Drew

Just some fleeting impressions: I liked both Borchenko (a rather melting Odette) and Bondareva (more soubrette style in the Act I pas de trois in Swan Lake) when I saw them in London a couple of years ago. Not all-time "great" dancers but both very fine. I believe Perren was a hit in London in one of the full length roles--Giselle I think--but I myself only saw her in Spring Waters and she simply didn't have the daring (perhaps was just too tall) to pull off the flamboyant nonsense aspect of the choreography. Shemiunov did not make much of an impression as Siegfried. Those are the only ones I remember by name. I think on the whole, speaking of the company and its soloists/demi-soloists, I thought they were very good with some interesting repertory but, in the three performances I saw, did not strike me as a world-class "great" company--though the character dancing in Swan Lake and "Le Halte de Cavalerie" was terrific: in the latter ballet "character" dancing in both senses of the word was excellent...at least I thought so. Others on this board have seen more of them than I.

Rooting for best documentary The Invisible War! (Mmm...this is not as high minded as it sounds since I know someone closely involved with the film.)

Absolutely.

Thank you Jayne.

I was unable to read the article. Does he say anything about reasons for his departure from the Mikhailovsky?

I completely agree with Mashinka that the Bolshoi doesn't need a Gergiev. But, based solely on how he conducts himself in a crisis, I'm afraid I don't think they need a Tsiskaridze either. (And when I saw him in the Shades scene in Bayadere many years ago, I did find him quite a remarkably exciting and beautiful dancer.) For the rest: the Bolshoi in recent years (under Burlaka and under Filin) has seemed to me one of the 2-3 greatest ballet companies in the world. (I base this primarily on what I saw in London right before Burlaka resigned, but also on reports, reviews, film and videos since then.) Their artistic direction has obviously been doing a lot of things right. And Filin surely has to get the credit for bringing Obratzova and Smirnova into the Bolshoi equation as well. The horrific theater politics-well, one hopes that could one day somehow change, but surely Tsiskaridze does not appear to be the man to do that...Beyond the politics, the sheer lawlessness and violence Michael talks about (the acid-in-the-face that goes well beyond even horrific politics)--well, that can't be solved inside the theater, but must be taken up by powers outside it. In fact, I keep hoping Putin decides this is enough of an embarrassment it has to be cleaned up. But I'm not very (or at all) optimistic.

Unless i have misunderstood the cast listings, Copeland is down for first movement in Symphony in C in New York. (Same cast Osipova is dancing 3rd movement.)

Thank you for drawing attention to this. A fantastic interview with a fantastic dancer! Love, too, what he says about Peter Boal: "there was a kind of reverence in his dancing," I think that really captures something essential about Boal.

I completely agree with what Buddy said above about the problems with youtube as a medium for judging dancers. [buddy corrected me below--it was Writer who said that]; I also completely agree with Cubanmiamiboy about wanting to watch dancers who dance (rather than move from pose to pose) though certainly some roles (like Kitri) require less in the way of beautiful lines than others (such as Bayadere) to come off effectively. But if a youtube duel of Grand Pas Classique it is...here goes: clearly both of these young dancers have problems negotiating some of the ballet's more harrowing moments -- I pause in typing of this sentence to appreciate Cynthia Gregory sans cigarette -- but only one of them looks like a potential world-class ballerina: Smirnova. And it's the upper-body and indeed the "danciness" that, in these youtube excerpts, makes the crucial difference. Skorik does have some lovely qualities (including some of her lines). And indeed looks as if she has fine potential and may "grow" as a dancer and artist. Her prominence at the Mariinsky at THIS stage of her career remains a puzzlement if youtube here and elsewhere is to be believed. Of course, it may not be; fan reports of live performances (as on this thread) are rather divided. Smirnova I have no doubt is someone I want to watch "grow." Here's hoping it happens and that I get to see her one day!

