Drew

A website called Artsalive.ca (which Paul also may have discovered in his searches) attributes it to Blasis--along with the use of enchainements in the classroom, but the site does not give a specific source. I have tried doing searches on one or two of Blasis's treatises on googlebooks, but so far, no luck.

I .. saw a touring company with "Moscow" in the title a few years back (maybe another touring name of Radchenko's?) in Sleeping Beauty. The second half was hugely cut and awkward but the prologue and parts of the birthday scene were traditional and, to me, seemed well prepared (the dancers knew what it was supposed to look like) and that was quite worth the price of admission for me.

Perhaps you are thinking of the Moscow Classical Ballet. This is a legitimate company which toured a beautiful production of the Vainonen Nutcracker last winter. Unfortunately, it was lamentably danced.

I posted my impressions of the performance at the Kravis Center, which led to a discussion. One of the posts (though this might have been on another thread) mentioned that the company's first team was touring in Spain at the same time. What we had was a legitimate company, with a good production and with choreography that was the real thing -- but which was performed by what was VERY much a second team.

That thread is here:

http://balletalert.i...nutcracker-huh/

Thank you Bart--the thread was informative and rather entertaining (all over white body make-up in Swan Lake? hmmm...). I suppose if I hate this Voronezh performance as much as Cubanmiamiboy I, too, will give up on the touring companies for a while...

Violinconcerto mentioned an upcoming tour by Radchenko's Russian Classical Ballet Theater. I've had mixed results with them. Some good dancers but (to me) truly tacky production values, such as last year's Coppelia tour of the US.

I believe I saw the Radchenko company in a mediocre (but not disastrous) Cinderella which had a few pleasant moments--I was bored but people who see no classical ballet would not have been damaged by the experience. (Choreography by Vasiliev though revised from what he had done earlier for Maximova--still I could not help thinking as I watched that with Maximova this would indeed have been very charming! I could see her doing the steps.)

I also saw a touring company with "Moscow" in the title a few years back (maybe another touring name of Radchenko's?) in Sleeping Beauty. The second half was hugely cut and awkward but the prologue and parts of the birthday scene were traditional and, to me, seemed well prepared (the dancers knew what it was supposed to look like) and that was quite worth the price of admission for me.

If I lived in New York--or Miami or Seattle etc.-- I probably would not have felt that way. But I don't. Of course, I'm fortunate, in that (for NOW) I can afford travel to New York and, occasionally, elsewhere to see quality ballet. But I am very limited in the range of what I see.

In the last few years, I 'introduced' someone to classical ballet (adult, male, very much likes classical music, good taste all round--but in terms of 'activities' mostly a serious jock and huge sports fan): my strict rule for our first dozen performances was only the BEST--meaning nothing we could see in Atlanta--with the somewhat hilarious result (to me hilarious) that now when he sees anything or anyone--even something or someone very, very, very good--his reactions are often some version of "she's no Cojocaru" or "it's no Sleeping Beauty grand pas de deux" -- Of course I have pointed out to him that even if everyone cannot run as fast as Usain Bolt, sports fans have still been known to enjoy the local high school track and field championships...Anyway, he is coming with me to the Voronezh Swan Lake and I will be interested to see his reaction.

Thank you for completing your review--I know it's depressing to write about things one did not like. I confess that some of the problems you describe are not so different from what I would have expected from a bus-and-truck touring Russian group and may not irritate me as much as they did you. (I can't quite tell from what you say--or don't say--how weak you thought the dancers were...)

By the by, the Messerer version that was danced by the Mikhailovsky in London this summer (and which dates back to the Soviet era) also had the Spanish dancers accompany Rothbart and Odile as part of their entourage. And there may even have been a bit of red in Odile's costume if I remember correctly...Do you remember who was responsible for the "State Ballet Theater" staging?

Semionova is wonderful in Swan Lake. One of the best - gorgeous, long undulating limbs, highly musical, soulful. On the other hand, I was surprised that such a statuesque and 'queenly' dancer would be cast as Kitri. She'll be a Kitri in the Bussell and Wiles mold.

In the Swan Lake I saw her give with the Mikhailovsky this past summer I found her a rather cool Odette and liked her rather charmingly sly (and very well danced) Odile better. I have liked cool Odette's in the past, but just was not terribly moved by the performance I saw. Certainly I would be happy to see more of her though and she is an interesting choice for ABT.

