Drew

I thought a variety of material in order to showcase a variety of dancers, though certainly featuring British choreography (or, in the case of the Nijinska solo, choreography partly associated with history of British ballet) in keeping with the rest of the program and rest of the season. That is, I thought they were going for a dancers' showcase with a distinctive Royal Ballet flavor. Of course one can think they should have chosen different pieces--for myself it is not really my favorite style of programming. (I preferred it to seeing Don Quixote though, and in the era of one week tours to New York once a decade it was a chance to see a number of different dancers.)

None of the choreography was particularly well served by the bits and pieces format of that portion of the program. As for Voices of Spring...I don't think the performances we saw were less than terrific because the dancers were not performing tongue in cheek, because I think there were more basic problems. To parody something effectively if affectionately you need to be be able to do it very well. It's not like we got spectacular but pompous performances. In the afternoon there were nerves and/or insecurity. In the evening the dancers were more polished and more fun, but not enough to make a big difference. (As I remember video I've seen, Cojocaru rather let the humor speak for itself anyway...or dance for itself.) [edited because my memory telescoped two different casts I have seen in Voices of Spring]. After the last tour when the Royal brought a series of pas de deux for a portion of the program, there was a similar sense of dubiousness in many reports about the performances which included Ashton's Thais. Unfortunately, I missed that tour-- It is not that I think Voices of Spring was a great choice, and I assume it was there because they wanted a classical crowd pleaser, but bits and pieces is rarely the best the way to showcase choreography, as opposed to dancers.

I don't think the choice of Ashton pas de deux for the series of excerpts presented on the second program was a make or break issue for this tour. The fact is we got to see some interesting rep and some good and very good (and, unavoidably, some less good) performances. That last sentence sounds a little tepid--but I mean it as real praise. Oddly enough--or not, since the choreographer is alive to work with the dancers and the choreography itself fresh and being danced by the dancers it was created on--Scarlett's Age of Anxiety seems in my memory to have been the most fully realized performance (even if not the greatest ballet) on this tour, the one that showed the company doing something IT does and can do better than any in the world. (I'm thinking of the 'first' cast, but the other cast was very fine too.) In an interview O'Hare spoke of a certain naturalistic style of acting that was distinctive to the Royal. That certainly seemed the case here. Of course we saw other quality performances in other ballets, and in some cases truly splendid performances, but not as consistently up and down the cast or from the corps as well as the leads etc. One may feel it IS a problem the company can make a more consistently memorable mark in Scarlett than Ashton, rather like the days (now past) when NYCB was dazzling in Martins and sometimes less so in Balanchine. But as someone just seeing a few performances on tour I won't draw any grand conclusions. And it is just one opinion anyway. I'm still happiest I finally got to see Song of The Earth. I also wish the Royal could have brought Winter's Tale, but that wasn't possible. On the ballerina front, I think it is a huge shame they lost Cojocaru, but on the evidence of the tour they have interesting younger talent, plus the wonderful Nunez at the height of her career, and in Osipova a thoroughly exciting ballerina with a fresh take on pretty much everything. And I am thrilled the company is reviving Two Pigeons. Wish they could tour THAT to the U.S.

What a gorgeous photo. Hope you enjoy the rest of your holiday.

Both programs sound like they made for very enjoyable evenings...lots of great dancers. Would be happy to hear your impressions of program B if you have the chance...

I completely agree that "technique" and "artistry" are intimately bound up with one another in ballet, but I think that when it comes to analyzing and evaluating dancers the grounds of discussion or debate then sometimes simply shift to what one considers "highly accomplished technique" or for that matter what one considers mannerism. (And I think repertory has a bearing on that too.) Above, in a different part of discussion you mentioned that even such a brilliant dancer as Merrill Ashley had been known to modify a step--you make allowance, but someone else might not, and a third person might say it's Ashley's musicality (or "artistry") that made the difference. So some of this discussion may be about semantics. I say this even though I, like you, have some difficulty when people distinguish artistry from technique even in dramatic roles. But I don't think it's always about defending some lesser ballerina who can't do the steps. Balanchine and the cult of 'personality' as it informs the cult of the ballerina is a tricky topic; I don't think NYCB under his leadership escaped its own peculiar version of it nor was like to do so under the leadership of the man who said 'ballet is woman' and sometimes had his leads dance without understudies. But call it technique or call it artistry or just call it being unique--ABT needs major dancers in its top ranks. I am hoping all of those recently promoted can rise or grow to the occasion...

