Drew

When Kowroski first danced her (very beautiful) Odette-Odile at NYCB she did not do the fouettes. Don't know if she did them later or not. I like to see them and see them done well, but it is not a huge stumbling block for me in appreciating an Odette-Odile when that doesn't happen -- as long as I admire the rest of the performance. I had hoped to see this debut and am sorry I missed it. I bet it was plenty exciting to be there.

Although I'm looking forward to seeing the Royal dance the Dream (and, fingers crossed, Osipova as Titania) it did occur to me that this was one Ashton that ABT does on a somewhat regular basis and, across different casts, does very well; in the case of certain cast members such as Cornejo as Puck, even....incomparably well. That said, I still want to see it and I'm genuinely eager to see Song of the Earth which I have never seen. (I have watched much of it on video.) I am aware that this revival got some critical responses-from fans at least-but I do just want to see the ballet one way or another. For Scarlett: I would much rather they had brought Asphodel Meadows than Age of Anxiety, but I assume the company felt it had to bring works that were performed this season and were determined to bring a Scarlett. And one never knows: New York may have its own response to the work... I'm rather curious as to whether the collection of 20th-century bits (the divertissements part of the Scarlett/McGregor program) is going to be interesting/fun or disconnected/draggy...

Yes, that's right. Obraztsova danced in the third movement of Symphony in C two different nights. Those are the only times I have seen her live. I had a companion who loved her in it, but I did not think she was well-suited to the choreography and she seemed to dance behind the music at times (especially the first night). But I do not doubt--based on video, reports/reviews and even just how she looked on stage in Symphony in C--that in the right repertory, I would very much enjoy and admire her dancing. I can picture her in the Ratmansky Sleeping Beauty and hope to see her dance whatever repertory in the future whether with the Bolshoi, the Royal, or ABT.

Re prices. RB tickets when I bought them in the Fall were considerably cheaper than equivalent tickets at the Met where ABT is dancing or at the Royal Opera House. For example, I paid $80 for seats in the orchestra, a bit towards the back, a bit towards the side, but still excellent. I believe I paid more for the same seats when the Mikhailovsky was at the Koch theater. Don't know if prices went higher after that--some companies use dynamic pricing...

Very sad news--RIP Albert Evans.

Like most fans, I often feel sympathy for the dancers, but it's difficult to have a serious discussion of a dance performance without critical perspectives on the dancers--even if one is reflecting primarily on the choreography. (Though piling on or personal cracks may be unnecessary...) For me dance deserves serious discussion, and -- from a cruder perspective -- well, people pay the same price and make the same effort to attend whether it's early in the season or late, the dancers are dealing with injuries or not. That's part of the challenge dancers face and indeed one reason for our admiration as well as sympathy! P.S. Was just about to post this when Abatt posted...I think I'm coming from a similar place.

Me three... (I would program Firebird as the closer.)

Guillem also was capable of very high extensions without generating distortion or strain in the rest of her body/line and without losing control of the quality of her movement. Most who have followed in her wake...not so much.

I agree with the need for ABT to maintain a diverse repertory, but I can't agree about Ratmansky. I think the single best thing Mckenzie has done in recent years is build a long term creative partnership with him. I DO see that Ratmansky often remains focused on Russian/Soviet history and tradition in a way that makes him an odd fit at ABT (Bright Stream, Shostakovich Trilogy)--but his ballets are events in the ballet world and keep ABT a meaningful part of that world in a way that all the superstar performances in the world cannot. (Nor did Balanchine cut off his artistic and intellectual relations to Russia and Russian history in the creation of a major American ballet company. However, Balanchine did have interests in American music and culture that so far I haven't seen in Ratmansky. I admit I would not mind seeing that change.) At the same time, some of the best performances I have ever seen of ABT 'regulars' (not guest artists)--Murphy, Boylston, Seo, Abrera, Lane, Gorak, Herrera, Messmer (when she was still w. the company), Simkin, Gomes, Brandt, Reyes, and others--have been in Ratmansky ballets/stagings. In some cases work created for the company, in some cases work created elsewhere and reset on ABT, and in some cases a restaging of a nineteenth-century work--Sleeping Beauty. His approach to Sleeping Beauty has obviously been controversial (on this message board at any rate, but I would guess that is representative); it has also drawn a tremendous amount of critical interest/admiration and featured the company as a company in way that has not always happened at ABT in recent years. Personally I would not want the bulk of ABT classical productions to be "reconstructions" in this manner -- but I firmly believe that this Sleeping Beauty works. As for the ballet itself, it's one of the great classics of the ballet repertory--it's hardly "Russian" in some local, parochial way. (Arguably there already is an "Americanized" version of Sleeping Beauty danced regularly in New York by NYCB--Americanized in the sense of stream-lined, speeded up, danced at times with 'neo- classical' accents and port-de-bras, and revised in one spot (the jewels) to reflect local traditions--not Americanized in the sense that it has been set in 18th-century Boston...or been re-choreographed by some young American seeking to one-up Petipa in the manner of Nacho Duato.) Dancerboy 90210 mentions specifically how things like YAGP and social media have overly impacted the ballet world in recent years. Interestingly I think part of the aesthetic of the production is, in fact, meant to 'counter' a YAGP (competition-centric), star-oriented aesthetic...to go back to something more modest/gracious in order to go forward. Though whether that will happen overall is a different matter. Anyway, ABT without Ratmansky would be, to me, infinitely less interesting than it is with him. And I think it's way too soon to say his "best" years are behind him. (People said similar things about Balanchine after a notorious flop and...oh...a year or two before the Stravinsky Festival. Ratmansky may not be "a Balanchine" but he is an important choreographer and still quite young.) [Edited to add: I am responding to a comment about Ratmansky that seems to have been edited out of the original post]. I can hardly imagine who or what as a creative force would be better or even half as good for ABT.

