Drew

I love Giselle, including Act I, but I think this is very good advice for someone who has never seen Giselle and been underwhelmed by video of it. I have to admit it's more or less what I tell anyone seeing Giselle for the first time--but whether you enjoy Act I or not, Act II is "must see" in my book, anyway at least once. Especially with corps of Mariinsky. As for Osipova? if you have the chance? I don't think you will regret seeing her Giselle. In fact, I think you will be very glad you did.

I agree that Kennedy Center is probably confident they can sell out Swan Lake with the Mariinsky (or close to it) no matter who is dancing. They may also feel it's not up to them to dictate casting for a company of the Mariinsky's prestige--even if they had the power to do so. And yet I do think the Kennedy Center cares about being treated and perceived as a top-level international venue--not the "provinces"--and must want the same dancers, say, New York or London or Beijing would get. That is, there is a prestige consideration as well as a business one when it comes to casting. Whatever our opinions I doubt it's a matter of vetoing anyone--they can hardly say to any company, 'well xyz is good enough for you but not for us'--but perhaps requesting/requiring certain dancers. In that sense, I assume pressure on Kennedy Center might be meaningful if (a big "if") they have any say in what the Mariinsky does (especially since this tour is a done deal anyway). Of course, they also probably don't take fans, even apparently well-informed fans, seriously especially when they can sell out in any case. What they might take seriously is the fact that Kondaurova was featured in the company's recent film broadcast; Lopatkina is...well, Lopatkina etc. (A fan boycott? with a chance to see the Mariinsky corps in Swan Lake and other soloists in small parts even fans who despair of the lead casting may break down and buy tickets. If I were in D.C. I would...)

I found Hallberg became more interesting as a performer when he started dancing opposite Osipova. And I do think that, with caveats, the Astaire Rogers quip that others have cited about Hallberg-Osipova is not entirely random here (she gives him sex, he gives her class). I think his Bolshoi experience has further contributed to his growth as a performer in ways one can see even when he dances with others. But I definitly appreciate the Hallberg-Osipova partnership--I also think that like most good/great partnerships it grows from performance to performance. I actually very much regret that they have danced together so little and fear that the partnership will never be all it could because their opportunities to dance together are so very few and likely are going to become fewer and/or restricted to pure "guest" drop ins without more extensive rehearsal/preparation etc.

I wonder if the non-compete clauses we have discussed elsewhere are an issue here -- not just for Hallberg, but also for Vasiliev and Osipova, who were guests with Bolshoi in their London season last month. As people no doubt remember, that was fatal in the planned Mikhailovsky season last year. The Bolshoi can sell tickets without any of those artists, though I'm sure the tour presenters would be happy to have them. I rather suspect, too, that Osipova's contract with ABT may have changed since she is no longer a principal with the company (and in any renegotiation Ardani would presumably have been ultra conscious of the issue).

Hmmm, thank you Mme. Hermine....though--I'm not convinced that's how Jim Kirk would react.

I was looking at Semenyaka's final Raymonda variation (via youtube) just the other day--it's just stunning. I did also see her Raymonda w. the Bolshoi when they were on tour: I remember loving it, but honestly can't remember any details of the performance--watching the video though reminded why I have always thought she was one of the greatest I was ever lucky enough to see. (Very much enjoyed the Tereshkina video, especially the second to last variation--the one in the beautiful purple tutu which is indeed rather better than the tutu she wears at her wedding.)

Economist is decidedly different from MBA....though I am sure that Kaiser knows plenty about the economics of the arts... Best wishes to Kaiser and Roberts.

Yes...that's probably one reason the 'plot' (as edited anyway) is so unappealling.

Allison (qua Breaking Pointe "character") interests me a lot more as the heroine of an internal "love!" versus "art!" debate than as the heroine of a more conventional love triangle. Qua dancer, she has always seemed quite interesting to me. At least as best one can tell watching a show that doesn't show all that much dancing. Actually, in this last episode, I felt the producers gave us more of students at Rock studio dancing than professionals at Ballet West dancing. Perhaps because it's the CW but I almost suspect that it's also because, on some level, they find it easier to grasp dance as a school recital than as a grown-up art.

It would be interesting, but...reality? on a reality show?? That's setting an awfully high standard . . .

He sure did!

