Drew

I will put in a word for Heinz Claus as well--I still recall his sense of anguish.

Thank you for the report--I almost always have to make corrections to my posts.

Although my knowledge of the company is minimal I was rather pleased with the news about Messerer.

I'm a little wary of youtube as well (and not a huge Onegin fan obviously), but I watched the Act I mirror duet and Act III duet out of curiosity regarding Smirnova. In the former I thought that -- as best I could judge on youtube -- her dancing looked beautiful, but could perhaps have afforded to be less beautiful and more...well...fraught with newly discovered emotions. But I WAS very moved by the final pas de deux; I thought there it appeared she was giving herself up more to the emotions. (Raw emotion was certainly what Haydee brought to it.)

There are many different versions of the ballet: one way to choose a tape or DVD might be to take a look at excerpts of what's on youtube and see what you think would be worth investing in...I place little historical faith in the Millicent Hodson/Kenneth Archer "reconstruction" of the Nijinsky version, but on youtube you can find it being done by the Joffrey and the Mariinsky. This is part I of the Mariinsky (w. Gergiev conducting) though the actual performance doesn't begin until 5:43 into it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ViymK-35eU I have read several critics express the view that Bejart's version is one of the better ones if not the best of those for which we have a living theatrical tradition. (Hodson and Archer were working from very fragmentary evidence.) I have no opinion on about the Bejart (haven't seen it), but when finding the Mariinsky one I noticed youtube also has at least one complete performance of that version. While the so-called Nijinsky version can be found on DVD w. the Mariinsky, I don't know whether one one can find the Bejart on DVD or tape...

Volcanohunter: Thank you very much for clarifications about translation....

Malahkov was/is one of my very favorite male dancers -- but I'm thinking he (like so many others in this mess) is not exactly disinterested. I can't resist adding that neither of the two reconstructions that I saw during Iksanov's time (Corsaire or Coppelia) remotely seemed to me artistic failures, especially not the Coppelia which I would have described as an unequivocal success. (I don't know how these productions were received in Moscow though. The Coppelia was certainly well-received in London. And of course, I'm just a fan not a professional.) And would not the "new ballets" that Malakhov is criticizing include the Ratmansky premiers? Including Bright Stream? Color me puzzled--or a person of very different taste than one of my favorite dancers... [edited to add that clarifications about Malakhov translation below make the above comments besides the point: the translation was just mucked up...]

I confess I have never thought pique turns looked any less (or more) like "tricks" than fouettes (albeit easier ones, at least based on the number of ballerinas I've seen who can do them well)...As discussed above, in Act III of Swan Lake the fouettes can be thought of as playing a role in hypnotizing/seducing the prince, an idea which seems to me at least as plausible as thinking of the piques as encircling him. (Was he on stage?). It really depends on what the ballerina does with these steps.

There are a number of great American ballerinas past and present.--I'll say for me that "American" in this context means trained primarily (not necessarily exclusively) in U.S. and has U.S. family background (say, a parent) wherever they happen to be born. I'll name one from the recent past who, in my judgment, ranks as one of the all time greats from any continent or any tradition: Gelsey Kirkland...

In her new book Balanchine and the Lost Muse (Lidia Ivanova), Elizabeth Kendall writes of Olga Preobrazhenskaya that I love that last mental image. I also love the fact that a dancer would have the courage and imagination to personalize a key scene like that. It's interesting that (according to this account) she disdained such 'tricks' but several of her most famous pupils (the baby ballerinas) were famous for doing exactly that particular trick -- even doubling down on it (so to speak) -- and when they were still just barely out of her studio.

Always interesting for me to hear about the top ballerinas in San Francisco--though alas I have only ever seen the company once and that some years ago.

