Mike Gunther

That was the only program - they were just here for 3 days. The pieces were "specially chosen by Taylor to represent various facets of his half-century career" (program quote) though it must have been hard to pick only 3

The Paul Taylor Company brought their 50th anniversary celebration to Washington, DC this weekend. What a pleasure! The program - Klezmerbluegrass, a new number (2004). Odd costumes (red mesh from head to toe for the guys, red dresses with blue underlays for the girls). Typical PT choreography, I think, winsome dancing but breaks no new ground. Eventide (1997), music by Ralph Vaughan Williams. Arden Court (1981) - yes hooray, you all know this one! I like this more and more every time I see it. Dancers trying flirtatiously to unbalance their partners, but never quite succeeding! One thing I noticed this time is how very look-alike the men are (uniformly ripped & bow-flexed, same general body type and presentation) while the women are so very different from each other in body type and general appearance. Is there a generic "PT Man?" (Like the "Balanchine Woman" of yesteryear?)

Where's the Cat? Septime choreographed an original and sparkling pd chat to go with the Cardinal variation; I saw a delightful run-through in technical rehearsal, and it's printed in the program, but it seems to have dropped out in performance! Besides the Cat, Septime's original Cardinal variation (again, as seen in techincal rehearsal) involved an incredibly beautiful entry canon in contrary motion, where the cardinals spin in delay down along their diagonal line, while the principal (Morgann Rose, a fabulous dancer) spins up the line - it was so ravishing, and worked so well on so many different levels (musical, mathematical, and oh-so dance-ical!), that I am willing to embarrass myself here and *beg* Septime to bring it back! While on the subject, I've just got to say that Septime's choreography for the Snowflakes is brilliant - I've seldom seen anything that I liked so much, that so perfectly evoked an image - winter, sparkling sun dancing on the ice - I would not be at all surprised if this took on a life of its own, like Balanchine's Diamonds!

I attended the Saturday matinee with Maki Onuki and Jonathan Jordan as the Snow Queen and King; Erin Mahoney and Runqiao Du as the Sugar Plum Fairy and Cavalier; Michelle Jimenez as Dew Drop. A great new production, with elaborate sets, eye-popping costumes, and a very large cast. It seems like the company needs more time to settle in with Septime's new choreography. The dancing this afternoon was tentative in spots, reflecting (I suppose) that we are still in "premiere week" with its attendant jitters. Thumbs Up: to Mahoney and Du in the Grand Pas de deux; to the sets and costumes; to the choreography and dancing in Katchina, Snow Flakes, Anacostia Indians (the dance formerly known as "Coffee"), and the Frontiersman solo; to the live (hooray!) orchestra. Thumbs Down: to the idea of not printing the individual casts for each performance. Surely a program insert would be possible, and the performers deserve at least that much recognition!

I was surrounded by toddlers at the Saturday matinee. They were pretty well-behaved, and in any case it's part of the Nutcracker experience Standouts at this performance were Julianne Kepley (Arabia), John Gluckman (China), and Jennifer Goodman (Sugar Plum Fairy). This was the first time I've seen Goodman dance, and I was captivated by her amazing balance, lightness, and artistry. Another thing I noticed was that the dozen or so kids on stage were *very* well-trained in mime, step, turns (some en arriere!), etc. According to my program, their Ballet Mistress is Rhodie Jorgenson - one of the great teachers, from what I saw on stage. I hadn't seen the Joffrey for quite a while, and this performance reminded me how much I missed them. I hope we can get them back to DC for other ballets, as well!

I like him too. A very legato dancer. He did a lot of great partnering with Brianne Bland while he was with the WB. Worth going up to Boston to see!

Around 40 guests from the Smithsonian Resident Associates program joined Septime Webre and company members, at the Wisconsin Ave. studios last night, for a first look at the WB's new Nutcracker. This was the first in a 4-part lecture series run by the Smithsonian in cooperation with Washington Ballet. The evening started off when Septime invited the group onto his rehearsal floor and led us in a mime sequence (we are still waiting for the callbacks ) Costumer Judanna Lynn showed her fabulous designs and some spectacular new costumes, then Principal Morgann Rose and Studio Company dancers segued into a working rehearsal of one of the divertissements. It was fascinating to watch Septime and the dancers working the creative process, including different variants (not yet finally set) of one passage. The evening concluded with audience Q&A after a far-ranging talk by Septime about various aspects of the production. A few items I remember are that the total Nut budget is about $1.4 million (which came from a special donor campaign, not from the WB operating budget); that the new Nut is expected to return $1.5 million in revenue per year to the company; the total casting is 340 dancers (yes, 340, that is not a misprint) divided into three separate casts; with performances in Baltimore as well as D.C. Washington Ballet has always given great outreach, and with programs like this it keeps getting better and better. "Behind the Scenes" continues next month with observations of a working rehearsal in November and a technical rehearsal in December, followed by a backstage tour + performance on Dec. 16.