I very much dislike the prologue and agree that it undermines the sheer magic and wonder of Odette's entrance. The ballet begins in the real world and takes us into the world of the lake. It's as if one of Shakespeare's comedies/romances were to open on the magical forest before back-tracking to the courtly-ordinary world. When the prince sees the swans flying across the sky (something at which Dowell was unequalled) it--and the music--hint at what's to come. He thinks he is getting away from it all and the swans are in and of themselves beautiful as suggested by the music. But then...what he finds is something still more mysterious. And a ballerina's FIRST entrance matters. Having her come in on the prologue does undermine the second-act entrance. Especially since even if Odette is a woman not a bird, she is a special kind of woman. One under a spell, in thrall to an enchanter. To meet her that way -- as the score clearly intends -- has a special impact for the audience as well as Siegfried. I can live with multiple versions of Swan Lake, but it dismays me no end that ABT's is so weak in so many ways. The Prologue is far from the worst of it.

I also very much appreciate the detailed reviews we have been receiving from London.

During the Tchaikovsky festival they did the one act version by Balanchine. It's based solely on the white acts, primarily Act II with some elements of Act IV. Not a staging of the entire ballet. I think it's fantastically beautiful. I don't know if the full length Martins version was done at all last year or not. Since the Balanchine is one act, it's always done in mixed-bill programs. if it's the full length production, then it's Martins (which does use some Balanchine choreography for Act II).

I would call it an austere, almost abstract Swan Lake. Per Kirkeby designed it in an abstract way with clashing difficult (not to say ugly) colors in Act I and a brooding slimplicity in Act III. For the Lake Scenes, if you can accept the modern "abstract" portrait the drops give of the natural setting, then it's actually rather beautiful. (If you look up some of Kirkeby's abstractions it will give you the idea and you can better judge if you will care for what he does here). The choreography for most of Act II is Balanchine's "version" of Ivanov which brings some additional geometric complexities to the configuration. Act III takes place in a grim "northern" court-- and I actually thought that, in some ways, that approach worked with the story, especially Martins' version of the story in which at the end, Siegfried lives on without Odette. No Siegfried suicide. As in Soviet productions, Martins also gives Siegfried a peppy court-jester sidekick and his is the only Swan Lake Jester I have ever really found interesting and even, at moments, liked, because he seems there to comment on or reflect some of the emotions of the ballet not just to jump a lot. For me ABT's current version (which, in many ways, I despise) is only more tolerable--and hardly that--because the very pretty and traditional sets and costumes work so well with the music whereas Martins' and Kirkeby's austere modernizing seems to fight against it. BUT--and for me it's a big but--I consider Martins' failure to be an intelligent one: I don't despise what he has done even if I don't really buy it either. And I feel as if I have a sense of what he was after: the Prince's pared down, narrow world versus the poetry of the Lake--and the prince finally having to accept his world in a spirit of melancholic stoicism. I also find Martins' "filler" choreography in Act I and parts of Act III to be superior to Mckenzie's. I'm a bit of an outlier in having good things to say about this production--and the Act I sets/costumes are, in particular, hard to take. If you were curious, you could think of it as a quasi-abstraction from Tchaikovsky's vision...Unfortunately, at this moment in history, it's actually hard to find a Swan Lake to recommend. If you would like the opportunity to explore NYCB as a company there are better options than the full-length Swan Lake for sure. One other note. Macaulay and others have nothing but praise, HUGE praise, for Sarah Mearns in this ballet. If I were in New York to see this production this time round, then she would be my first choice of ballerina--with even my other favorites, a very, very distant second. I have seen her in other roles and would say she is a physically very powerful dancer who puts a great deal of intensity and daring into her performances. Certainly, if you go then you will find it looks very little like the other Swan Lakes you have seen on Youtube. (As referred to by Jayne: in addition to Martin's full-length version, NYCB also sometimes does Balanchine's 'original' one act distillation of Acts II and IV which is rather remarkable and has a beautiful "traditional" backdrop. But not this season.)

Not the least bit boring when done well--which admitedly is almost never by 'western' companies. But certainly not boring with the Mariinsky and, as I recall, not boring in years past with the Bolshoi. Of course, there is still a sense of anticipation waiting for the pas de deux but that would be the case no matter what was going on...(NYCB's version has some of the national dances on pointe though not, as I recall, by the princesses. Someone else may remember better than I.)