I suspect that what enraged Soto was that Macaulay singled out four NYCB ballerinas/Principals (whatever you prefer) as not really ballerinas (because not ballerinas all the time) while he did NOT name names in any other cases of leading woman dancers he considered less than genuine ballerinas, just those four. He didn't take a knock at Kent (by name) to praise Murphy, but he did take a knock at Whelan, Bouder etc. to praise Peck, Mearns, etc. Likewise he didn't take a knock at other SF Ballerinas or Miami City Ballet Ballerinas, etc. to praise the ones he praised. When he took that knock, he also did so by arguing that these dancers were not ballerinas in all of their roles--leaving me at least rather to wonder if he had really seen all the non New York ballerinas he mentions in anywhere near as many roles as he has seen these NYCB ballerinas...because, although he travels around, it still seems unlikely given the realities of geography and, indeed, given the limits of some of those company's repertory per season. He finds the younger generation at NYCB more exciting than the older. That's an opinion I can respect and, in all honesty, partly share. But the same point could have been made without listing the older generation. Why do so? Well, perhaps because NYCB is arguably the most important company in the U.S.--though many on this thread may disagree I do think it's probably Macaulay's own opinion. (And this--or something close to it--might also be the reason, condescending as it may seem, not to bother knocking ballerinas/principals at other companies about whom he has reservations: 'who considers them ballerinas anyway?' is the implication....) Or perhaps because he knows many of his readers will be wondering why he doesn't mention those dancers in particular, so he would just as soon name names...and give his article a stronger dollop of controversy to boot. Still, whatever the reasons, given the specificity with which he singles out NYCB ballerinas to criticize in an article whose focus is really elsewhere I can understand why Soto or others might be upset. I personally wasn't particularly angry, but I did feel he was being unfair. I don't think he is much worried about that and I do think critics have to write to garner debate and discussion and I suppose he has done that. I could wish he had found a different way to do so. (Surely the "American" angle might have been sufficient to lead to lively debate...and could have been developed more by contrasting American with non-American ballerinas. He wildly praises Mearns' Odette-Odile at every opportunity as he does again here: does he think it would play in Moscow or St. Petersburg? That in itself could make for a pretty controversial article.)

I laughed a little reading your last sentence. 'Cause there's never any unnecessary drama at the Bolshoi . Anyway, I do sort of doubt they are thinking of Onegin as second-rate--even if they should be--and, whatever one thinks of it, Tatianna is not just any old heroine to a Russian audience...

If what we have heard is true, then I don't think Zahkharova should have walked out--of course she doesn't get to decide these things. But that said,I do not think she should be characterized as an aging ballerina whose time it has come to "fade." She could quite certainly have danced the opening and no-one would have blinked or said "she is too old to be a good Tatiana." To speak more generally, I like to see the next brilliant young ballerina as much as anyone--in fact I am dying to see Smirnova--but companies need to value mature ballerinas at the height of their careers. Nor do I think the way Zakharova was pushed forward super early at the Mariinsky was always to her benefit. She became a better dancer when she left the Mariinsky a little later in her career and started working at the Bolshoi. In fact, whether or not the Bolshoi administration was involved in this decision, I could not help wondering if the heads of the Bolshoi were not just as happy to avoid giving Halberg the opening Onegin--that is, if they might prefer not to have the company's first performance of Pushkin's iconic hero danced by the American who has been away for a year. And (speculating further), who knows? perhaps as much for his own sake as anything else. Surely critics (and god knows who else) would be waiting to pounce and quite indifferent to Hallberg's success in the role in the United States. The source material is sacred territory for Russian culture even if it's Cranko's ballet and the Stuttgart's signature. (As an aside: I hope that Vishneva's Bolero was more exciting in the theater than it looked on the video posted above.)

An interview with Obratzova in which she pays warm tribute to Filin (whom she had just visited in Aachen). Unsurprisingly, she is rather less warm about Fatayev, but also about claims that Filin is faking his injuries: "It’s inhuman and absolutely incorrect to say such a thing . . . These people just don’t put themselves in his or his mother’s shoes. I saw his eyes, his skin – it’s a tragedy.” http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/3638845e-e323-11e2-bd87-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YG3f5xvt

Many Russians dance the rose adagio this way (including major dancers in my memory)...

Major cast shuffling among principals, long after most people have bought tickets, seems to be the norm for the Bolshoi. At least that was my experience when they visited Orange County in spring 2010. I guess it's a warning to be prepared for this during their visit to New York in July 2014? Can Bolshoi experts let us know if this impression is correct? Or is this just a fluke. I am not a Bolshoi expert but, in my experience, yes...it is correct.

