Drew

I have really enjoyed video of Heymann. I wish I could see his Corsaire performances. Don't think it's in the cards though.

The Bolshoi version is very different from the Mariinsky version--I would say much inferior. But certainly different. If it's a debut in London...well, that's an important debut on tour.

She has also been listed as dancing Swan Lake in London. Probably will be dancing it in Moscow first...

I know this discussion reflects box office etc, but as a front-rank ballerina in her prime, I'll take Murphy any day!

That's exactly what I had in mind.

This production obviously took some imagination and brought not just local color but local artists (designers etc.) into the mix. That is one way to get a community excited and involved that seems legit to me. That Lopez has to find ways to get audiences excited is a reality; that she find creative ways to do so while supporting major choreography seems to me what one can hope. This production sounds like it was an attempt at just that. The local geography allusions--"dumbed down marketing" or reaching out? Even if it amounts to the former, I have seen ballet companies get much, much dumber. And not in the service of serious choreography either. Was it really necessary in this case for success -- who knows? (Lopez says in interviews that even when she was at NYCB she wanted to see the ballet with a brighter palette.) I am a little skeptical the company would have gotten as much attention for a reproduction of a version done by other companies or even for a more standard-style redesign. But at any rate time will tell if this production "takes" so to speak with the company and its audience. Edited to Add: presumably the Nutcracker doesn't need any helping along marketing-wise but doesn't San Francisco Ballet set their Nutcracker at the San Francisco World's Fair? Plenty of differences from what Lopez is doing, but does show a similar spirit of wanting to give the audience something of it's 'own'--and I'm guessing not because they can't enjoy a Nutcracker set in 19th-century Germany.

Whatever was going on ... sounds like good news for Kobborg and the company. (Though I must admit one of my first thoughts about the seeming dismissal was...'gee I wonder if this means Cojocaru might look for more dance opportunities in the U.S.?' It's the selfish gene.)

Re "Why?" I guess I think it's meant to say--'yes, we are doing Balanchine-Shakespeare, but we are doing it in a way that speaks to our community and is unique to us.' Marketing? Artistry? A bit of both. (Cf. Hubbe's Sylphide--and that's AT Bournonville's home company which I admit I found more problematic.) Maybe they could have sold a version based on NYCB's just as successfully, but maybe not...Would we be talking about it at this length? Certainly not, But also, as noted by Birdsall above, redesigning classic librettos/scores in ways that reframe and recontextualize them is a norm in opera and has happened somewhat in ballet too. For myself, I'm very glad opera's wilder attitude to staging hasn't made its way to the ballet world, but I also think the art form just withers if it goes to the other extreme and every production of a 'classic' in every company is always the same. Keeping the music and choreography seem to be the essential thing in staging of a classic work. Though certainly the story in a story ballet and design elements true to the spirit of the music, choreography, and story are not unimportant. (I am not talking about a work like Prodigal Son where Rouault's designs would at least seem to be irreplaceable.) The underwater/by-the-water theme remains true to the idea of a magical alternate world where everyday laws don't apply. It's not like Shakespeare's forest makes sense, though it is meant to conjure a certain image of England--Lopez presumably is translating that to the world of her Florida audience however playfully. (Balanchine brought the sea indirectly into his ballet with Titania's shell. Not an obviously logical touch and it links his Titania to, say, Botticelli's Venus born from the sea.) The production does still sound as if it pushes against aspects of the libretto that do affect some aspects of the choreography and imagery. How much--too much or not much at all? I haven't seen it and though grateful for people's reports and interested in their arguments don't like to guess second hand what my own reaction would be in the theater. What I also don't know is if it might give me a new kind of delight in Balanchine's choreography. But I'm writing 'blind' so to speak, anyway, because I am uneasy with the implication that Lopez has done something that's somehow illegitimate or disrespectful or without point. (I assume the Balanchine Trust took a similar view--they had to okay this no?) MCB isn't dancing Agon in baroque court dress -- or, for that matter, Les Sylphides in leotards ?

Hope they bring Laurencia to NY-- I would certainly be likelier to try to see it than Corsaire. At least with Osipova I would.

