Drew

Wonderful video of Obratzsova! Aurora is her "emploi" so to speak. (I haven't been as impressed, say, with video of her Nikiya.) Aurora is an ideal role for her. Less so for Skorik who is making her debut; that is, Aurora doesn't seem to be her emploi. However, she still may develop greater comfort with it -- I wouldn't mind seeing her try. I think emploi is important but can't always decide how important I think it should be. But I guess it's clear I also find more about Skorik "impressive" which is to say genuinely beautiful and artistic (to recall something else said above), than others do. I'm not just writing to balance out attacks--though they do sometimes puzzle me. In addition to what I wrote above and elsewhere about her dancing, I find she has a kind of delicacy and air of vulnerability that is rather appealing too. (I have seen her twice live--both were what I considered quality performances. And of course seen a barrage of video. I can only wish I had the chance to see all the live performances of the Mariinsky others have seen!!) The video of Skorik's Act I does suggest a performance that would be improved if she connected more fully with everyone around her.

Skorik has flaws--most ballerinas do including some of those mentioned in this thread as far her superior--but I don't always fully understand the horror she engenders. It is clear from casting and interviews that Fatayev does not view Vaganova school training as essential for what he wants to see in leading dancers at the Mariinsky. That seems odd and unfortunate to many. I myself love the Vaganova school trained dancers and am concerned about what his attitude means, but I'm not inclined to focus that concern at any particular dancer he happens to favor who, though trained in Russia (and thus presumably from a Vaganova-system basis) isn't from the Vaganova school. That is, I don't think the problem is Skorik (whose plush, lyrical dancing I have rather enjoyed and whose lines are beyond gorgeous so that when she relaxes and her movement flows she can be very beautiful). And I don't think it's Shirinkina or Chebykina for that matter. I know there are limited opportunities for dancers at any company, but the Mariinsky dances year-round sometimes touring and performing at home at the same time. Fateyev could support other dancers along with these if he chose. I also understand fan frustration when he doesn't cast this favorite or that. For my taste, Osmolkina is a great Mariinsky Aurora and should be dancing the role more. And I can't wait to see what happens with Stepanova at the Bolshoi. But all that doesn't keep me from seeing things to like in Skorik's dancing. Video of her Act I Aurora suggests a creditable debut. And NOT unmusical. But even if one hates her dancing--what company hasn't had controversial principals? (When I start reading about Soviet ballet history I even notice conflicting reports about, say, Dudinskaya. Who...uh...got cast a lot .) Like others on this thread I do worry or, at least, wonder a bit about overall shifts in the company's style and approach. And yet, I know that is what happens at institutions even when I mourn the changes. With new leadership at the Vaganova school that comes from the Bolshoi and, at the same time, new leadership at the Bolshoi from the Kirov/Mariinsky, it seems likely that the styles of both major Russian companies may morph a bit. Or, rather, continue to morph a bit. I'm not happy about it, but I don't assume it's all bad either. And I'm not inclined to blame it on Oxana Skorik. Below is the video I mentioned--she seems a little tight in the entrance and is not at the level, say, of Osmolkina or Cojocaru, (I also agree it would be nice if she had a wider range of facial expressions.) But to my eyes still a debut with many lovely, classical qualities:

Your trip sounds wonderful! Looking forward to reading more about it when you have the chance. And it sounds as if Giselle was, despite some weaknesses, also just a wonderful experience. When a great corps de ballet is 'on' in a great ballet--well, they can indeed be the star of the show. St. Petersburg is like a fairy tale (for a visitor anyway).

I wondered if she would finally dance Sleeping Beauty. I think of Aurora as an allegro ballerina's role and I think of Skorik as an adagio ballerina and so would agree that Aurora is not the most obvious role for her. But I wouldn't mind seeing her dance it and certainly consider her an artist -- actually quite a lyrical one at times.

The Bolshoi just premiered a new "Undine" ballet to the same Henze score Ashton used -- (Samodurov is the choreographer) -- the Bolshoi web-channel has some images and scraps of video. I think there was also an "Undine" sea creature in the Possokhov Hero of Our Time that premiered last year. I think ballet (not just romantic ballet) has an affinity with these kinds of fantastical creatures and spirits of place. This thread could probably go on ad infinitum with examples and ideas.