I do think this season is anomalous in some ways--those anomalies may bring into relief problems at ABT, but how many seasons lose for the entire season a major male star AND two major ballerinas--all scheduled for multiple performances throughout the season (Hallberg, Semionova, Osipova except for her Giselle) and, in the same season, lose another 'guest' pair scheduled for one performance (Smirnova/Chudin) and then lose one of their biggest stars to illness for an additional evening (Vishneva)? Heck there may even be a Sarafanov fan out there who bought tickets to see him in Sleeping Beauty when he replaced Hallberg only to see that bit of casting change, too, once Osipova was out. (Now that I know the production and have seen what Sarafanov can do when he is on his game, I actually would buy a ticket JUST to see him dance the prince's variation in Act III.) I find it hard to believe the best run company in the world, with this repertory especially, could have found a way to arrange that much in the way of cast changes without some people (myself included) being disappointed and/or frustrated. Was the original casting in the first place part of the problem? I don't think there is a simple yes/no answer. Think how often people raise the 'Guest Artist' problem at ABT only to acknowledge how much they love this or that guest artist--wish this or that one would be invited more often etc. For myself, I know she is a guest, and that raises questions about the company's long term health, but in all honesty and given the circumstances, I am very glad Cojocaru was brought in to replace Smirnova in Bayadere--ditto Sarafanov for Hallberg the next evening. (That was a long planned trip to see Bayadere and 'introduce' it to someone-- I wasn't about to cancel.) Of course, I hope the company finds ways to address its long term health issues...They need a 'middle way' so to speak.

After See Heo's just-respectable-pretty-at-times-not-special Bayadere (the matinee performance as I saw it), I was absolutely won over by her very lovely Aurora (also a matinee). I couldn't help wondering if Ratmansky's guidance played a role, but in any case found the performance very high quality and--the reason for my bringing it up in the context of this discussion--thought she really did look joyful dancing with Stearns in the Act III pas deux (especially the coda). In key respects I preferred her to Boylston; in particular she did more to show the differences between the three acts. She had not been scheduled originally for either performance. In one case was replacing Semionova; in the other Boylston who was moved to the evening to replace Osipova.

Let me add my thanks as well Ilya...

The Royal Ballet sent out the following tweet (yesterday) about the mixed bill: Thinking of seeing our Mixed Programme 2 when we visit #NYC? Here's what to expect ^E http://bit.ly/1K16JB7 Here is the full link in case the above does not work: http://www.roh.org.uk/news/divertissements-ballet-essentials-a-guide-to-short-works-performed-by-the-royal-ballet-on-their-2015-us-tour It does sound a rather eclectic collection of bits and pieces (all 20th-21st century in keeping with tenor of the NY programming), but is at least a chance to see a range of dancers.

Slacking off a bit eh? Well, all the more time to write up for the rest of us about what you are seeing --

Thanks for these reports on Obraztsova's ABT debut. The performance sounds wonderful. (She has danced Macmillan's Juliet with the Royal ...)

Big and very embarassing oops--Apologies to Watson...I will correct and note that you pointed it out.

Video of an open rehearsal of Song of the Earth from earlier this season--Monica Mason & Grant Coyle (notator) working with Laura Morera, Edward Watson, and Nehemiah Kish (who are all scheduled to dance the ballet in NY): :

Korbut still looks a heck of a lot more charming and humane than today's gymnasts. (Not drawing an exact analogy with ballet. I like many of today's dancers; today's gymnasts on the other hand...)

Not altogether an outlier Amour -- I am coming from out of town just for the Royal and plan to be there for every performance except the opening fundraiser and closing matinee.