I think it would be more exact to say that there will always be people who complain about highly accomplished technique when they believe that "technique" is all that a dancer has to offer...(I am not commenting on Lane as I have only seen her in solo roles.) For myself, I believe that in many ballets, what people call technique can be plenty revelatory...but not always. And in any ballet, that technique has to be deployed in a distinctive, imaginative way for a dancer to put her or his personal stamp on it. I found Kochetkova an unremarkable, even uninteresting, Nikiya in Bayadere this past spring (though I would not say she "disgraced" herself), but I assume what I guess everyone assumes: that she has been brought in to be a partner for Cornejo and, possibly, Simkin. I know people hate ABT's reliance on guest artists, but if I made the journey to NY to see ballet, I would much rather see Cornejo dance with Cojocaru than with either Kochetkova or Lane. Their Bayadere together was remarkable ...

Thank you for sharing this sad news. I remember the Ballet Shop very well (and can picture Mr. Leibovitz in my head though I did not know him personally)--it was a wonderful place to find all kinds of books, programs, photos etc. At a certain time in my life I would drop in before almost every ballet performance I attended. A few years ago, quite by chance, I picked up a photo of the shop from an outdoor book (and-what-not) seller near Lincoln Center. RIP Tobias Leibovitz...

All of this is very sensible, but I hope you are not blaming yourself in any way. One can make perfectly good calculations as you did (based on your size, knowledge of the city, numbers of people around etc.) -- or outright paranoid ones as I often do! =- and bad things can still happen. Anywhere--though it's sad to have it happen as part of an otherwise joyful visit to St. Petersburg.

As do I...

Very sorry to read of this terrible attack. I am glad you saw such wonderful performances of Nutcracker--but being beaten as well as robbed is just a horrible, horrible thing. Hope all injuries heal up well and quickly. Buddy, without exception guide books--including those for young people--say tourists should never get into one of those hitch a ride for pay cars in Russia if more than one person (the driver) is already in the car. (As a woman tourist alone in Russia I would never do it in any case--whatever the locals may feel comfortable doing.)

I mentioned difficulties above--so I should also mention that when I got hold of someone today they were all resolved. And subscribing did save me money as well. I still think subscribing is tricky if you have very precise ideas about where you want to sit, but on the whole I would probably do it again. CTballetFan wondered if the company's subscription sales were particularly strong this year. I would be interested to know, because I have never been pursued to renew a subscription as persistently as this year and it obviously worked on ME. But I may be an easy target (for this).

I dealt with someone on the phone and they were very nice and helpful, but even so there is a limit to how precisely they can help with seating choices (in my experience) and unfortunately I do not think my instructions about alternate locations (if seats I requested were not available) were understood. I received a message from subscription office earlier today that suggested as much. I don't know how this story ends, but likely with me not subscribing again. I think the subscription office has a tricky job and works hard to do it well--from their point of view I am the problem. But this year I had decided not to subscribe, and they peppered me with emails, phone calls and lots of personal attention, and I decided to give it another try. But it's just not set up to accommodate very precise instructions. One thing that I think I have a legitimate gripe about is that this call about problems accommodating my requests came the day tickets went on sale and, predictably, I did not get the message until after the office was closed...why not Friday or Saturday when I might reasonably have cancelled the whole thing and been able to buy seats the first day they went on sale? Do I sound fussy?? Well, yeah, I'm fussy. But I'm guessing a lot of NYCB's most loyal customers are...