So here I am, all bitter already after almost give up to the trip to West Palm. To get out of Miami Beach was a nightmare...the traffic didn't move, so I told my mom that if I couldn't be on I-95 by 6:30, I would then turn around and give up-(the performance was to be at 8:00 pm, and I didn't even had tickets). So finally I'm on the highway, and by 7:50 I was already in my seat-(don't ask me at which speeding...).bart...you know about the traffic situation down here, so I'm sure you can "feel" me.. The Kravis-(love that building...way more than the Brodward Center and even more than that absurdity called Arsht Center)-was packed, and soon enough, the performance started.

So the overture starts-(or course, canned music...by now a too common feature, so nothing that I wasn't expecting), and when the curtain rises, I'm already dreaming-(c'mon...this is Swan Lake!). Too soon, I'm afraid to report.

Act I

Act I revealed a troupe that wasn't too engaging and an uninteresting choreography that almost put me to sleep. Of course, there was the expected jester-(is he a Konstantin Sergueev' legacy?), but to be honest, he was one the highlights of this production. Benno was there also, as the male lead on the watery Pas de Trois. There's not a lot that I can think of to make this review more interesting, for which there was NOTHING more interesting presented. Perhaps-(actually I’m positive)-that this have to do with the fact of having to have seen probably hundreds of Swan Lakes in the course of my life span in the island, in a choreography that still retains many great chunks of that one which was choreographed and premiered in its four acts in Havana in 1954 by Mary Skeaping. Since then, Swan lake has been a staple on the Cuban repertoire, and along with Giselle, one that I got to see all year around, all the time every year. The choreography of the valse of the first act is one of those chunks, in the form of a great pas de six, which very daring lifts and a triple fish dive at the end for the three couples. So then, when I saw the Russians’ version with all those little, obscure steps, I was almost yawning. Another miss-(not the last one, and not an uncommon one in some productions I've seen)-was the unchanging light scheme for the end of Act I, where it should be suggested by darker tones that the sunset is happening, so the night, where the next act takes places, approaches.

Act II

The lake scene backdrop was too bright, with shades of blue for the water. Then Von Rothbart appeared, one sorcerer that was too small and short winged-(and with almost no makeup)-to be properly scary. Here I must say that I could take The Swamp Thing with no doubt over this poor little bird. And THEN one of the major absurdities happened. Some swan-maidens got out! Right there, along with Rothbart's presentation, some corps girls made an in promptu appearance, which according to the choreographed moves was apparently supposed to give the audience clues as what was happening to them in terms of being enchanted and captivated by this evil entity. The sad result was that the much anticipated and beautifully choreographed entrance of the corps of swan-maidens-(one of the pieces of choreography that seems to be respected in almost every Swan Lake on earth)-was completely diminished…its magic totally broken.

To be continued. I’m tired, and I really want to write some more, if you guys till want to read it...

Thank you Cubanmiamiboy. I would be happy to read more, though I don't want you to torture yourself. What I had hoped for when I bought tickets to this production (coming to Atlanta next week) was not a first (or even second) tier production, but a third-fourth tier one where I could at least enjoy some elements of good classical training in the dancers and the main outlines of the choreography for the white acts and maybe, if I was lucky, a decent principal or a few decent soloist performances or some good character dancing (which Russian dancers often 'get' in a way Americans don't)...Anyway, any other thoughts or reactions you had would be welcome.

Details, Cristian, PLEASE. After my shock at the touring Russian Nutcracker last year. ("HUH?" was part of my reaction, posted here on BA.), I think we need to know more. For many audiences in the provinces (as south Florida is, when it comes to classical dance), this sort of thing may be their only experience of the truly great works of classical ballet. If they (we) are getting an inferior version, we need to speak up. Otherwise it will just go on and on .... and on.

I also would appreciate details so I can prepare myself.

Actually, Kirkland politely loathed Farrell. Kent was her model.

That makes sense to me: Kirkland, even in her distinctiveness, recalls Kent more than Farrell.

Some (underline: some) elements of her off-stage career even recall Kent's slightly defiant relation to Balanchine though, in that case, if one is to trust Kent's memoirs, it led to three children -- not a career with ABT and a Ballet Academy with a commitment to story ballets. (This presumably is not a matter of influence.)

