand, were woefully unsuited to this piece. On the other hand, I saw them do the pas de deux from Midsummer Night's Dream twice, and I loved it. Wanting to see them do this piece again, was part of why I splurged on a ticket for the final performance. They were exquisite. 

Something notable I've learned, that I did not know about myself before, is that I really like ballet as performed by American companies. As beautiful as the Russian and the French schools may be (I did not see the Royal Ballet), I relate more immediately to the forthright American style, and I particularly enjoyed seeing Miami City Ballet, San Francisco Ballet, and the Joffrey.

I thought the POB couple performed Agon PPD well enough, but something else struck me about the whole thing. NYCB tends to have taller women. Most of the foreign companies have women that are short and tiny. Sae Eun Park, is an example. Hugo Marchand had to duck under her leg in arabesque when he was on one knee. I've only seen the woman's leg sail over her partner. Agon should be danced by a taller woman, or at least a couple that are more closely matched in size. There's another section where the man supports the woman under the arms as she does a series of splits, two or three times going upstage on alternating diagonals, twice coming downstage. Marchand was so much taller that her pelvis couldn't reach the ground. Do these companies have enough tall women for Balanchine rep?

11 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

I wish someone would make a good documentary about Happel and his costume shop. A binge-able, multi-part series documenting a "year in the life" might even be in order. I appreciate NYCB's little costume gala featurettes about the costume design and construction process, but Happel and his artisans deserve a brighter spotlight.

I was at the SAB open house this year and they had a presentation on costumes. It wasn't Happel, but a man spoke about how costumes for Concerto Barocco and Serenade had changed over time and about how each costume has a book showing design, decoration placement and fabric swatches, (including fabric costs, where to purchase etc.) for all of its elements. The costume shop is on top of it!

15 hours ago, Drew said:

What has been most interesting to me reading about this festival is the wide variation in people's responses to the same performances--and I've found the same variety (and more, for example, regarding the Joffrey) on other social media. One always reads different and even conflicting opinions here at Ballet Alert [...]

  But it's not that often, as far as I remember, to read such a wide and widely swinging variety of responses to so many performances and not easily categorizable responses either since everyone is interested in Balanchine at the least. And where one person's favorite performance is another's worst disaster and yet another person's nice and another person's meh. Perhaps this reveals how strongly people feel about the different ways Balanchine can/should be danced and what they expect from non-NYCB  as well as non-American performances. 

 Though there does seem to be something consistently wrong with the City Center stage that so many falls are happening -- Canbelto commented on this on her blog too.

I haven’t spoken to any dancers about the floor surface, but I trust it won’t surprise anyone to read my differing opinion of the reason for the slips and falls. I think it’s part and parcel of the occasion; bringing different companies together, a different routine, the excitement of seeing heros or idols up close, the excitement of the unknown. 

The first day of the festival Unity Phelan posted an IG film taken just before company class. The little films disappear after 24 hours, but the excitement in the room was palpable. She highlighted a dancer from another company at the barre, a friend and/or someone whose dancing she admired. After a close up view all the dancers are probably comparing their own interpretations to the dancing of this vast number of other people (even if only subconsciously), changing routines and approaches to movement that were proven by time. The snow globe has been shaken and the flakes now fly. Until they settle anything might happen.

On 11/3/2018 at 8:31 AM, Ashton Fan said:

Interested to learn that Anna Rose appeared in Tarantella with Sambe in what must have been her role debut  and also in Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux which I think must have been a joint debut and that in both cases they were well received. But if the RB's dancers no longer perform Balanchine as they once did with a heavy foreign accent  that is in large part the result of no longer having such a pronounced house performance style. The more idiomatic Balanchine is perhaps at the cost of a less sure grasp of Ashton's stylistic obsessions and quirks. I had thought that perhaps the Mariinsky's dancers might have had the sense to conform more to the requirements of the choreography when appearing in New York . Did they really cut bits of the choreography in Tchai  as reported ?

