Drew

I loved Cornejo's Colas this season--to say nothing of his dancing in Ratmansky's ballets--but I'm not sure he is dancing with quite the same spring as I have seen in the past. Still with amazing buoyancy and beauty (he is pretty much my favorite male dancer) but it wouldn't surprise me if his height isn't exactly as it has been or not across the board. Conrad does tend to be more the "straight man" hero of this production of Corsaire...and in that sense, much of the "sensational" dancing goes to Ali as noted above.

Just saw this sad news. May she rest in peace...

Love the photo. I thought the moment he describes, when Colas positions himself as if for a grand bit of partnering (Macaulay mentions a fishdive) and then the ballerina just gently nestles her head against him, was just lovely -- all 3 casts I saw, though I think I found Copeland and Cornejo especially tender and beautiful. I also think it's the sort of moment that shows an affinity betwen Ashton and Ratmansky that seems important to the company ABT can be.

There is some tension in a lot of nineteenth-century ballets - and in some later ones - between the agency women have in the story and the agency they have in the choreography. Medora has plenty of the latter (perhaps even more in the Burlaka-Ratmansky Corsaire 'reconstruction' which the Bolshoi dances than in the productions you mention). I wasn't sure how serious you were being re Corsaire, but though I am not a purist, I would just as soon choreographers who wanted to tell women's stories create their own ballets and their own stories rather than radically mess with nineteenth-century ballets. And some have.

That was Wagner's understanding too .

I suppose you meant 1809 on Mendelssohn...but when you say you don't know if it's a good thing if the ballet stays close to its source material, which ballet version(s) of Midsummer Night's Dream are you thinking of? I have seen three (Balanchine, Ashton, Neumeier) -- there are more -- and never had any trouble sorting the story out. (Am I a bad example? The Balanchine version is a huge and consistent hit with New York City Ballet audiences. I don't think it would be if they found it confusing.)

It was interesting to read about the 'earliest' Sleeping Beauty story--I don't think I ever knew about that one. Thank you. You will find that some of these ballets have topics and multiple threads devoted to them in the encompassing forum "Ballets and Choreographers." There is material there about different productions, versions of the stories etc.

It may be that I was over-reading their pitch--though not so much as a ballet "for" children as something you might want to bring children to see. The brochure does give a lot of historical information/background about the ballet, its music, and designs that certainly seems more aimed at framing it as an artistic 'event.' But I was thinking of the opening sentences: "The magical fairy tale ballet The Golden Cockerel is a visual spectacle for the whole family. The ballet follows the exploits of the foolish Tsar Dodon, the cunning Astrologer and the exotic Queen of Shemakhan." A little further down, the brochure describes Ratmansky's use of mime "as a way to convey the story to the audience, making the ballet fun and easy to follow." I took "whole family" along with "fun and easy to follow" in particular to mean "you can bring your kids" -- but I can't say I really know what they had in mind...or if it was the best approach.

The corps happily looked engaged at all three performances of Fille I saw (with two alternating casts as "Colas's friends" and "Lise's friends," assorted poultry, etc.) and the ballet does have a number of featured character parts as well as a few other featured bits like the boy with the flute, and other bits of business for dancers sometimes around the edges of the stage (at one point Colas and the Rooster get into it upstage). It's not Sleeping Beauty of course! And goodness knows the dancers need Sleeping Beauty type opportunities as well -- so I'd agree that it's important the repertory have a certain balance. But writing not as a friend or fan of dancers, sympathizing with their challenges (though of course I am a fan), but as a lover of classical ballet, I have to say, too, that it's the job of corps dancers to dance with the same commitment and energy as featured dancers. (Think of Broadway dancers performing the same show night after night. They may BE bored, but they certainly shouldn't look bored.) At its best, I think ABT's corps shows that commitment and energy. Re children: I received a colorful brochure for Golden Cockerel today, and I thought it was nicely done--beautiful photos, lots of information etc. And the company is obviously pitching it as a "whole family" ballet. Whimsical fairy tale, but satire for adults too etc. And it may be that with that pitch in mind ABT felt they couldn't do another, semi-similar family pitch for Fille. I won't be able to see Golden Cockerel this season, but hope it is a huge hit.