Did anybody see the other casts? The more Giselles the better It says a lot for the company that they were able to put together four different castings for this ballet! I loved the Sun. matinee with Brianne Brand/Jonathan Jordan as Giselle/Albrecht, Kara Cooper and Brian Malek in Peasant pdd, Morgann Rose as Myrtha. Come on, Fri. (pm) / Sat. (a.m.) fans - say a few words pleeze!

Natalia, thanks for posting! I, too, was delighted by the performance, especially as this was the company premiere. The Wilis, for example, were a lot more together than some big companies I could name ; ditto in ensembles like the Act I pas de quatre. Michele Jimenez as Giselle brought an explosive energy to her solos, fervor to the great Mad Scene, and a touching lyricism to her dancing. I thought Rasta Thomas was technically up to the mark, but dramatically unexpressive. (btw, Koshka, I didn't get the feeling that Jimenez was overacting, so much as projecting to the house; I can see where it might have felt overdone from the first row, but from further up it came across just great.) I'd have been happier with live orchestra instead of canned, base-boomy sound. Other than that, I felt that the production worked great on all levels. Looks like we've got a "new" Classical dance company in town, and what impressed me most is that they nailed it the first time out of the starting gate.

A very enjoyable eve. at the Washington Ballet - Sarah Kaufman's review is right on, so to avoid just repeating what she write, I'll copy the link here (from the "links" forum for Friday, April 30). Washington Post Review The program was seven new works, short variations on a theme, that theme being love in several of its manifestations - by turns funky ("Memory of a Free Festival," "L'Apres Midi/La Nuit"), romantic ("Desire," "Sostenuto," "Seego,") searching ("Underneath"), and satirical ("tink tank" - sic, the title is lowercase in the printed program). Music ranged from Arvo Part's haunting "Spiegel Im Spiegel" through Matthew Fuerst, David Bowie, John Lennon, Tin Hat Trio and Go Ten Project, Rachmaninoff, John Lennon, and J. S. Bach. I don't think the choreography broke new ground, but every piece was a well-crafted miniature, with plenty of technical and artistic challenges to showcase the company's dancers. "Showcase" is the right word here, because each piece built thoughtfully upon the performers' individual strengths. Every dancer had some great moments in this program. A particular favorite was Erin Mahoney in "tink tank." The piece, a takeoff on Muscle Beach, has Erin flirting with five musclemen and a soulful Jared Nelson. She had so much fun with this that it oughtta be illegal Brianne Bland and Runqiao Du were also outstanding in "Seego," as were Elizabeth Gaither and Chip Coleman in "Desire." The dancers seemed incredibly light on their feet, especially when catching and carrying. To allow Sarah Kaufman the last few words, this program of short new works was a great presentation of the company dancers in all their "to-die-for fabulousness!"

I think we saw the same thing in terms of what the dancers were doing. I was swept away - it was a clear, confident performance - but I learned a lot from Ari's review also. Oddly, Villella emphasized in pre-preformance how careful Balanchine was to cast specific roles for particular dancers, which makes it a bit surprising that he'd cast the Stravinsky VC on different types than B. did. By the way, I noticed the program didn't have any of those "Balanchine Trust" representations in it. Is Villella not a part of that? (Feel free to just point to a FAQ if this is a FAQ)

Thanks for the pointer to DVT, Alexandra. After reading your note, I looked up their review and posted a comment about it in the DanceView Times forum.

Thanks for posting this! I saw both programs - well actually just the first half of Ballroom. It was sort of boring to me, so I skipped out early. Villella said he made the dance for Florida residents who attended Broadway musicals... yep. Plus he lifted the plot right out of Tales of Hoffman. That's so 19th century! I loved the Balanchine program, and would have posted a rave notice but after reading your post, Ari, I'm no longer so sure of my ground (except I'm still sure I liked it!) Some things I liked were Kronenberg's decisiveness in the Violin Concerto 2d pas de deux, and the sparkling clarity of Rubies... if it was stylistically incorrect, though (sigh).