But I'm pretty sure about the Croce remark...and of course one can be influenced, if only unconsciously, by someone one loathes! But certainly it's easier to picture Kirkland with Kent as her model.

I had the good fortune to see Sara Mearns on Thursday night as the Sugar Plum Fairy in Nutcracker at City Ballet. What a complete artist. Yes, she is the American ballerina of the 21st century, but I don't think she will "influence" other dancers any more than Suzanne Farrell was an influence. These are unique artists, they are inimitable. You can only hope that each dancer will find his or her path to artistry within the classical vocabulary and in shaping the great roles of the repertoire.

I don't think influence precludes people finding their own way. Suzanne Farrell had a lot of influence on other dancers--Arlene Croce at one point (in a very critical review of Farrell and NYCB from the 70's) argued that the influence had become a problem at NYCB and named several dancers she felt were "caricatures" of the "caricature she [Farrell] had become" before Farrell left the company for Bejart. And Croce also mentioned that one could see her influence even on the very young Kirkland. (I'm quoting from memory--I can't look it up, but I am reasonably confident).

Of course the best dancers will always find their own path to artistry--certainly Kirkland did--but often that path includes experiencing and experimenting with the influence of other artists, especially early in one's career. Farrell herself must have been somewhat influenced by Diana Adams.

There are more general examples as well. Critical consensus seems to be that Nureyev's career in the west led to a wholesale raising of standards in male dancing. And Guillem's extraordinary extensions obviously have influenced the look of today's ballerinas. Though, unfortunately, they only rarely seem to have her bodily control and command of line in producing those extensions or her judgment about how to deploy them...

Thanks to my local PBS station, I was just informed that there will be a performance of Swan Lake by the State Ballet Theater of Russia, tomorrow at the Kravis Center in West Palm Beach. The last time I saw the complete ballet-(Odile included)-was when the Cuban Classical Ballet of Miami performed it. MCB, as we all know, bears Balanchine's compressed white act.

bart...will you go...?

http://www.kravis.org/index.cfm?&fuseaction=performances.detail&performance_id=1313

the only million dollar question now is which "state ballet theater" it is, there should be a name of the city attached to it, but these provincial companies conveniently drop the city name to sound like they are "THE" State Ballet Theater. I bet this one is Voronezh one.

According to what I have read this IS the Voronezh company. Bart wrote about their touring Giselle very positively (as I remember).

I am eager to hear about this production as I just bought tickets to see it in Atlanta. I would love to read your (or anyone else's) reports on the performance Cubanmiamiboy--I suppose it is too much to hope that they tour with an orchestra.

I did discover that they are scheduled to perform as part of a Chicago festival featuring art created under the Soviets--so I am guessing that the production is an old style Soviet one -- jester! happy ending! -- but perhaps not. In any case, I am eager to hear reports...

We sometimes get so sensitized to the little transgressions that the real things get a pass.

I actually thought the shocking part of the Johnson review was the claim that Koch, as the donor, had dictated the choice of Ratmansky as choreographer for this Nutcracker. Moreover, he made the point as if Ratmanksy would not have been Mckenzie's choice, and an obvious one, anyway--something I found especially odd. Ratmansky is ABT's in-house choreographer and artistic adviser etc.

I already asked about this on the ABT discussion thread: has it ever been established, as a fact, in the public record that KOCH picked/insisted on the choice of choreographer? (I'm not shocked at a big donor making a private suggestion--which might well carry a bit of implicit pressure with it--but Johnson implies a kind of official 'demand.')

It was very unclear to me that Johnson had any evidence for this claim at all...and, on the other hand, if true, it seems to me to call for more serious comment and investigation than Johnson offers.

However, this really is far afield from the topic of writing negatively about individual dancers (or choreographers) in a personal vein...

Your post led me to think about the original sentence ...

Ratmansky is an idiot to turn this celestial ballerina role into an occasion for bathos and comedy

,,, as compared with a possible alternative ...

Ratmansky made an idiotic choice when he turned this celestial ballerina role into an occasion for bathos and comedy.

But I can't figure out whether the second option is better or not.