For me the standard in that role was set by Malakhov. I think that many potential ticket buyers don't know WHAT La Fille Mal Gardee is. It hasn't been done by ABT in over a decade, the title is in French, the story doesn't come from a famous literary subject etc. And most people probably have no idea what a great ballet it could be for their children. (Probably better than Sleeping Beauty because shorter and funnier.)

Company for the perennial swans.

Lucky you! You must have seen Alexander Grant as Alain then! I also just leave the theater happy with this ballet. I actually find the second act extremely touching and Lise's mime just beautiful. I liked Scott's Alain a bit better than Salstein's as he seemed more genuinely shy (as opposed to just a goof) and danced the steps better. I preferred Zhurbin's Widow Simone to Gomes's for analogous reasons: more like a character, less like a gag and great in the clog dance. But I enjoyed all casts I saw. I might not want to see this season after season, but as a regular returning part of the rep? Danced as well as the company dances it? Absolutely. I did wish there had been more children in the theater, and am sad it doesn't sell better. It seems to me ABT dancing an Ashton masterpiece very well across multiple casts, with no guest artists (and perhaps more to the point, no guest artists needed) shows Mckenzie doing his job very well. (Though I admit I wouldn't exactly picket if Cojocaru turned up in NY for a performance.)

After this afternoon's and this evenings performances, I'd say ABT was 3 for 3 with Fille, though different casts had slightly different strengths and I have my own personal preferences in any case. But I will single out Copeland and Cornejo's absolutely magical account of the final pas de deux as a particular highlight of the performances I saw. (Unfortunately, my ballet-going is now over for at least a couple of months and I will miss Abrera.)

Also seen (with the Mariinsky still touring under their Kirov name) at the Met. One cast was Zakharova-Lopatkina.

Osipova trained for some years at the Bolshoi's academy (I think it's called the Moscow State Academy of Choreography.)

Then perhaps it was an atypical night. Everything was good by the way--but a series of pirouettes was just a tad uncontrolled/sloppy where they needed to be very fast and crisp (I don't know how to describe the little Ashton touches) and a final set of tours a la seconde alternating with pirouettes [edited to say more like tours a la seconde alternating with double fouetees] while well executed, seemed slow. Both 'big' moments in the choreography that got comparably modest reactions from the audience (which the rest of his dancing did not). I would still have said not bad at all but in comparison with his smooth, easy jumps, graceful partnering and generally assured manner--a little less impressive. My main point is that it was a very enjoyable evening. (While we are on the subject of things dancers sometimes do more but sometimes less well--I don't think I have ever seen Boylston's arms and hands so charmingly deployed. Her mime too in the famous daydreaming scene was completely natural. I am guessing the stager (Malin Thoors) or, at any rate, someone gave her some good guidance. In Ratmansky's Chamber symphony I had found Boylston prosaic when she needed to be poetic, but with Lise--admitedly a kind of prosaic heroine--I thought new layers were emerging in her dancing.)

I think the Paris Opera Paquita is (except for the last act) Pierre Lacotte's choreography as he interprets the spirit of the original for today's audiences. The Ratmansky is throughout a reconstruction based on notations and other sources. It, too, involves interpretation of past materials, but is still a very different enterprise and different production -- at least as I understand. I would be very interested to see ABT take on the Ratmansky Pacquita staging.

A very enjoyable evening...I thought Boylston took a few minutes to warm up, but once she was underway I liked her very much. Cirio was also very good, though he is perhaps not so strong a turner as he is a jumper. Zhurbin was a funny Widow Simone and what I also appreciated about the evening was that the whole ensemble looked to be dancing with devotion--as if THEY enjoyed the ballet. Which I hope they did.

Just a quick additional note to say Monday's performance of Piano Concerto no. 1 happily reminded me why I love the ballet: Shevchenko again, but with Calvin Royal III, Skylar Brandt, and Gabe Stone Shayer. All danced with the urgency and chemistry that seemed to me missing on Saturday. Even the orchestra sounded more energetic, though that may have been an aural illusion. Cast changes in the first two ballets of the Trilogy made subtle differences to their impact as well and the Chamber Symphony also seemed to be more warmly received than on Saturday -- though the house was, if anything, even less well sold. Glad I was able to see this performance.

I would be surprised if Mattel hadn't acquired the rights to reproduce the Firebird costume. I have seen Balanchine's and Fokine's versions of Firebird (two Balanchine versions actually) plus Glen Tetley's version. The Ratmansky version still works for me! But if we all reacted the same way to everything, then we wouldn't need discussion boards...or art come to think of it. I agree that Seven Sonatas is not well served by the Met, though I still enjoyed seeing it.