The uninjured part of Filin's directorship--and the period when presumably he had the freest hand--lasted a little over two years. That's not a lot of time. I also admired what Ratmansky and Burlaka did with the company--some of it at any rate. And I absolutely loved the Vikhaerev Coppelia reconstruction which the company brought to exciting contemporary life. But neither of them lasted and it seems as though the job of Bolshoi director has not gotten any easier since then [cough]. The new plan as announced (which Urin rather puzzlingly characterizes as typical of other companies) in which the director supposedly will be responsible primarily for 'administration' and the artistic decisions kicked upstairs may or may not prove much of a solution. Uh...we will find out. (In Swans of the Kremlin Christine Ezrahi describes artistic control by committee at the Kirov in the 50's/60's and quotes from meetings where artistic decisions were discussed and argued about by a team of people. She seems very interested in how they dealt with external pressures considerably worse than the external pressures top Russian companies face now--though now is problematic enough; she also does a very good job, I thought, of clarifying how and why Grigorovich is such an important figure in getting beyond 'dramballet' even if he sometimes looks to the West like an example of dramballet.)

I agree that it would be sad to see the company's identity diluted--and I think some dilution had been going on well before Filin (eg more academic port de bras than the 'old' Bolshoi; fewer uber-masculine male leads). One reason the emergence of Osipova seemed so exciting was that she had a power and personality that seemed to echo an earlier time in the company's history. Vasiliev likewise seemed (and seems) a bit of a throwback. The other side of that identity, unfortunately, is that it does seem very bound up with the Grigorivich heritage. If/as the company moves away from Grigorivich's productions and ballets, then the way they dance may well change even more than it has. I guess the difficulty is how to preserve an identity AND let it grow and develop. People are very happy with NYCB and Peter Martins now, but in the first 20-25 years after Balanchine's death...not so much. When Filin was interviewed by Anna Kisselgoff during the Lincoln Center Festival (2014), she pressed him on the changing type of the male dancers at the Bolshoi in particular. At one point he said something to the effect that the older-style, super muscular dancers might not do so well in much of the newer rep. Whether or not that's true, certainly the "golden age" of the Bolshoi is hard to disentangle from the Grigorovich repertory. (Obviously, since at least the 30's, the Bolshoi has always had a few prominent Vaganova/Mariinsky imports in its top ranks. I'd say that's part of its identity, though I admit the styles don't always mesh. And Filin has imported from elsewhere too.)

Filin may take seriously the Bolshoi's offer to keep him on in some capacity--his comments have certainly eschewed bitterness--and from that point of view he may either prefer a more 'honest' account of the situation or not have been given that much choice. I prefer to think the former. After all how much "face" is saved by something obviously untrue? In terms of accomplishments: Filin has been stymied (I assume) by his injuries and by politics both internal and external to the theater, though the buck still has to stop with him since he is the director. But he at least tried to expand the repertory (both with 'standard' international rep works and new commisssioned works by international and Russian choreographers) and made some decent choices especially for the company/aesthetic in which the Bolshoi works. For example: I don't care for Onegin--but for the Bolshoi...it's a pretty defensible choice. He has also brought in some interesting artists to the Bolshoi as collaborators. If nothing else, Taming of the Shrew in particular has cultivated and featured the talents of some of its top dancers in fresh ways. (Though I base my judgments on video I don't think I'm the only one who thought it took Krysanova to a whole new level.) On the dancer front the hiring of Obraztsova and hiring and development of Smirnova seem to me great decisions, though of course I don't know what company insiders feel. I think the hiring of Hallberg was, at any rate, a daring and interesting choice and sent a signal about making the company's culture less insular. No-one wants the Bolshoi to be Russian Ballet Theater, but a little less insularity? Seems like a good thing. On the dancer front too--I like Chudin a lot and since he came from the Stanislavsky a little after Filin, I always assumed he was a Filin hire too. Other talented younger dancers are coming to the fore...Fairness to older dancers? That's a hard call in any company when a new director comes in (see Corella, Angel) and in a company with politics as murky as the Bolshoi?? Let's just say I don't assume Filin has been the sole problem. I depend on Ismene Brown for information about the financial (mis)management issues -- her reporting said Filin was cleared of any wrongdoing. His own answer to a question about casting-couch and Smirnova in particular was (I thought) hilarious in a very un-PC way, though I understand if others found it in...uh...questionable taste. (He said something to the effect that he could sleep with his wife--also a dancer--for 25 years [or some such] and she still wouldn't be anywhere near as good a dancer as Smirnova.) But I haven't the faintest if Filin is the "best" person for the job. Actually, the job seems pretty impossible--even without acid-throwing thugs thrown into the mix--and changing the job itself, as announced, in a way that may put more power in the hands of a committee or the overalll theater director?? We will see what happens...