Yes, the Russians cut bits of the choreography. It's a star vehicle, so in a certain sense we should expect dancers to tailor it to their particular gifts. Somewhere on Youtube there is a compilation of Balanchine sanctioned (at least in several cases) changes to the male variations. Still, Tereshkina doesn't hop backwards in her variation very long. She took two or three hops and then turned and ran to the corner. She doesn't really gargouillade (Patty McBride didn't either). Kim leapt so high in his variation that he ran out of space and stood smiling in the corner waiting for the music to catch up. He's good looking, the audience didn't seem to mind. The dancers often exited early, leaving the stage empty before their partner's next entrance. They gave a spectacular performance in many ways, but it wasn't really Balanchine, imo, and they weren't terribly connected to each other emotionally... aside from the play acting in the bows.  I heard the couple from the Royal Ballet had a much better version of Tschai Pas that also brought down the house.

Kimin Kim DOES have a spectacular and amazing jump. Truly gasp worthy. But that doesn't make an entire ballet.

I thought the Joffrey showed what a disadvantage it is not to have Balanchine training. 4T has eleven soloist/principal roles and a large corps de ballet. They did an admirable job, but you can't fake or coach your way through ten years of training in a few weeks (I have no idea how long they've had this piece).  Colleen Neary, who staged it, must have had to pick her battles. It was accurate and recognizable as 4T, but the use of space, the off balance moments, many of the leg positions were not Balanchine. A Balanchine attitude has the knee directly behind the hip and the lower leg bent behind the body to the opposite side. It's super crossed over. So is tendu to the front, with the toe ending up even with center of the body (read Merrill Ashley's book). It's extreme, and the dancers, HIS dancers are super pulled up through the hips and middle. The Joffrey dancers haven't mastered that and it makes a difference in the tension and energy of the entire piece. I think the Joffrey cast did a laudable job, the men often stronger than the women, but they also showed just HOW MUCH there is to master in this choreography.

All that said, I really enjoyed it and I think the whole festival is wonderful. I loved the Paris Opera ballet couple in Midsummer PPD. My friends thought it woud have been better programmed before Tschai Pas. Calm you down, then rile you up.

It was a beautiful opening night performance tonight. Miami City Ballet gave a beautiful and moving Serenade. The audience is closer to the dancers at City Center so we were viewing it from another angle.  Jeanette Delgado was superb. 

The Mariinsky dancers brought a different style to Tschai Pas. Lovely at times, puzzling at other times. Kimin Kim has such ballon he looked like he might jump off the stage. I’m not sure he was able to fit all the choreography into the available space, but he was a hit with the audience. They also take a lot of time with their bows in the middle of the piece. Perhaps that’s the style in Russia. It seems self indulgent in NYC.

Tarantella was a lot of fun and really connected with the spirit of the piece and with the audience. 

More later.... I’m interested to hear what others thought. 

On 10/22/2018 at 4:32 AM, l'histoire said:

IIRC, one of the constant features of the reviews of Farrell's revival of Don Q was that "hey it's nice to see the genius not at his best, in an emotionally important moment" (someone upthread I believe described it as a "time capsule" - it does seem so, when looking for the transcendent). But, I think of Acocella's review of it from the New Yorker ("Backstory," 25 July 2005), where she is discussing the solo we are all raving over & how Farrell  ("She") differed from her ("they") dancers:

Anyways, as a cultural historian who has to spend a lot of time reading *really not good* cultural products (far worse than Balanchine's Don Q, I assure you), yes, there is much to be learned by things that don't quite work (or don't work at all). I've built my career on studying things that weren't terribly successful, actually, because they are often more revealing than the "hits." As I like to remind my students, "I don't care if you LIKE it, that's not why we're watching or reading it." But obviously, someone going to ballet for an evening of pleasure is not going to want to pay money to see something they aren't going to like for some educational reason. The big problem is, unlike the plays I deal with (which I can just read in script form - it loses something, but I can still take in something the original author wanted to convey), you can't just "read" a ballet without having it in front of you, with dancers. Even if you have notations: way different than dealing with a drama script. What IS the answer for ballet? I really don't know.