{I am editing this post to add that Sandy Mckean posted just as I finished typing this and says something similar, but I will go ahead and post anyway...}

I think the second is better critical manners, but also better critical reporting (Johnson can only draw an inference about Ratmansky as a person and it's hardly a convincing one since a brilliant person can be a lousy choreographer, and, in any case, he's not reviewing the man but his ballet.)

But actually, when I reread the Johnson quote in this thread I found my (additional) problem with "idiot" is that I don't find it that illuminating. "Stupid jerk" actually seems more precisely to express what Johnson is getting at.

I guess I'm still glad he did not say "stupid jerk," but oddly enough I'm not kidding: since a jerk tends to be inconsiderate of people's feelings--at the least through sheer awkwardness (think of the word literally: "to jerk" something) and stupidity connotes dullness in response to something--it's related to the word "stupor"--and I think Johnson is berating Ratmansky for what he feels is a lack of response to the music and an awkward denigration of the ballerina image Johnson hears in the music's grandeur and emotion.

Etymologically "idiot" is related to privacy (or private meanings): that is, it suggests that someone is ignorant of anything outside of his/her own ideas. Johnson may have meant that--but I suspect he meant something closer to unresponsive etc.

Even without the etymologies that's how I hear those different words, but yes--I am decidedly a pedant (which more or less makes me an idiot in exactly the sense described above).

I also want to give all critics a bit of a break. They are writing to deadline and they have the complex task of writing for many audiences at once--and goodness knows what their editors are demanding from them. (Editors may want "blog-like" writing-ugh.) Of course, critics have to know that in this day and age, the blogs and message boards are waiting for THEM and I guess turnabout may be considered fair play!

For myself, I am very curious to see Ratmansky's take on Nutcracker and I tend to think that no choreography has ever been entirely up to Tchaikovsky's music for the adagio of the pas de deux....and if I were to draw a personal inference from the Ratmansky ballets I have seen it would be that he's a very intriguing person indeed--but I will stick with 'he makes intriguing ballets.'

I have loved reading this thread. Thanks to everyone for offering such detailed accounts of the ballet and of their reactions.

I think the staying power of a Nutcracker for many ballet fans (maybe not for holiday tourists and families--though over decades perhaps even for them) is the quality of the big set dance pieces.

Even the biggest admirers of this production seem close to agreeing with its biggest detractor (unsurprisingly, Robert Johnson) in not finding the snowflakes scene or Waltz of the Flowers to be major classical set pieces in which the choreography as choreography really rises to the level of the music. Reaction to the grand pas de deux is mixed but few have said anything particularly positive about the choreography per se or especially about the choreography to the Sugar Plum Variation Music (which Macaulay, who liked the pas de deux, criticized as bland). Nor has anyone singled out any of the national dances for DANCE praise. From what I read, it sounds as if the charms of the production have been registered primarily, though not exclusively, as scenic and dramatic--and a matter of novelty.

Now it could well be that the production has choreographic riches that are being missed because the ballet is so new and maybe Ratmansky will tinker in any case...It's also easier to write about scenic and dramatic elements than dance elements (in a new interpretation especially) but I suspect that THAT issue (the choreographic substance of the great set pieces) is what may finally determine whether this Nutcracker really becomes a substantial long-term part of ABT history or just another production that is replaced in a decade or so etc.

And if the production is going to compete in the New York market it WILL be compared to Balanchine--whose set pieces for the snowflakes and, especially, the Waltz of the Flowers, are among the greatest responses to Tchaikovsky's music (any of his music) in classical ballet. Whatever Ratmanksy's production's connection to the Bolshoi tradition, the latter is never going to be a touchstone for either the ABT dancers or their audience.

I did have a question about Johnson's review. Given his dislike of Ratmansky's work I was not surprised by his criticisms of the production, and--as noted above--he does seem to be 'seeing' the same ballet as those who like it much better than he does. That is, he does not seem merely to be writing out of prejudice (actually I was surprised he found so much to praise in Act I--he so rarely has anything good to say about Ratmansky!). However, I was astonished to read his claim that Ratmansky was KOCH'S pick to choreograph the production--indeed that Koch actually dictated the choice of choreographer.