...oh yes...that made me think of Tharp's Princess and the Goblin (from a Victorian children's book) which has a troll kingdom (plus an ancestral spirit--great-great grandmother).

Thanks for link to season....I have been wondering what the Fall would bring. The Tharp Brahms-Hayden Variations (which I have always wanted to see) employs a large cast and seems to have a number of featured dancers. Unfortunately, I am unlikely to make it to NY this fall but along with Symphonic Variations and Monotones, the Tharp would be a draw for me. http://www.twylatharp.org/content/brahms-haydn-variations

The years at ABT surely have changed Part, but she was invited back to the Mariinsky to dance Giselle a couple of summers ago--there was a thread discussing it and some youtube videos turned up that generated a bit of debate/disagreement. Here is one I found just now:

http://tsiskaridze.tumblr.com/post/147184956803/dmitrichenko-update

As a 'home grown' international star, Hallberg is sort of a model of what one hopes will happen with some of today's younger talent. Wishing him all kinds of healing....

Was Seo an exchange artist...and both times? I've been praising her Aurora, but in a general sort of way I do sometimes find Mariinsky invitations (exchanges or not) a touch puzzling from what I consider a strictly "artistic" point of view. Or, at any rate, from my point of view .

Abatt mentioned s/he thought Seo was better last year as Aurora. I was interested to read that remark, because I did not see her this year, but I really enjoyed her Aurora in 2015. I have had slight reservations about her performances in other roles--both classics and 21st-century. (Reservations less about technique--except as Gamzatti where the night you and I saw her was not good--than a certain lack of distinctive inflections and projection.) But the Aurora I saw was radiant and has actually lingered in my memory. Macaulay, notably, makes a point of praising her Aurora this season, too, for its arc of development and that was surely a strength of her performance last year--though not (as I saw it) the only one.

It saddens me that a certain type of touring (the 3-4 week season with varied repertory and casting) is no longer common in New York. What's worse is that at Lincoln Center, even two weeks for major companies (Royal, Mariinsky, Royal Danish Ballet) seems largely a distant memory. They managed it with the Bolshoi doing ultra predictable rep. Very much agree about Cojocaru, though I did also want to speak up for Osipova in the Ratmansky Firebird--also Juliet though I realize Juliet isn't exactly "forward looking." At the Royal she seemed quite up to snuff in McGregor's Infra (for what that's worth) and, for myself, I found her extremely interesting and compelling as Titania albeit with a few caveats. But of course she is dancing with the Royal regularly and that does make a difference. Drop-in, Drop out performing--that has greater limits. As for Semionova (not a guest artist but a Russian-trained import)--perhaps oddly, I have never seen her look better--freer, fresher, more fun--than in Tharp's Bach Partita! For me the jury is out on her overall contribution to the company as a regular principal, since presumably Mckenzie didn't hire her because he needed Tharp dancers, but because he needed a reliable ballerina for the classics. I wrote above that I didn't think Ananiashvilli held a candle to Makarova as Odette-Odile. Well, in the classics I have seen them both dance (Bayadere and Swan Lake) I'm not sure I think Semionova holds a candle to Ananianshvilli. That's a little harsh: she is technically very accomplished, so...maybe a candle. Still, my liking for some imported and guest ballerinas notwithstanding, I'm cautiously optimistic the company has the talent it needs to develop some terrific American/American-trained dancers and also think some of its current crop of principles may be being a little under-valued. Though I could wish several of them were further along in their development and/or compelling in a greater variety of repertory or, indeed, just more consistent. (I exempt Murphy from any of these strictures. She's not a perfect ballerina and may not be to everyone's taste, but she is a ballerina worthy of the name.) And thinking of what it means to be a ballerina...someone please do something about Boylston's hair; I even found it distracting in the Ratmansky Trilogy where I could pretend she was stuck with the absurd dye job because it was Soviet Russia in the 1950's. That's a personal remark, so apologies to Boylston and her fans for being....well...personal, but I make it because I do believe she has something to offer on the ballerina front. And for a ballerina, every detail counts. The fact that ABT now has more in the way of substantive and/or intriguing productions and rep (which Macaulay talks about) is perhaps, though, the most important development of recent years and the thing that got me traveling to NY this year. .