I can understand lukewarm to Scarlett and Mcgregor (even if I am, for myself, curious to see more of their work)--especially the particular works the company has chosen to bring neither of which got rave reviews exactly. I have more trouble understanding the lack of appeal of a program with major works by Ashton and Macmillan. But it would just be depressing to believe that it takes Don Quixote to sell any major ballet company especially in New York and especially when New York has had so much Don Quixote in the past year. The conflict with ABT's Swan Lake does seem like a real issue...how did the a Royal Dane's sell when they performed opposite ABT a few years ago? (Not, I think, opposite Swan Lake?)

An ABT subscriber I met last week, vaguely thought they were appearing at the Joyce--presumably because the Joyce Foundation is presenting the company in NY--I don't think that confusion can be helping either. The Royal used to have a serious NY following, but has not appeared there often enough in recent years to sustain that and, unlike the "Bolshoi," I guess they don't have a name that somehow transcends all other considerations. I worry the poor ticket sales may simply be blamed on unfamiliar and mixed-bill repertory. That may be playing a role, but how can one know if there isn't more effective promotion for the tour? (I assume the problem here, too, is costs...) For any impressarios reading this board: I bought tickets to multiple performances because of the mixed bill programming.

She does frame her reflections by commenting on the production's huge costs and also makes clear she didn't much like the style Ratmansky elicited--both concerns others have expressed on this board. But in her case, the concerns lead her into more general reflections on what would be worthier or more "serious" to celebrate ABT's 75th anniversary, and I think that--in that context--she altogether under-rates Sleeping Beauty itself (so to speak) not just this production. I don't begrudge a critic having a strong aesthetic (or in this case anti-aesthetic) point of view and taking a stand on it...though the one expressed in this article isn't one I share. (Whatever she thinks of fairy tale ballets, Perron has written quite appreciatively of classical ballet and classical ballet dancers.)

Ballet IS a great art and can be very stimulating intellectually, emotionally, aesthetically etc. It's great 'escape' but not just escape--or, one might say that even as 'escape' it shows how imaginative flights can add to and even deepen life. But none of that that has to involve a direct representation of "serious" themes. Art can be light, it can be fun, it can be fantastical. Perron actually recognizes this aspect of Sleeping Beauty's greatness when she says at the end of her piece that she is glad Ratmansky restored all the fairy tale divertissements. (It is hardly a new idea to acknowledge the psychological and other meaningful--if you will, "serious"-- undercurrents of fairy tales. The fact that the meanings often operate as undercurrents or allegorically, as Doug Fullington says above, is part of their power.) Art also can make its appeal through form--whether austere or lush. And it can entertain. Sleeping Beauty (in any number of Petipa-based productions including, in my opinion, this one) does all of these things, and I don't think it has to be or should be defended only as "entertainment"--though its value as a splendid entertainment is a very fine thing too.

As noted on another thread by Tomorrow--Wendy Perron is dubious: http://wendyperron.com/a-new-sleeping-beauty-but-why/ I think she underestimates the emotional undercurrents and artistic seriousness of Fairy Tales and fantasy as well as perhaps undervaluing the fact that not only is Tchaikovsky's score arguably the greatest ballet score ever written but the choreography includes some of Petipa's greatest sequences and is foundational for 20th-century-and-after neo-classicism. It's a ballet that needs to be revisited by major companies and stagers from time to time and Ratmansky obviously has something he wants to say about it. (She does clearly disagree with that 'statement' when she objects to the way the production is danced. Some fans seem to feel much the same way, but by no means all.) Certainly Ratmansky is not just any old stager...but an important choreographer in his own right. I think, too, that unless there are plans to change its profile entirely, ABT is in need of substantive productions of the major classics and didn't have one of Sleeping Beauty. This production was worth doing. Perron also doesn't see the need to revisit the ballet's celebration of absolutism (which I guess we can all agree we don't like )--as she made clear in a tweet linking to her article. Absolutism and its imagery are part of ballet's history, but in this ballet even absolutism has to accomodate to natural forces it doesn't entirely control (Lilac Fairy/Carabosse) which is also a theme not without currency in the modern world albeit translated to entirely different terms like "climate change." (Maybe we can think of Koch's -- that is, the ballet's main funder's -- climate change denial as a form of leaving Carabosse off the list, though doing so deliberately unlike poor Catalabutte.) She talks specifically about the money that went into the production. Reasonable people who love ballet can disagree about what ABT (or its donors) should spend money on--and Perron is obviously one of the most knowledgeable--but I think she allows too little of the ballet's importance in making her argument that it doesn't merit this investment. And Sleeping Beauty can't really be done on the cheap.

I was hoping for a slightly different rep for London (especially having seen three of those productions and two very recently). Depending on how they schedule the ballets, I may still try to see Shrew and either Corsaire or Flames of Paris alongside.