First: who else would Mckenzie have picked? He has already done his own, not that well received, Nutcracker and Ratmansky is ABT's in-house choreographer and has experience with this ballet...Second: what is Johnson's source for this claim? Has anyone else read interviews or articles saying that Koch asked for Ratmansky in return for his funding? Third: Although Ratmansky is an obvious choice for this production AND I am not shocked that a donor would make a 'suggestion'--I do find the idea that Kock "dictated" Mckenzie's choice disconcerting if true--but on the other hand I find it hard to believe it's true.

Basically, I think it appalling that Johnson would write this (or that his editor would let him write this) if it is not established in the public record. (And if true, then I tend to find it so problematic I'm inclined to think it deserves more than an 'aside' in the review...I would feel identically if the donor's name were Michael Moore.)

Thanks again for all the detailed and thoughtful comments about the production. I hope I can see it one day.

Apologies for replaying to my own post, but I wanted to mention that I tracked down some apparently bootleg video of the Bolshoi Rubies on Youtube. Using English, as I did, you can't find it under Bolshoi or Rubies or any dancer's name, though I think Russian might work. I initially found the video very indirectly, by doing a wider Google search and finding someone's twitter about the video. The videos were posted by someone who goes under the moniker Dolchev.

I hope these links work--if not, then one can try youtube directly and do a search for videos posted this week by Dolchev.

I know this is off topic, but Hugo is a figure of some importance to me ... I will try to circle back to topic at the end.

From what I have read in biographies etc. the Victor Hugo joke mentioned above goes back to a newspaper questionnaire which included a question about the greatest French Poet: André Gide wrote down "Victor Hugo, alas" (poet--not'man of letters': the distinction is not trivial when you are talking about the author of Les Miserables and Notre Dame de Paris as well as the symbolic leader of the opposition to Napoleon III and one of the most important nineteenth-century voices against the death penalty inter alia). Presumably, Gide would have been happier if he could have just said Mallarmé was the greatest French poet, but he couldn't which is probably to his credit. As a poet, too, Hugo has rather more in common with Whitman than Poe.

Uh...of course I don't expect anyone else to share my interest in Hugo and minutiae attached to his reputation...

Back on topic? Well, I think no-one would say "Balanchine alas!" in response to a question about the greatest choreographer of the twentieth-century, unless perhaps someone who, recognizing Balanchine's greatness, still opposed his larger aesthetic and/or just did not much like it personally and/or thought Balanchine a false trail for others to follow; still, it's much more likely they would simply name another choreographer than condescend in Gide's manner. (Hugo is the rare genius who seems to invite condescension...)

Anyway, if Balanchine-centrism amounts to no more than parochialism, as it may for some, then it is obviously limiting their vision. But I remain persuaded that being centered in a particular aesthetic or artistic vision--assuming it really deserves to be called that--can give a basis for serious judgments of a range of different aesthetics/visions IF that 'centrism' is raised from the level of mere personal taste to real aesthetic judgment: that is, an ability to evaluate and argue concerning what makes a particular aesthetic/vision what it is, what its values and meanings are--or, challenges to values and meanings etc. (I think this is pretty much in sync with what I wrote in 2001 (!!!), though I have developed a much greater appreciation for Victor Hugo since then .)

To give an example: why is Andre Levinson able to write so powerfully about Isadora Duncan even as he opposes and dislikes what she is doing? I believe that he was able to do so, not in spite of the fact that he was Petipa-centric, but because of it. He had a grasp of what was at stake in Duncan's dancing--at least so it seems to me who, admittedly, never saw Duncan or early-twentieth century performances of the Maryinsky. And that grasp was based in his understanding as well as love of everything she was trying to transform.

A profound sense of personal connection to one's local company or style seems to me a slightly different matter. In that more particular sense I agree that most people (though not all) are 'centric' for what belongs to their personal history and the things that made them who and what they are.

My daughter did- for 20 rubles (66 cents). She loves Osipova, and thought she was amazing. She did enjoy the Bolshoi more than the Maryinsky (although Vishneva in the Ratmansky "Anna Karenina" was a highlight). She said the Bolshoi dancers have more personality- even in the corps. I'll ask her to find reviews.

Thank you. I love Osipova too and am very curious. Oh--and 20 rubles, wow!