Very uneasy-making news -- including the indication that the new director of the ballet will have less power and the overall head of the theater more...I am sad for Filin as well who--whatever his faults may be--has suffered appallingly and will be dealing with the repercussions of the acid attack for the rest of his life. I hope too that the good developments of the company under his leadership will not get rolled back...

Most companies seem to do it pretty much the way NYCB does, but when NYCB first started that kind of programming (each program a distinct unit and repeated identically with little or no overlapping between programs--and separate marketing monikers for the programs, too, like "Balanchine Black and White") many people on this site complained that if they wanted to see ballet y, then they might well find themselves forced to sit through ballet x with no alternative (and not everyone is simply "okay" with paying for a ticket to see just one ballet on a program--and I assume few are actually happy about it). Even worse if they wanted to see ballet x more than once. That kind of programming also prevents one from exploring different repertory and musical juxtapositions over the course of a season and, for people who come in from out of town, it usually limits the variety of repertory one can see in a 2-3 day visit (not a priority for programmers or New Yorkers perhaps but one of the issues discussed on this site). I'm actually reasonably happy with the way NYCB does it--especially when some really great programs are on hand that I want to see multiple times--but there is no perfect way to solve the programming conundrum especially for fans who like to go multiple times . And ABT's way of doing it does solve certain problems even as it may create others. (I have no idea why they do it the way they do...they may have entirely other reasons.)

OT: I have sometimes thought that judicially selected bits of Game of Thrones would make for an entertaining narrative ballet plot albeit for a rather retro ballet. And it might bring in some new audience members to boot.Anyway, it sounds like you had a wonderful trip. Glad you got to see and even meet Kolegova. Of course I desperately wish I could have been there to see Lopatkina's Raymonda. The company has posted some lovely photos...

Very much enjoyed reading about theses performances. Am hoping to see Lopatkina again at least once before she retires...perhaps if she dances in Raymonda at Kennedy Center next year (and I can take a day or two off of work)...I imagine that in Raymonda, too, you get a grand view of the whole company--soloists, demo-soloists, corps etc. (If you see ballet in Moscow, then I hope you will report on that as well.)

This news story (in Russian-which I do not know) has some video clips -- including bits of Smirnova, Shipulina, and Zakharova and clips from a section danced by Russia's wheelchair sports team dancers performing as wounded soldiers -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KJlbrIck7I

I found the following interesting as well from the press office (link below quote): "It was the Bolshoi’s artistic director of ballet, Sergei Filin, who suggested choreographer Possokhov and director Serebrennikov should work together on a new ballet. 'Have a think about subject matter', he said to Kirill Serebrennikov. 'A Hero of Our Time', the latter answered straight off. A Hero of Our Time is one of Serebrennikov’s favorite books. But however much one might love a book, not everyone is capable of bringing it alive in ballet. 'I find it surprising no one thought of doing it before', says Serebrennikov, 'it is a quintessentially poetical and inwardly musical work. And where there is poetry there is ballet.'" http://www.bolshoi.ru/en/about/press/articles/2015/3392/ Not every new production from the Bolshoi captures my attention to such an extent, but this one--obviously--does. I am very much hoping it is a substantive work and a success.

They also published this video (English subtitles included) with some comments on the role of the director, Serebrennikov, in the production:

I only saw her a handful of times, but always found her a wonderful dancer. (Injuries really took a toll...) Wishing her a fabulous next career.

Very enjoyable reading about this performance. I have never seen Kolegova live -- perhaps I will get a chance at some point.