But ultimately, they CAN'T "revive" it without her permission, at least as far as I understand. 

Couldn't they do a revival that is similar in scope to the ENCORES revivals that City Center does? Fewer sets and costumes, limited rehearsal. If they don't want to use the theater they could stage it in a studio at SAB and just invite company members and interested intellectuals/ballet historians... but VIDEOTAPE IT FOR POSTERITY, like they do with the Balanchine Trust rehearsals. The YouTube videos of DQ are beautiful, but the Govrin solo is so dark, and her costume so dark that I can't see anything. Farrell was lucky to be wearing white.

As I understand it, the Choreographic Institute works on a similar level (limited rehearsal time, studio environment, NYCB dancers paid scale during non-working weeks).

On 10/19/2018 at 1:08 PM, FPF said:

I haven't watched the whole thing, but this is exactly what I noticed so far. She talks about what you do, he talks about what I did. 

Also, thank you for posting this BalanchineFan.

You're so much more concise.

I realize now that someone else posted the same rehearsal video upthread.

6 hours ago, Emma said:

Thank you for posting that video! It's so beautiful. And Mimi Paul seems like such a great coach for Megan, bringing out her extensions to their fullest and make sure she danced as swoony (is that a word? with full sweep?) as possible. 

Mimi Paul looks like an excellent coach.

While John Clifford is certainly knowlegable, I was struck by the number of times he said "I." 

I never did... I always... here, I did [such and such]...

Most good coaches keep the emphasis on the younger generation. They realize that no one has to, should, or is even truly capable of dancing like another person. It's about empowering the younger generation to make choices in keeping with the style and aims of the choreography.... about showing them options that broaden the possibilities, options that make it more musical, bigger, more varied, more dynamic, more in keeping with the original intention. Clifford calms down a bit in the video, but I found the first six or seven minutes difficult to watch. It's one thing to talk about what Balanchine said in the studio, what he wanted, how he saw the movement. It's another thing entirely to say, in effect, "do it like me," even if you were once a good dancer. It's like he puts himself between the dancers and the ballet.

Mimi is entirely different. She says "you." "You do this, you do that, then you're completely caught up in the music." She gets herself out of the way and helps the dancers focus on their tasks. It's more than a semantic issue. It shows respect for the dancers in the room. They are also artists. They are going to be out there onstage. They have to assimilate whatever new information is being imparted. It's good coaching to say "you." If "ballet is now... there is only now" is true, as Balanchine said, then "I did this" doesn't really have a place in the room. Yes, build on what all the dancers did way back when, but recognize that it's not about your personal glory days of old, but about the new generation and their possibilities.

On 10/11/2018 at 9:24 PM, Drew said:

I'm a big fan of today's NYCB and think Martins did many things right, but it was still disconcerting to read on Hyltin's instagram that she felt couldn't even make use of everything McBride was telling her in rehearsal this season because she had been doing it so differently for so long and didn't have time to integrate it properly. ...I don't think Clifford will be next director of NYCB or SAB (and if I were a betting person I'd bet that isn't what he's after) but I'm all in favor of bringing back dancers who worked with Balanchine to the State Theater. I know it's not without drawbacks -- especially since different dancers learned things differently...and at different moments in Balanchine's trajectory. And presumably tact may be called for in certain situations...But still, bringing in Villella and McBride especially is one of the things the interim team has done that has most caught my attention. And having recently seen fantastic results with Farrell's own company shortly before it folded, I'm hoping Farrell can be brought back as well. That is, Clifford may not be wrong when he says "so much has been lost over the years." What may be wrong is imagining that change is not inevitable no matter who is doing the coaching--because "times are racing." But why not preserve as much knowledge as possible not just on tapes by the Balanchine foundation but on the bodies of dancers at NYCB?