That's interesting...I don't remember Makarova being considered a phenomenal technician per se. In the ABT of that era, one was more likely to see -- or read about -- Gregory's feats of derring-do. For myself, I hugely admired Makarova. I did occasionally find her a bit 'calculated' which may be related to Waelsung's complaint about her dancing being "too obvious." Still, until I saw Lopatkina I don't believe I ever saw any Odette I found as wondrously legato. (At ABT, I enjoyed Ananiashvilli as Odette-Odile, but still didn't think she held a candle to Makarova in the role. I'm not 100 percent sure that reaction wasn't partly influenced by quirks of taste (Kirov versus Bolshoi), but I certainly found Makarova more poetic ... )

Enjoying this thread a lot. Responses to a few remarks made above: I'm team Ratmansky all the way (I even liked--no, I loved--much of The Tempest) and he makes ABT an important part of the conversation about ballet as a serious art form. Yet I did have some questions about the impact of the Shostakovich trilogy as a full-evening work when I saw it this spring at the Met. I suspect that that its impact was a little blunted for me partly because of the shadowy lighting mentioned in a post above and (in the first two works) the dark and/or limited color palette of the costumes. Bluntly, the effect was kind of homogenizing and I even found the dancing sometimes a little hard to really see. The shadowiness also put more pressure on the dancers to project effectively and not all of them did. However, I plead guilty to sitting upstairs and, on the eyesight front, middle age. I gather it's a forlorn hope but would like to see Mckenzie's Swan Lake replaced. I am very eager to see Ratmansky's production in any case. But still, deep down, I suspect, when it comes to ABT, I would prefer a "middle way" production to a strict reconstruction--say, the original libretto/choreography as template but letting aspects of the dancing soar and convey worlds of fantasy that reflect (up to a point) the way the ballet's interpretation has evolved with dancers' bodies/techniques. On the international star front: I would just like to add that Herman Cornejo is the peer of any international male ballet star and widely recognized by critics and many fans as such. No-one has to like any dancer, but I think he merits recognition as a world class artist. Cornejo is not enough, perhaps, to compensate for other weaknesses in the ABT roster--and, as I often say, I'm a ballerina-centric fan myself--but I think it worth registering how lucky ABT is to have him. People may point to his age and injuries, but I think he still dances with remarkable beauty and charisma--I saw him in Ratmansky and Ashton, and I even think he has gotten...uh...sexier with age. (I tried to find a more high-minded way to say that, but gave up.) Edited to say: I guess I should have said something about Macaulay since this is the dance writing thread! Mostly I'm struck by the critical support he is giving to the overall season--not just to the rep that he likes, but (as he has in the past) comparing ABT favorably to the Royal when it comes to Ashton. No matter how much the Royal's Ashton may have fallen off, that's still strong praise. In general in his writings, whether re ABT or Sarasota ballet, he seems to try hard to build an audience for Ashton (that shouldn't be necessary to do, but seems to be anyway) -- and even here, looking back over the season, presumably wants to keep championing ABT as a home for Ashton. I appreciate that since I want ABT to be a home for Ashton too.

It was thrilling to see the lovers in their boat as they were joined in the land of the dead. Almost exactly as in the ending of the David Blair production for ABT that was my first Swan Lake. But I, too, wasn't sure how I felt about the more 'naturalistic' intimate style of acting in relation either to the Tchaikovsky music--which is nothing if not mythic--or even to the rest of the choreography. (Canbelto mentions the lovers' "tight embraces.") I can't judge of its accuracy of course (not just the gestures, which I know are notated, but their 'flavor' so to speak). A combination of classical ballet with somewhat more everyday gesture is characteristic of Ratmansky's own choreography. If the reconstruction appears to have 'less dancing' in this clip, I think that's because you don't have a danced physical fight between Rothbart and Siegfried. That's a Sovietism I, for one, can live without. I'm a little puzzled by the claim I have seen that this production gets rid of 'swan' arms. What I consider swan arms are decidedly there in that clip (as I was happy to see).

He says "There are rumors..."--which is not exactly reporting. I suppose he may know more than he is letting on...

Thanks for this report. I was just this second looking at a photo of Trenary rehearsing Aurora with Kolpakova. Very excited to read about rest of performance. (I tend to think excitement from 'newbies' as well as fans can be a good sign that a dancer really has the 'it' factor.)