The ballet boom was fueled by Fonteyn-Nureyev before Kirkland-Baryshnikov and took place in a context of creativity that included, in addition to new ballets by Balanchine, occasional new ballets by Ashton. Even Tudor did a couple of new ballets notably The Leaves are Fading -- and there was also a context of dance talent better known to ballet fans but still just as extraordinary (Bruhn, Sibley-Dowell, Farrell etc.) -- That said, I think ballet is in a bit if mini-Renaissance right now that includes attention from outside the ballet world -- attention that preceded the attack on Filin. Much as I hated it, Black Swan was a symptom, as are the ballet-linked tv shows, and the attention to Osipova's mugging a couple of seasons ago (discussed, say, on Rachel Maddow's show) and to Hallberg being hired by the Bolshoi. Hallberg appeared on morning tv shows and Stephen Colbert. I tend to believe that it is not a coincidence that this has been happening when there are some intriguing new choreographers on the scene AND remarkable ballerina talent in particular. I think that in some indirect way, when exciting things are happening inside the art form it does get communicated to the general culture in however attenuated or sensationalized a fashion. Can ballet ever be the broader phenomenon it was during the cold war (which is arguably what really fueled a lot of the media attention to ballet--not the talent per se--because otherwise Erik Bruhn's arabesque should have been enough to get a Time Magazine cover)? Well, maybe not. Especially not in a slowing economy. But I'm more optimistic about the overall fate of ballet today than I was say 10 or 15 years ago--and that includes its ability to attract new audiences even if it's not the 'same' as during the boom years. (Some years ago on this site we had a thread on whether there were any ballerinas around comparable to the greats of the past including the "ballet boom" and though several of us weighed in with our candidates, no-one said "what an absurd question..." etc. I think today we actually are in an era when it would be much harder to suggest we don't have great ballerinas or remarkable talent dancing regularly on the world's stages. Are they comparable to Kirkland (my own all time favorite)? Kirkland, Farrell, Makarova will always be my ur-pantheon...but I honestly don't feel the need to yearn for "the good old days" when I'm watching the best ballerinas today in their best roles. I started to include a list as part of my comments, but it was getting so long I thought people wouldn't take it seriously. I think remarkable male talent today is thinner on the ground, but we do have some remarkable male dancers too w. ABT the home of 2 of the best Cornejo and (half-time) Hallberg.)

I saw her dance in it and to my (admittedly inexperienced) eyes it looked plenty problematic to dance in.

I had not thought of this at all -- but I think it's a very just comparison. Indeed mentally comparing Peck (in Baiser--last season) to Mcbride, I found it didn't quite work and, in fact, while admiring Peck's dancing I slightly missed Mcbride's distinctive allegro in the first part of the ballet. But I think Peck is a great dancer and the calm spaciousness and ease as she does utterly brilliant, can't-believe-your-eyes dancing...that is reminiscent of Nichols. (Think chaine turns done at dizzying speed yet as clear as if they were in dreamy slow motion--those are some of my strongest memories of Nichols and surely will be of Peck after seeing her last week in Allegro Brilliante.) Peck has her own distinctive plangency--I actually loved her in the later sections of Baiser when the tone turns fateful--but the comparison to Nichols seems illuminating to me.

Indeed: that statement reveals a worrying ignorance of bothe the company and the repertoire. Millepied may not limit himself to neo-classical ballet, but the company has been doing a fair amount of straight up modern dance by way of new work and as Dirac clarified, in the full quote Millepied is clearly saying that he wants, rather, for the company to do more new work --that is also 'of our time'--that uses the classical ballet idiom, not that he wants to chuck the classics. In fact there may have been a hint that he is precisely thinking of their repertory in which new work, when it's not modern dance, is sometimes just nineteenth-century pastiche (Lacotte etc.). I think that could in theory be a very good thing especially since he also emphasizes a desire to cultivate choreographic talent coming from the company itself. Anyway, it didn't sound to me like he has in mind doing more modern/contemporary non-ballet than Lefevre already was... What will happen in reality? Anybody's guess...though an educated guess might be that an outsider without much leadership experience with this kind of institution and none in maintaining nineteenth-century classics will face a very steep learning curve even if he does basically have a sound approach in mind and wants to preserve the company's (authentically) classical heritage. He sounded quite confident in the interviews and I suppose if you didn't go in that way then you would be eaten alive.