Here's a YouTube video of Mimi Paul and John Clifford coaching Megan Fairchild and Jared Angle in Glinkiana (Valse Fantaisie). It may answer every question you ever had about what John Clifford is like in rehearsal. 

On 10/15/2018 at 9:56 PM, ABT Fan said:

Also, they don't have guest artists who take precious opportunities away from homegrown dancers or principals who also dance with other companies thus only performing with their "home" company a few times a year, much unlike ABT (though the later has done away with their heavy guest artist policy for now it seems). They are all together all year long.

NYCB dancers also have so much more repertory. When one dancer gets injured it's like EVERYONE ends up picking up the slack. One injury can richochet up the entire schedule.

16 hours ago, Helene said:

I disagree:  I once went through the entire Balanchine Catalogue, and after removing the pieces d'occasions, the redos, the works for operas, plays, musical theater, and movies, and other pieces that weren't part of ballet programs, the number of surviving ballets is quite extraordinary, especially given how prolific he was, and of the ones that are still performed, I think very few of them are meh.  Some are stronger than the others, some are problematic, and some are in a style that some people just don't like, but that doesn't make them meh.  Balanchine had a very high hit rate, in my opinion.  His experiments were when he was a student, and he had a lot of practice making short ballets for the opera, both in Europe and at the Metropolitan Opera for a couple of years.

I'm not arguing against new works; I'm arguing against expecting works at the same level as the average Balanchine ballet.  And when new works are performed next to masterworks, they tend not to hold up well, but when they do, it's a bonus.

Hey, you're not disagreeing with me! Balanchine said it. Maybe the 10-1 ratio was meant for the person he was speaking to. For someone who choreographed very quickly Mr. B may have wanted to emphasize the work that goes into it. I've read that he spent a great deal of time learning the music he was choreographing to, playing it, analyzing, etc.

16 minutes ago, canbelto said:

For those who were curious, Robert Fairchild did make a return to bid Joaquin farewell and he and Tiler Peck were onstage together.

Aha! THAT'S who that was! Who was the woman in pink who greeted Joaquin last and danced with him at the end? Was it his mother?

What a beautiful program. De Luz is such a wonderful dancer and I hope everything goes well for him.

On 10/13/2018 at 3:55 PM, Helene said:

What I'm hearing is that the new choreography at NYCB isn't worth many views and doesn't hold up to the masterworks, which is not surprising, since few choreographers have had a hit/stick rate like Balanchine, Robbins, Macmillan, Ashton, and Tudor, at least when their primary and secondary companies were committed to training and performing them.  With Ratmansky, it's harder to tell what his stick rate will be with ABT: it seems to be stronger at NYCB and other companies for whom he has choreographed, and, in the case of Concerto DSCH, among a number of other companies; his focus now seems primarily on Petipa reconstructions at companies that have the money and the commitment.  Enthusiasm for Peck and Wheeldon seems to be among the companies outside NYCB for whom they created one or two works, which also isn't a shock, since NYCB is/has been their labs, and most experiments aren't that successful or groundbreaking but are steps going forward, and the ones that are the ones that have been are performed by other companies, like "Year of the Rabbit," "After the Rain Pas de Deux," and "Polyphonia," and have had legs.  

Much European contemporary ballet -- that's 40 years worth at this point -- has never been to the taste of NYCB audiences whose eyes have been honed by neoclassicism.  And that's aside from the main challenge that NYCB faces, which is that its rep is so vast every season -- no other major company in the world comes close, not the Royal Ballet, Mariinsky Ballet, Bolshoi Ballet, the two-venue Paris Opera Ballet, Dutch National Ballet  -- that they don't even have the rehearsal and coaching time for what they have, let alone time to workshop new styles and dedicate company classes in the lead-up to them, even if that's not a deep dive much of anywhere in North America.  It shouldn't come as a surprise that a lot of dancing has to happen via shorthand, that the dancers tend to slot into what they know, which is a cycle in itself, and given the strain of different styles on their bodies, they need to be self-protecting to be standing in any way by season's end.  Paris Opera Ballet has long been described as being two companies within a company, with the contemporary branch and the classical/neoclassical branch, and there had been much hair-pulling about appointing etoiles who were primarily in the contemporary branch.  NYCB wouldn't have that luxury, even if it wanted to go in that direction.  The closest it got was having a tight group of hand-picked Robbins dancers when he was still alive.