How nice to see all the dancers greet and present flowers to Kovaleva! That was the loveliest aspect of this evening. As a gala performance I found it, on video at least, a mixed affair. Had I been in the theater I daresay I would have enjoyed seeing Vishneva--on video I was unwilling to watch the Van Manen beyond the first few minutes. She is a great, great artist, but what she is doing just doesn't seem to communicate to me in this recorded format. Some of the point of "Live" in particular seems lost even when one can make sense of it intellectually. Perhaps I will make myself watch it later. The highlight for me of what I DID watch was Smirnova's variation/coda in Don Q; when she is really in command of what she does the movement looks simultaneously regal and joyous. And I appreciated the speed in such a long limbed dancer. However, the adagio looked a bit labored for my taste though I allow that the role is new to her and, again, I'm watching video. (Perhaps Ovcharenko is not the best partner for her...but perhaps the adago will work better at their upcoming performance in April.) I also enjoyed Borchenko in Corsaire and I always quite like Yermakov.

I think more than ego was involved in this production--well, no-one can be sure of another person's motives but it sounds like more than ego to me--but I can understand wanting to see the ballet, especially for the first time, with the sets and setting Balanchine supervised.

"Elizabethan forest period...?" why not "an Athenian forest period?" or a bit of both for that matter. Balanchine riffs on both (as does Shakespeare) as well as riffing on nineteenth-century ballet conventions. So there is no "period" about it in both senses of the word period--historical period or period as a way to say 'that's the end of the matter.' God knows theatrical productions of Shakespeare's play have gone far more radically in the direction of transforming sets/costumes/contexts etc. I'm not unsympathetic to your concerns as I happen also to like the forest convention and thinks it's true to Shakespeare and Balanchine's original conception etc. , but as design re-imaginings go this Miami City Ballet production sounds pretty respectful and pretty charming. Does it work? Some people think yes and others no and others in-between. But that could easily have been true of a production that simply reproduced NYCB's sets/costumes. Piety is no guarantee of theatrical life and sometimes stifles it. Amusingly (to me) and on the more literal side, there actually are such creatures as "sea butterflies."

The darker hair gives her a rather different look...

Thank you for the information and link.

I have always at least wondered whether Farrell's long-term impact as a coach and teacher -- a spreader of the "gospel of Balanchine" as mentioned above (or her version) would not be greater if her company was developed to be more of a real institution, and even if that meant that a portion of her time was spent on more administrative tasks. But that isn't the route she and/or the Kennedy Center have chosen. I'm very interested in seeing what Kent does with the Washington Ballet.

Thanks for the link.

Whatever one thinks of this production--some of us writing haven't seen it--it sounds like something more interesting than a "publicity stunt."

This is what the Lopez' approach sounds like to me too. Have no idea what I would think of this production if I saw it, but as long as there is respect for the choreography and music I don't find it absurd for directors to try something new now and then with productions of classics (which I consider this ballet). It won't always work, and people should debate, but productions that don't involve redesigns or narrative reframing won't always work either.

Thank you for drawing attention to this--I had no idea.

Messmer was one of my absolute favorites at ABT!

This sounds wonderful. I wish I could see it.

I hate scrims--they almost completely spoil my pleasure when I see a ballet or contemporary dance work that uses them. I think I would have been ready to scream at a performance of Balanchine's Midsummer Night's Dream in which the scrim didn't go up until the second act -- whatever the scenic effects achieved. Uh...otherwise many aspects of the production sound rather delightful. I'm okay in principle with Miami City ballet having a distinctive version of Balanchine's work as long as NYCB doesn't mess with theirs... Also edited to add: there are several butterfly-ish looking creatures under the sea...

Like Buddy above, I had much the same reaction. (I have never seen her video blog.)

I will miss Copeland in Firebird but am interested in seeing her in Fille--never thought of myself as a "screaming minion" though. Edited to add that I've never had any problem with fans cheering Copeland...or any other ABT ballerina come to think of it.

Ye olde days indeed...and warmly cherished by me. I don't think it has been that way lately. At least not in my experience of roughly the last 7-8 years. Not saying I always am able to get my first choice seats but more or less I've done okay. It's possible I had some good luck.