This interview primarily discusses the La Scala production of his Swan Lake (bigger than the Zurich version) and mentions a new Petipa production for New York (ABT I assume) in 2018. Which ballet? "it's a secret:" http://www.gramilano.com/2016/06/ratmanskys-swan-lake-arrives-bigger-better-la-scala/ Wish the Lincoln Center Festival would consider bringing this to NY (soon)...Surely it's so retro it's kind of hip. Plus Swan Lake...so they know they can sell tickets.

Others have reported the Royal Ballet had done a Frankenstein Ballet before (by Wayne Eagling) and some aspects of the story are well-known to the public, so a company that has a long and (more or less) successful history of full-length ballets based on literary works may have thought, not entirely irrationally, that it was a good bet. ("Royal House of Mime" indeed - mime has always been one of the company's calling cards.) I haven't seen the production live and the 'literary-adaptation' full-length ballet is not my favorite genre anyway,...I will say that what bothered me about the harlot scene is that it looked like Clerval was all but being sexually assaulted. I found it really unpleasant--and even a little hard to believe that the unpleasantness wasn't deliberate and perhaps intended as a comment on the cheerful 'whoring' of, say, Macmillan's Romeo. I even wondered if Scarlett intended Clerval's resistance to signify his homosexuality (whether repressed or, for social reasons, merely suppressed). But that didn't appear to be something elsewhere explored by the ballet...though perhaps Scarlett's approach to the story as a whole could be suspected of hinting at an unexpressed resistance to the uber-domesticity of the original Frankenstein home. Possibly not worth the thought, but I actually found it sort of interesting that Scarlett wanted to spend so much time on the Frankenstein home and I wasn't completely convinced that it was simply padding or bad judgment though elements of both may have been involved. I wonder if he will tinker with the ballet for San Francisco. (If the ballet draws good box office, I suspect the companies and the sponsors can live with bad reviews.)

It's interesting to me that the Mikhailovsky is also doing a (very different) ballet based on Pushkin's poem this season.

He gives no evidence of having one.

Very pleased to read your report about this performance. I have had mixed reactions to Seo in major roles but treasure my memories of her Aurora last year. I hope to to see her Swan Lake one day...

Deflope --thank you for the further translations. What Stepanova says about the Bolshoi is lovely. [Edited to say that Deflope corrected me below--thank you Birdsall!] Smirnova was the first Bela--and seems to have been very well received in the role. If I remember correctly, when the ballet had its first run, the second cast was Vinogradova. I can't say what Rodkin may have said/intended. (Certainly the producer of this feature liked showing Stepanova in midriff-baring roles.)

Oh yes...I was trying to respond to that perhaps somewhat obliquely. Companies have ups and downs. ABT is having a down in some respects -- though not at all I think in others. NYCB has had a resurgence, though I must admit, allowing that for many years I have been seeing them mostly on special trips into the city, I never found them to be in as bad a shape as sometimes asserted. But certainly in recent years remarkable talent has emerged in the way of dancers and choreographers. The company still has misses as well as hits on both fronts. How could they not? Altogether though--yeah, they're fabulous. (Though I'm a little wary of the upcoming schedule doing without Balanchine for what...well over a month?!) I really was just trying to say--again, perhaps too obliquely--that companies and their audiences go through different phases ... what's strong one season may be a little less strong the next two or three and then back again and then another strength emerges and so on. One has a right to complain of course when things are weak. But I think ABT is artistically in a stronger place than it was in the seasons we were getting Macmillan, Cranko (not just Onegin but Taming of the Shrew), and Stevenson (Snow Maiden) for British choreography, and little or no Ashton. I'm also a Ratmansky fan, and find the company more artistically compelling because of his role there, though I know not everyone feels that way. And I remember your dislike, Vipa, of the new Sleeping Beauty. I guess I'll just say that, at any rate, he has drawn a kind of critical and international attention to ABT that is not just about ballet dancers but about ballet. I started to write something about dancers, too, but everything I thought of to say required so many qualifications and exceptions and explanations that I just gave up. I fear I sound pollyanish re ABT. I don't think I am but perhaps...Actually since it costs me a great deal in physical/mental/budget stress to travel to see ballet performances in NY I am plenty disheartened when I see "meh" though I only occasionally write about "meh" at length.