I would be interested in hearing reports on the Bolshoi's Rubies (with Osipova). I have seen a few photographs, but they don't tell me much. I realize few people reading this board are likely to have seen it, but perhaps someone has or someone who reads Russian has read reports from the Bolshoi-home audience. Thanks--

I do not agree with you that it is an unreasonable thing to ask the artistic merit of something which is clearly way beyond any other ballet in popularity. No offense, but if you objected to that, you didn't have to answer (which you did quite richly for my purposes).

I think you are right that it is reasonable to ask the artistic merit of something as popular (or, at any rate, ubiquitous) as Nutcracker, but I think it can also be reasonable to query the premises of that question at the same time--so that's why I responded. I do realize your question intended to open discussion.

I am still a little uncertain how one should think about the rise of Nutcracker an a ritualized holiday experience when the larger context of the ritual in the U.S. is Christmas marketing. I feel that way even if the ballet always had a marketing or product placement role as apparently the original production did.

Perhaps oddly, I also don't find it terribly popular among my acquaintances: they don't take their children to Nutcracker, and they don't go themselves: these include people who do and people who don't go to theater/musical performances etc. Of course, it would not be the first instance of my being out of touch with whole swatches of American life . I don't think I know one person attending Nutcracker this year unless one long-distance Facebook 'friend' counts. And that person has children IN the Nutcracker.

I do think that certain works in a number of art forms get picked up and commodified/popularized in ways that seem to have not much to do with the art form itself.'Everyone' who goes to the Louvre races to see the Mona Lisa, 'everyone' recognizes the opening chords of Beethoven's Fifth...and, as far as flexibility goes, it's been used as the basis of a disco tune among other things (I say nothing of the enormous number of 'samplings' of the 'Ode to Joy'). Not the same as Nutcracker? True, but these are still works whose popularity/recognizability has come to impinge on any experience of them outside of that popularity/recognizability--for me, that's what has happened to Nutcracker, at least in the U.S.

Is Nutcracker "the greatest ballet ever"? No. As with "the greatest painting," "the greatest novel," etc., my mind doesn't work in those directions.

But the question needs to be asked because, as I said in the OP, it unquestionably is light-years ahead of all other ballets in terms of popularity and financial exchange value. And we all seem to love it to some degree

I am not persuaded by this--one would never feel compelled to ask if a work in a different media (movie or book or painting) was the greatest based on these criteria--popularity and financial exchange value. I realize the comparison does not run on all fours (so to speak), but nor is it the case that "we all . . . love it to some degree" unless "to some degree" allows for an awful lot of latitude. Of course if someone is posting on a thread on "Nutcracker Chronicles" likely that person DOES love it to some degree. But that is not all balletomanes, not even all American balletomanes.

For myself, I have very much enjoyed some good-to-great performances of Nutcracker (and been bored by middling ones). I usually admire the stagecraft of the few productions I have seen. I can even get carried away by a great performance--for a few minutes anyway. I also danced in it as a child which I found unspeakably thrilling. But even as a child I did not exactly love the ballet or, at least, it was far from my favorite. (Too many children, not enough dancing: that's what I thought as a child--plus I wasn't crazy about the Christmas theme though I realize that would not be a common reaction; even now, when I am more open to the ballet's charms than I used to be I am not mad for the children--or adults pretending to be children. if I had to choose my favorite choreography for children then it would be Balanchine's Midsummer's Night Dream. Nutcracker--not even close.) I last saw Nutcracker at NYCB about 5 years ago--it had some extraordinary highlights (including a great Sugar Plum Fairy in Ringer), but ... uh ... I did not regret that I would only have to "sit through it" once.

Is it a cultural phenomenon in the United States? Sure: I completely agree. I was vaguely under the impression that it does not play the same role in other countries and cultures and indeed only started playing that role here in the wake of Balanchine's version. And of course "here" means a country whose ballet companies need "moneymakers" and perform Nutcracker in the midst of a larger moneymaking Christmas machine. I doubt that more than a few people going to see Nutcracker ever experience it as any kind of gateway ballet, leading them to attend other ballets: it's a holiday tradition, which is a different thing. If they enjoy themselves then they go back to Nutcracker the next year.

I do think it is a great work and I do like it and admire it. I also attribute its lasting power and even its flexibility to one thing: Tchaikovsky's score. Set the same story to Minkus or even Adam--well, we would not be having this conversation. (Maybe Delibes and we would...) Of course the story inspired Tchaikovsky (who, in turn, inspired Ivanov) so, sure they all get some credit for the template--but really I think Tchaikovsky takes the palm here. This is one of ballet's greatest scores.