One problem with Les Sylphides is that it's often danced as if it's mostly of interest to ballet historians, but it can be brought to life and ABT has the dancers to do so if properly coached (a big 'if' I know). "Theme and Variations" is also from ABT's "past," though it's Balanchine and danced, now, as part of Tchaikovsky Suite no. 3 at NYCB. I appreciate having it live on in its original (or more or less original) form as an independent work. I have sometimes wondered why ABT doesn't revive Intermezzo or At Midnight--and even thought that perhaps Feld doesn't want ABT to dance them now. But that's speculation. I do share your bias towards rep--though I also think they should give some attention to having better productions of some of the full length classics. Still, not all the rep they used to do was that great qua rep; from the 70's I remember a lot of Tetley and excerpted pas de deux (Don Q and Corsaire), and though I remember liking Ailey's The River, I'm not persuaded it would hold up as a masterwork. They also tried to bring in some Neumeier without much success. Baryshnikov worked with a number of modern dance choreographers and brought in a lot of Balanchine. I'm happy to see some Balanchine at ABT (modern dance less so), but New York doesn't need two Balanchine companies. Some of the excitement of the repertory programs, too, especially as one goes further back into the company's history, was the opportunity to see premiers: with Ratmansky ABT now has a steady stream of premiers by a major choreographer. The most sought after in classical ballet. How will those ballets look in a few decades? Not sure. But I am sure the company today would be immeasurably more boring without them. I think bringing Ashton into the mix has been a huge plus too. Tudor's living repertory is a small one and I have never entirely accepted the view that Tudor-De Mille can be a realistic, ongoing basis for ABT seasons in the 21st century. I realize for many Tudor is the peer of Balanchine--I myself don't think so, though I consider him a great choreographer. I do think Ashton is and since ABT has proven success dancing Ashton, I'm delighted they are making him an important part of their repertory. I do not think it has to be at the expense of Tudor, though, and would definitely like to see Tudor revived more frequently. Insofar as Ratmansky cares about story-telling traditions in ballet, his work does also stand in some kind of relation to the Tudor heritage, though not a direct or close one. As I was typing Bingham posted -- what a great idea! I would love to see a Burlaka or Burlaka-Ratmansky staged Paquita. Either a full length (if it could be done) or just the final act.

For me, an unexpected highlight of the Sylvia performances I saw was the Act II, scene II pas de deux as danced by Bolle and Semionova. His strength as a partner and her long, beautiful limbs meant the trickiest partnering highlights became genuine dance highlights--as mentioned above the flying fish dive was just spectacular especially the first one (perhaps because it was the first one) as she freely leapt towards him and was just swept into a gorgeous position with (seeming) total ease. But also the opening, entrance lift of the adagio in which Bolle was able to phrase the walk, as I assume is set in the choreography, with little dips every few steps, while holding her by her lower calf with her other knee resting on his shoulder as her long body extended upwards--skywards really with these two tall dancers--and again with total ease and grace from both dancers. Semionova has yet to fully win me over, but I also appreciated the way she caught the whiff of Aurora in the pas de deux, though I rather wished she would lose the frozen ballerina smile she sported throughout that portion of the ballet. Matthews as a last minute replacement for Gomez on Sat afternoon had tremendous difficulty with Murphy in the opening of the adagio: the whole of it was rather spoiled and as he very shakily let Murphy down and as her position became more and more awkward I almost wondered if she would injure her knee; you can bet that they didn't go for broke with the fish dives which were respectable though with a very bunched up ballerina tutu messing the line up rather. Otherwise, at the performance I attended I would say his Aminta was respectable and he does look the part. I could wish I had seen Murphy with Gomez , but it remains a fabulous role for her and she was terrific in Act I especially and had the freest upper body of the ballerinas I saw in her Act II, scene II (or, I should say, Act III) variation. Thought I would also mention Messmer's authority and beauty as Terpsichore, especially as it may well be the last time I get to see her dance. In this ballet, in the final tableaux, Terpsichore is held aloft upstage center behind the lovers as if to say that dance is what presides over the ballet's reconciling of opposing forces (Bacchic indulgence, Virginal independence, Loving desire). It's great to see a ballerina in that role and I used to love Part in it, but I think Messmer may have been as good or almost. In the Barcarolle, Thursday night and Sat afternoon, when she, Abrera as Ceres, and Boylston as Persephone were all lined up next to each other, I found them all lovely in rather different ways, but I thought it was Messmer alone who looked like a fully-fledged ballerina. A few years back when ABT did Sylvia I remember the opening dances for fauns and other woodland creatures as just magical: I found the scene less magical this time around because at every performance I saw at least one or two dancers (a male dancer here, a female dancer there, or even two of them together) was behind the beat or otherwise uncoordinated with the rest of the dancers. Ashton's effects depend on greater cleanness and precision from everyone. But the ballet is, on the whole, danced well by the company and at every performance I saw the Act III ensemble dancing was very enjoyable.