It's possible that it was not "political" (that is, that it did not involve Filin's role at the Bolshoi), but given how intense the threats against Filin had become and given much of what is (if I may say so) understood about the influence of organized crime in Russia in relation to the arts, and, finally, given the highly personal and peculiar nature of the attack--throwing sulfuric acid in someone's face isn't exactly a clean way to rob someone--it seems to me highly unlikely this was just an arbitrary bit of street violence such as is "happening all over the place." No-one has said Filin was robbed, and according to press reports Filin himself says the attacker called him by name before the attack. So, whatever the motive--and, as you say, it may not be political--I would be very surprised if this turned out to be "some thugs out to rob or cause damage" without a very direct motivation, however irrational, against Filin. What that is we may never know. I tend to think that even if the police determine the cause, it may not be made fully public...

I have no insider knowledge whatsoever, but from the outside recent events at the Bolshoi rather create the impression that if artistic directors in Russia are giving way to pressures from not so savory characters, well...they may have reason...In which case I think forces outside the theater need to collaborate with those inside to establish an atmosphere of physical as well as financial security. Maybe the Mariinsky just suffers from garden variety corruption of various kinds, but at this point I'm willing to believe just about anything could be happening to explain the situation there.

Very much my reaction -- especially impressed by Reichlin in Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto no. 2. (Did think the men in the ensemble and in the trio were lackluster. And the men get some of the best music in the finale--a ringing horn theme as they all enter as a massed group; if they were on their game with strong, vivid jumps, it would be very exciting; on the musical repeat the same theme goes to the lead couple, Reichlin w. Tyler Angle, and they were splendid.) Enjoyed the matinee very much as well. I have always loved the Balanchine Swan Lake, and I think Odette is one of Kowroski's best roles. But I had almost forgotten just how beautiful the designs are...especially the arctic backdrop. I had not forgotten how marvelous the swirling corps-de-ballet storm is in the finale section and how moving I find the whole thing. And Tiler Peck in Allegro Brillante can do anything--and do it slowly,quickly, flirtaciously, romantically, happily, sadly, etc. etc. --weaving every beat and tone together into a single sweep of motion as if it were the easiest most natural thing in the world. Tchaikovsky Suite No. 3 however was a mixed bag. I quite like Janie Taylor's extraordinary intensity in the second movement, but when the second movement is the highlight of a ballet that includes Theme and Variations, there's a problem. Even as I had forgotten just how beautiful the one act Swan Lake designs are I had forgotten just how ugly the costumes for T&V are at NYCB (and the backdrop is nothing to write home about either). Additionally the music was taken at quite a fast clip with not so much as a nano-second break between the third movement and the opening of Theme and Variations--completely spoiling the "ah" moment when the light goes up on the purely classical vision; one could barely even grasp the dancers' performance of the "theme" because the transition was so sudden. (All one needed was an additional second or two.) And at various times throughout, I thought the principles (Fairchild and Veyette) and demi-soloists visibly had trouble keeping up. Otherwise Fairchild and Veyette had some fine moments, but they seemed under-cast. (At the "Balanchine Ballerina" demonstration I thought Fairchild did much better by the variation/coda from Tchaikovsky pas de deux: in the right role, she's terrific.) The four women demi-soloists were mismatched in height which I would mind less if they would at least put the taller women in the center of the four so there was a kind of arch effect. Instead, it was short-tall-short-tall. I don't require Boshoi or Mariinsky style uniformity from NYCB--I don't even want it from them--but I do not understand that choice in this ballet. The demonstration on the "Balanchine ballerina" was a very full and fun event: lots of dancing. And the dancers also did a great job introducing their excerpts. I did think that it was a shame not to include an example of one of Balanchine's modernist "ballerinas"--a bit from Agon or Rubies or some such. I suppose that, with the exception of the Sugar Plum Fairy variation, (danced by Bouder) they were sticking with ballets from this season. (And Variations for a Door and a Sigh doesn't really allow of excerpting). Still a big piece of the Balanchine ballerina story was missing. Ironically, the highlight for me was not a ballerina at all. I had been disappointed not to be seeing Robert Fairchild at any of the performances I had tickets for, so I was just delighted to see him in an excerpt from Western Symphony w. Maria Kowroski.