I can't really gainsay what's been said about Wheeldon's American Rhapsody, but though Robert Fairchild may be out of (ballet-dancing) shape, he is still a charismatic and skilled performer while Peck is those things AND a brilliant ballerina--all qualities that are not for nothing even in a ballet that doesn't work. I even genuinely enjoyed their pas de deux and find they do have chemistry onstage. I also think that a complete redesign might improve the ballet a fair amount. The Craig Hall/Tiler Peck After the Rain pas de deux Sunday was quite lovely and moving. A bonus for me as a fan was seeing Wendy Whelan down the side of the first ring, all but right over the stage--there (as I infer) to support and cheer for Hall.

In Piano Concerto number 1 Sat night, Shevchenko and Kochetkova somehow didn't gel together effectively, and Simkin was a touch sloppy. Several years ago at the Koch theater I saw Piano Concero number 1 as a seperate ballet three times with two different casts including Shevchenko and Simkin (one of the most artistically convincing performances I had ever seen him give) and I loved the ballet -- possibly more each time I saw it. Last night it seemed off--even the slightly satirical but fun 'sport culture' formations didn't seem like the crisp vivid snapshots of a few years ago. The cast? The chemistry? The cavernous Met? Off night? Inadequate rehearsal? Hard for me to say, but I found it interesting to read other people's thoughts, and they seem to confirm for me that last night did not quite work. Too bad because it was my first time seeing the trilogy as a whole and I find it an intriguing and impressive accomplishment. With some reservations/questions about the first movement I found Symphony number Nine especially compelling at the performance I saw. When Gomes lifted Teuscher up over his head and then held her up there with just one arm on her waist it seemed a poignant rewrite of spectacular Soviet partnering: as she arched backward over that arm she looked like a sacrifice. Throughout the ballet I thought Teuscher not only danced beautifully, but managed the undercurrents of disturbance and anxiety without a hint of excess or 'acting'-- and what clean long lines she has. It was fun to see the whole trilogy alongside Concerto DSCH Friday at NYCB too--it made for sort of a Shostakovich quartet. The companies may not have planned that, but it worked out very well. I am looking forward to seeing the trilogy again with a different cast on Monday. Could not agree more with Kaysta about Trenary and Zhurbin in Firebird. As she said: they 'killed' it. I have always loved the Ratmansky Firebird and happy to report the company still looks great in it and I still love it. I find it beautiful, funny, strange, surprising--and I think I may even have teared up when the young men emerged from the trees which had been their prison. My companion--who likes ballet, but is not a fan--was seeing it for the first time; when the curtain came down, he looked at me and said "spectacular." Both Trenary and Teuscher danced Saturday like ballerinas in the making.

This afternoon's Ratmansky triple bill had what looked to me like a very well-sold house--and it was a terrific afternoon at the ballet. The new Serenade After Plato's Symposium seemed to me very much to capture the feel of a male community in conversation and debate as the latter progresses through subtle shifts of mood and tone. The lone female figure comes from a different sphere--Diotima as priestess (which is what she is in The Symposium) rather than image of transcendence (which is what she talks about) though stll inaccessible. All of the solos, duets, and small groups emerged from the group and returned to it--at one point, solo even seemed to answer solo as if in confrontation. Though parts of the score are dancier than others (even a hint jazzy), one of the beauties of the ballet lies in the way it finds extended dance phrases in music that doesn't initially seem to invite dance. The result really does feel like a conversation at the same time as it is an enthralling ballet. I saw the cast with Cornejo, Forster, Scott, Hammoudi, Sebastian, Malone, and Gorak. "Second" cast or no every one of them danced with great distinctiveness--just when I thought one really stood out out for the particular fluidity, strength, and intensity of his dancing, another would show me something just as wonderful. I'll call Cornejo first among equals--and mention Sebastian who also got quite a warm reception from the audience. At the same performance Seo was lovely if perhaps not quite as distinctive. I think this is a major addition to ABT's repertory (as best one can judge from one viewing) and a wonderful ballet.

Thanks for the update.

It's a shame that these performances seem disappointing to so many commenting here: the company has done well by Sylvia in the past--