I would gladly trade Cinderella to have La Fille Mal Gardee back again. I think the last time I saw it I was a child. Is the Ashton Cinderella different from the Cinderella that was done a couple of years ago? I couldn't quite get used to the ballerina with one bare foot and the other foot in a pointe shoe. I believe the Cinderella ABT did a couple of seasons ago was by James Kudelka.

I find Manon dreary (a ballet that even first-rate ballerinas cannot save) but, like Onegin, have come to accept it as inevitable. I have been avoiding it but fear that to see the dancers I want to see, however inadequately, I may end up going to see it after all. As far as revivals go, I remember Taming of the Shrew as unbearable except for the extraordinary charisma of Haydee and Cragun. I never went to see it at ABT. I would love to see Raymonda again -- even in the Holmes-Mckenzie staging -- though a Ratmanksy/Burlaka effort would be very appealing. (They may feel that would be superfluous given the reconstruction done by at La Scala mentioned by Faux Pas. I don't know that ABT could get hold of the La Scala production, but if they could that would be fabulous...) I have been sorry and a bit surprised that they have not revived Fille lately since they have many dancers they could cast in it. But I agree, too, that if they are acquiring Ashton's Cinderella (a wonderful version) that they are unlikely to revive Fille the same season. I think if ABT wants to revive a less-done 19th-century ballet it might be interesting for them to try to do a staging of Napoli, though certainly it would be a huge challenge to the dancers and need a lot of preparation. For 20th-century ballets I would be very interested to see them dance the Ratmansky Lost Illusions and I think, from the bits of video I have seen, it might suit them. It is not only set in the 19th century but sort of riffs on 19th-century styles of ballet. It also has four lead roles--more opportunities for more dancers--and one pair of leads was originally created on Osipova and Vasiliev. I am also eager to see them dance the entire Shostakovitch trilogy again, as I would love the opportunity to see it entire. And I would not mind if they would try to do at least a few more mixed-bill programs at the Met--I genuinely think these could be marketed more aggressively so the company could afford to do them there. But who knows?

Vorontzova is young and, under the circumstances, I can overlook bad judgment from her and any general hysteria she displays (my opinion only about the hysteria) much more than I can overlook it from Tsiskaridze. And, like everyone else who has expressed themselves on this matter, I hope her career finds a way to flourish. To me the more interesting development in what Baryshnikov has called this "bad vaudeville" is that Ratmansky has now publically declared Tsiskaridze's statements about his (Ratmanksy's) departure from the Bolshoi to be lies. From what appears in the press, I'm not sure I think Tsiskaridze entirely knows what a lie is--perhaps he believes (some of) what he is saying. But I do think that with every interview he gives, he seems to make himself less and less plausible as a future artistic leader. If he is the great ballet teacher and coach some have said he is--and which I can easily believe--then that is a shame. And, in relation to the crime against Filin, entirely unnecessary. (From the beginning, Filin said he did not believe Tsisdaridze was involved and for a long, long time everyone has understood that.)

Ratmansky contra Tsiskaridze's comments about him: From Alexei Ratmansky's Facebook Page and Ismene Browne's blog (which gives a better translation than "Bing:") http://www.ismeneb.com/Blog/Entries/2013/7/1_Ratmansky_rebuts_Tsiskaridze.html https://www.facebook.com/alexei.ratmansky

Ringling Brothers has most certainly not gotten better and actually, as I understand, to train elephants for the kind of life they lead with circuses (which, for them, is horrific) requires that they be mistreated--that is, beaten. And of course the trainers run risks, because...well...they are training elephants. I love seeing elephants, and was taken to the circus once or twice as a child; I don't blame Mr. B. for not knowing much (or anything) about this issue...but, yes...I think we should leave elephants and other wild animals in the wild or in sanctuaries. Indeed, elephants need closely guarded sanctuaries because of the poaching problem. The elephant ballet is a notable or, at least, oft noted episode in Balanchine's career, but good for Seattle that it doesn't permit this kind of show anymore.

That seems right to me...and of course they got a lot of positive publicity as well.