I believe that tonight is the first time I have seen Mozartiana since seeing Farrell and Anderson. (I have deliberately stayed away from the video above and decided to just see how I reacted to Hyltin w. Finlay with no more than fragile images of the past in my mind.) Truthfully, Hyltin doesn't (yet) have Farrel's spirituality in the role, and Farrell's "impassivity" which often seemed like an inner communion is not part of her persona. She is an earthly beauty. . But a beauty she is and a real ballerina. The moment the curtain goes up, one knows it. And she has one ballerina quality that seems to me somewhat comparable to something Farrell had and very necessary to this role--the ability to make even a very small move or change of direction/epaulement into an event in the choreography. Whole passages of the ballet were just ravishing--including the bourrees mentioned above by others. I write with a touch of remorse because early in Hyltin's career I did not understand why people were so excited by her and was decidedly resistant to her personal charm. Delighted to be proved wrong and won over!! I think she is now one of my favorites. By the by, I enjoyed the very promising Finlay too--doesn't have Anderson's beats (or angles), but offered clean, well shaped, easy and unaffected dancing in some very difficult choreography. (Thought the adult ensemble dancing in this ballet was the weakest ensemble dancing of the evening...and I think that Hyltin and Finlay together may have come to a little less than the sum of their parts which I would attribute to their not fully finding a way into the choreography's odd-to-identify mood.) Lots of other pleasures at this evening's performance, including Janie Taylor's rather striking performance in Serenade. I will make the by now ritual but still perhaps necessary concession that she is not always technically reliable, but I find her terribly interesting--strikingly "in" the moment at every moment. I don't think I've seen anyone perform the episode based on a dancer arriving late to the rehearsal as if really looking hard at everyone around her trying to figure out what was happening and where she should be. It probably should be performed in more stylized fashion (as it usually is in my experience), but I kind of loved what Taylor did anyway. I thought the corps looked wonderful in Serenade--they don't all look the same, but they do all move with a shared energy and breath. Also very good in Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto no.2, though when the curtain went up they actually seemed lined up in a way that perhaps did too little to mute height disparities....Once the corps was dancing, though, the disparities became pretty much invisible (to me). I reacted to Bouder in the ballerina role, perhaps oddly, somewhat as I did to her in Liebeslieder. That is, it took me a while to accept her as a "nineteenth-century" figure. For the first few minutes I simply did not believe her as an after-image of imperial ballet glamor. Only as the ballet unfolded did the sheer quality of her dancing win me over. I will say that this is one Balanchine ballet that I would not mind seeing restored to its more "thematic" designs--or given some new ones. A backdrop of St. Petersburg seems as if it would fit the music and the choreography to perfection. And the Tchaikovsky almost cries out for something less austere than the current blue blank. Anyway, very grateful for the evening all round.

I have been away from news and just read this terrible, terrible story this moment when I opened up the Ballet Talk website. I am deeply saddened. Best thoughts to Sergei Filin and his family. May his attacker (and anyone involved) be caught...

I'll go out on a limb and speculate that the executives at Starz care more about ratings than revolution . I can only get to the Kennedy Center during the weekend in any case. So if I fly up for something it will be Corsaire not Ratmansky/Shostakovitch (a pairing that greatly interests me but whose 'political' implications are themselves not altogether easy to interpret). Hope your mood lightens soon puppytreats...

Beloserkosky's Aminta in Ashton's Sylvia was my favorite of the three I saw at ABT a few years back--the most fluid and, to my eyes, having the right unemphatic pastoral quality. When I think of him, that's the performance I call to mind.