And yes, there are times I agree with Drew that it can seem too long

Quiggin spoke of problems with length and, later, Bart. I have only seen Cunningham's company a very few times and those few times I was always sorry when the performance came to an end. That may be luck (what I happened to see) or taste (what I happened to like), but I suspect it is also because I sometimes needed the time to 'get,' in my own partial way, what was happening on stage: the repetitions and permutations helped me to see more/better as the evening proceeded.

I will add that the two 'events' I attended were in theaters with proscenium stages and...uh...seats.

"Because this is the thing. The life and achievements of Cunningham demand respect, they're irrefutable."

Simon G. wrote that above. I must say it's how I feel about Cunningham. I have no problem with someone disliking it or deciding once is enough. To speak of nothing else: I can't afford the money it would to take to 'educate' myself about all kinds of dance I don't like!--but I think Cunningham is not to be casually dismissed and especially now, when we are essentially on the verge of losing most if not all of his incredible legacy.

What harm does it do just to express how one feels? Especially on a message board? Isn't that what we are all doing? Well, honestly I agree here with Cubanmiamiboy--not much harm and we are all doing it. But it's also true that that for those of us who feel strongly about dance it's hard to sit 'quietly' at our computers and see such a flat out 'dis' of Cunningham on a serious dance discussion board without offering some kind of response. Especially when it does not come with much further explanation other than the Coast Zone clip which...uh...seems very nice to me and probably would to most admirers of Cunningham.

P.S. There is more to Osipova than virtuosity: I am convinced of it. Whether her career, with its 'guest artist' appearances, will encourage her to develop that 'more'(?)...I'm hopeful but not certain. (Valdes I only saw once live in a Don Q excerpt: not enough for me to judge much beyond virtuosity, but that was very impressive, especially the balances.)

Her first blog here.

Thank you for letting us know about this...certainly a big step up from Twitter, at least writing-wise.

Oh, this is wonderful!!! If I could travel back in time to see one dancer it would be her. I think what the video says is true. Even in such a short film, Pavlova's legendary grace and delicacy are more than evident. I take every opportunity to watch any snippets of Pavlova because she's one of the dancers that intrigues me the most.

It is wonderful--it also seems rather Duncanesque...

Moving away from the bedbug topic and re-focusing this topic on David Koch and the Koch Theater,there is an interesting op-ed piece in the NY Times by Frank Rich about the Tea Party. The op ed discusses the fact that sophisticated conservatives like Carl Rove and Koch disdain the less sophisticated people (Palin, O'Donnell) who have become the public face of the Tea Party. There is a mention of David Koch and the Nutcracker as follows:

"But the members wont let the hoi polloi dine with them in the clubs main dining room any more than David H. Koch, the billionaire sugar daddy of the Republican right, will invite ODonnell into his box at the David H. Koch Theater at Lincoln Center to take in The Nutcracker. The main dining room remains reserved for Kochs fellow oil barons . . .."

It does not sound as if Frank Rich has ever been to the David H. Koch Theater (no boxes)...

So my friend tells me that he wants to see Giselle in NYC when Vishneva dances. He happens to have seen her recently in France doing Bayadere and loved her so it's been decided...we're going to NYC.

Please...tell me about her Giselle. I have thousands of questions, but I basically need to know the general consensus here. I have faith in you guys, and you know...I don't mess up with Giselle.

In another level...would it be too soon to book a performance with her based on the current ABT schedule...? Is Vishneva usually reliable...? Is ABT's schedule usually reliable...?

I know...questions and more questions...

Thanks in advance...!

There are always differences of opinion but the general consensus among all the critics I have read (and my own experience) is that Vishneva's Giselle is one of the greatest to be seen today and one of her greatest roles. I find ABT's casting on the whole reliable, though less so this far out from the season which is a bit of a problem -- and one year I did get tickets for Vishneva and she ended up withdrawing due to injury, a situation which the company was slow to clarify. But her performances have not been casually moved around and I think that barring injury she is reliable. As for thousands of questions...hmm...well, like most really great ballerinas Vishneva is never quite the same from performance to performance. Whether she is to your taste is something you will have to discover!