Very interesting Buddy. According to Abramov--whose perfect honesty is not, I think, to be counted on--it isn't happening at the Mariinsky. He seems to say pretty directly that that is why the applause at the Marriinsky (again, according to him) is so tepid compared to the applause at the Bolshoi! Alas, unlike Buddy, Natalia, and others, I have almost always seen the Mariinsky on tour, but the few audiences I have heard at the Mariinsky theater were pretty tepid. Except, to some extent, for Lopatkina. Which certainly didn't feel like claquers. (Of course I'm a huge fan. Free tickets to cheer for Lopatkina? If you'll forgive the vulgarity, that sounds sort of like Demi Moore getting a million dollars to sleep with Robert Redford.) [Edited to add that I know I'm fortunate to be able to afford to see ballet if only occasionally]) I will say I heard one very loud and isolated BRAVO shouted for the Von Rothbart of Andre Soloviev after his initial leaping sequence. (I'm getting the name from someone else's report, since my program is packed away.) The "bravo" was so isolated and so loud I did wonder even at the time if it was coming from a paid supporter, but prefered to think it was simply a wild fan . . . or family member. Though indeed in Abramov's account, the claquers are in their way also wild (if corrupt) fans. But if we give him the last word, then it's a Bolshoi problem. Goodness knows, the Mariinsky--as great as it is--has its own problems.

Glad you enjoyed Bayadere --

I hate the repetitive depiction of dancers as uneducated party animals. And is that really what people--even teenagers--find entertaining to watch? Ugh... But do I find it rather entertaining that Alison's "plot" is a retread (a pale one, but still) of the classic ballet movie plot. Ballet or Love? To Dance or to Marry? It's the Red Shoes, but also Anne Bancroft versus Shirley Maclaine in Turning Pointe or even the Yvette Chauvire related plot in La Mort du Cygne -- in which the adoring ballet student-admirer (who commits a crime on behalf of Chauvire's ballet career) discovers Chauvire is willing to chuck being a ballerina to get MARRIED--at which point the student is suitably disillusioned. Chauvire's competitor, Mia Slavenska, on the other hand turns out to value ballet before everything. (In a recent video about Olga Smirnova, the young ballerina quite wonderfully announces her preference for being alone so she can do nothing but eat, think, drink,and breathe ballet. She may grow out of it--I guess it would be good for her if she does at least a little--but I love the performance of the single mindedness of the true ballerina-artist.) The Alison plot has got a bit of today's feminist overlay (maybe, not sure about that) plus the "love" in this case, as edited, seems a teensy bit equivocal. But still...I assume the arc is going to be that the Doctor boyfriend finally goes to see her dance and has a change of heart. At least I hope that's the arc. (Of course I respect whatever Alison decides blah, blah--her decision...real person...not a plot point etc....I just know what ballet myths I prefer. And what feminist ones, too, come to think of it.)

Very much enjoyed watching this. Thank you.

Sad news. He made a great contribution to classical ballet.

At the very least Dimitrichenko seems to be getting better advice than he was before; I admit I feel sort of relieved to see this kind of language coming from his 'camp.' (Obviously, at this stage, I don't believe his confession--however obtained--was just some hysterical fiction concocted by police.)

And when the sky is clear is...breathtakingly beautiful. At least I found it so...

Thank you, cubanmiamiboy and volcanohunter for the detailed reviews. It's exciting to feel like we're all a part of the action. ... As for the bows, I imagine that they're just used to a Russian audience, who wouldn't dream of ending the applause before at least two to three sets of individual bows, after which a small group of devotees usually makes them come back out even more times (I've never stayed until the end because it goes on so long). I can see how it would seem self-aggrandizing to a different audience, but I don't think it was meant that way. It's good to hear that London (my favorite ballet city in the world) responded politely. I join in the thanks. It has been great reading about the Bolshoi in London. About the bows: you could be right, but . . . I don't know. On tour, dancers from the Bolshoi and Mariinsky (in my experience) almost always milk the applause and take a bow if so much as one person is still applauding..softly. But although I've never seen the Bolshoi at home, I did finally get to see the Mariinsky at home and for several of the performances I attended the audience was plenty tepid generating no individual bows at the end--certainly no 'extras.' (In any case, these are companies that tour a lot.) But different customs are just that...different.

Unexpectedly (to myself), for this particular role, I found Sklute's reasoning made sense. It would be different if the company had several African-American dancers or maybe even if Josh was already well-known to Ballet West audiences. In the meanwhile there are other short-ish boy roles he could easily be cast in that wouldn't raise the same problems ...