OT.: Puppytreats--I am puzzled by your remarks about Spartacus. Karl Marx--who, whatever his faults, was pretty serious about revolution--is on record as having admired the historical Spartacus and Soviet artists/intellectuals followed suit. Spartacus' defeat doesn't change the "pro-revolution" cast of the story if one tells it or interprets it as a story of heroism defeated by tyranny. Especially if one assumes that its function is to inspire future revolutionaries who may do better. The Bolsheviks themselves took inspiration from the defeated Paris Commune. Uh...as for Grigorovich's choreography...that I have no defense for, though when well danced, the ballet ranks high on my guilty pleasure list.

I was disappointed to see Osipova would not be dancing Aurora this coming season. It may be a scheduling issue, but I also don't think that it's simply up to her in any case. I am thrilled she is dancing Sylvia as I think that it could be a very good role for her...Scheduling won't permit me to see much ABT this spring--I had wanted to come up for the Ratmansky and/or the Osipova Don Q and/or Month in the Country--none of them seem to be possible. But Sylvia was another top choice and I'm looking forward to it. Think Vasiliev could be very good as Orion too.

What about the Graham program? Is seeing the Trocks worth the time and money, or if one has watched the DVD/Youtube program, does that suffice? I have never seen the Trocks. Many ballet fans swear by them or have in the past at any rate, but for me personally drag -- even witty, insightful, or artistic drag which the Trocks are said to be -- holds no appeal. You may feel differently. Even so: if you have not seen much Balanchine or NYCB and really have to make a choice, then I would say that it makes little sense to opt for ballet-satire before you have a fuller picture of the art form. However, I will concede that In dance, if it's genuinely great, then DVD/Youtube does not suffice, so having never seen the Trocks I can't really say. Graham is a different question in my mind: if the company is in good shape--something I don't know--and you are interested in educating yourself on modern dance, then Graham is a must. When I was younger I was a dance fan almost as much as a ballet fan. For "life" reasons, I now usually have to choose and, without at first having given the matter much thought, I long ago found myself choosing ballet every time. I still like modern dance and attend now and then when I have the opportunity (most recently Paul Taylor in Atlanta), and Graham, like Balanchine, is a major figure in 20th-century art, so... However, there is another factor which several people have already mentioned. This is an unusually good season repertory-wise at NYCB and the company has a cluster of remarkable dancers right now. Not every principal is great; not every ballet is Serenade--but on the whole you have an excellent chance of seeing first rate performances and first-rate ballets. I would say, take advantage.

Well, if any ballerina could impress as Solor, surely Alexandrova would be it. I confess, though, that Zakharova as Nikiya is enough to make me less than enthusiastic about trying to catch this. I saw her dance it with ABT and though moment by moment she can be very striking and even, at times, beautiful, the performance as a whole was not memorable. Since that is how I have felt about almost everything else I've seen her do... Generally, I also wish they would cast Obraztsova or perhaps Krysanova in one of these theatrical broadcasts...I'm curious about Smirnova too but accept seniority playing some role here. She is very young.

I agree that NYCB Sleeping Beauty is superior to ABT's, but it is NYCB flavored: danced very uptempo and with a minimization of much of the mime. The arms and accents are not in a pure Petipa vein. It's beautiful and traditional but very much NYCB honoring Petipa. However, if the only Sleeping Beauty you have ever seen in the theater is with ABT or a smaller company, then I would say that you should certainly try to see it. (I haven't seen the current generation of NYCB Auroras in it--loved Jennifer Ringer as Aurora quite a few years back. One of the best I have seen in any production.) One supplement to Kathleen O'Connell's remarks: Croce thought that Theme and Variations (now, at NYCB, the last movement of Tchaikovsky Suite no. 3) was a kind of distillation of Sleeping beauty, something I think one can see in variations like the one with a row of women, the ballerina in the center, the women all linked arm in arm, and she traced the reference to the original ABT request to Balanchine for something in the spirit of Aurora's Wedding (not the exact wording, but roughly). She also speculated once that Piano Concerto no. II had echos of or riffs on Swan Lake, something that I never really saw until I read her essay...