 

I'm of the opinion that creating new work is what keeps artists growing. Having the choreographer and the dancer in the room together is what makes a ballet company different from an art museum. This conversation also brings to mind Balanchine's famous advice to young choreographers. I'll have to paraphrase but it was something like:

You want to be a choreographer? Make a ballet. Then make another one, then another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and another, and then maybe you'll make a good ballet.

The point is that Balanchine's expected ratio was about 10 meh ballets to one good one. I understand not all audiences will want to be in on the growing process, but others love that. I love Balanchine ballets, but I find the experience of watching them dull if the dancers aren't challenged by working with living choreographers. When I see people dance Petipa it bores me to tears. It's so slow, the vision of women is so stilted and artificial. NYCB is about the artistic spirit of creation, about finding something new, expanding the art form, as well as keeping the Balanchine/Robbins rep alive. 

Do any of the 'Balanchine/Robbins only" proponents prefer to watch films of Balanchine and Robbins ballets (and not come to the theater)? You can see the original casts and if the film quality is good those performances have the benefit of being coached by the choreographers themselves.  Anyway, I'm rambling.

I think there have been a lot of "keepers" among the new ballets. Helene mentions Year of the Rabbit, After the Rain ppd, and Polyphonia. I would add Everywhere We Go, Rodeo, and Times Are Racing. I don't know if other companies are performing them, but maybe it's just because they don't have enough dancers. Another judge of a successful new ballet is whether a young/beginning choreographer gets new opportunities to choreograph. Lauren Lovette made a new piece for ABT 2, I believe. I think that's a very positive step.  I don't think many other ballet companies are able to develop ballet choreographers.

On 10/12/2018 at 2:41 PM, Rick said:

Curious that no one has posted about Prodigal Son on Wednesday night with Joaquin de Luz and Maria Kowroski. It was so amazing. I didn't think that the partnering would work due to the difference in their height but Joaquin seemed so young, vulnerable, and powerless against Maria's femme fatale siren. I'll definitely be there on Sunday for joaquin's farewell.

Prodigal Son is supposed to have a height discrepancy. The Siren wears that crazy tall hat, dances primarily on pointe and the Son crouches (wide bent legs) throughout most of their dancing together. She's chillingly dominant, as per the choreography. Why did you think it would pose a problem?

3 hours ago, FPF said:

I saw it just the one time, almost 30 years ago at ABT, and have never seen it since. I would love to see it again (from either company). 

Miami City Ballet performed Bourree Fantasque when they came to NYC a few years ago. It's a lovely ballet, funny, too. It would be great if NYCB would do it again! There's a lot of rep that's been missing for too long. I kind of think that if Peter Martins didn't already know the ballet he didn't program it.

I miss the variety of programs they used to have. It was interesting in past years (ok, waaay past years) to look at the season and try to pick a night where you saw certain ballets in combination. 4T would be paired with leotard ballets one night and with tutu ballets the next. I thought maybe they changed it because it was easier for the crew to set up for the same combinations of ballets (21st Century, or All-Balanchine 1, 2, or 3, for example). Mostly I hate having to look in several places to remember exactly which ballets I have tickets to. You know, "what's the name of the program with Dances at a Gathering on it?" or "is All-Balanchine 1 the Apollo-Agon-Orpheus night or is it the Walpurghisnacht-Ballo-Bizet?