Did anybody else see this? (Or am I in the wrong forum - wouldn't be the first time!) I hadn't seen her work before so didn't know what to expect. In Sunday's performance at D.C.'s Dance Place, they danced Persephone (2003) and Underground River (1998). It seemed more like dance theater rather than pure dance - the performers' vocalizations (singing, speech) were integral. Persephone was a psychological take on the well-known myth; an interesting interlude in the Underworld, full of movement and energy, was sandwiched between two less-interesting scenes in the Upperworld. The other piece, Underground River, cleverly. and at times movingly, portrayed a girl in a coma, using four dancers to represent fragments of her personality. Considering both dances together, I thought the choreography was kind of simplistic at times but overall the dances were psychologically engaging. In terms of performance, I was very impressed by Olase Freeman (Hades in Persephone) who is incredibly light on his feet, yet strong and charismatic. I'll look for any chance to see him again! The evening got two reviews (both mixed) from the Washington Post.

Great comments - thanks - I was especially glad to hear about the lunchtime/intermission conversations, because I think that growing the audience is always important, especially given the company's ambitions - & yes, I do think we have the right dancers and artistic direction to make it all happen, as long as the finances fall into place - audience development, donors, sponsors... probably higher ticket prices too (ouch). That's right about Suzanne Farrell Ballet - glad to have them, too. I just hope the donors, sponsorship, ticket $$, etc don't get stretched too thin. Sometimes its amazing to me how much support the arts get here; for a community the size of D.C. it's really a high level of commitment. Bottom line... quality attracts support.

First of all, a disclaimer - I am not a company insider, and all I know is what I see on stage, or read in the papers I am old enough (although I hate to admit it!) to remember Choo-San Goh's tenure and the beautiful dances that he created. But nothing lasts forever, and Choo-San died too young. Afterwards, under the excellent leadership of Mary Day, we saw great dancers in classically-based ballets, although - it must be said - the company continued to strive for an artistic identity. Fast-forward to Septime Webre's tenure. The last decade has seen incredible growth in the company and the dancers - faster, better, stronger! As a choreographer, Septime is not an innovator. He wants to buff up the classics, and grow the company. His genius is in development - of dancers and audience - and his ambition for the company knows no bounds. A glimpse of the future lies in Septime's inclusion for the Coppelia program, which promises Giselle, Romeo and Juliet, and Rite of Spring in 2004-5. We can look forward to a classical company, and the question is simply this - can we make it? (Yes!!) - but do we need it? That is a very difficult question. We here in DC have the ABT, DTH, NYCB, and Kirov. Those are the companies against which the WB will be judged. In the past decade, we have seen local companies turned into national and international venues - the Shakespeare Theatre, the NSO, the Washington Opera. Septime has laid his cards down on the table. It's a high-stakes sweepstakes, and we wish him, and his company, well.

I really enjoyed the Saturday afternoon performance. Actually I like all three casts, so seeing this production could get expensive One advantage of doing classical with this company is that you get a lot of strength even in the large ensembles, half of which, on any given day, are leads the next day! This afternoon's leads, Jonathan Jordan and Elizabeth Gaither, were very well-matched, both technically and artistically. Jordan gave us a "Romeo" take on Franz. Swanilda was obviously his lady, Coppelia barely even a casual flirtation. Elizabeth's feisty Swanilda played really jealous in Act I, but turned on a dime (I love these dance metaphors!) in Act II, as soon as she discovered that Coppelia wasn't exactly a "living doll." Guess she didn't mind that her Romeo was dumb enough to stray with a dummy! Act III is, as you all know, the technical showcase, and here too the leads did themselves proud, although it seemed to me that Gaither stepped out of character in order to concentrate on her superb execution, while Jordan executed well and also managed to stay in character. As always, the post-performance discussion brought out some very interesting comments. Gaither mentioned that she went through three pairs of shoes - medium for Act I, soft for Act II, hard for Act III - very much in keeping with the distinct characterizations that she brought to each act. She brought down the house when responding to a comment about Coppelia as "eye candy." "Hey," she said winningly, "I'm eye candy too." Which brings me around to my earlier comment that in this performance, poor Coppelia never had a chance! Stepping back to the staging and production, it is clear that this kind of dance, and this quality of dancing, really needs a live orchestra, a point which was also made in the post-performance discussion. The Act I and III set backdrop was charming - rather like Hobbiton, if you will - and the interior of Coppelius' workshop, in Act II, got ooh's and aah's from the audience - deservedly so, in spite of (or perhaps because of?) the basic simplicity of its design. I loved the costumes, which were borrowed (if memory serves me correctly from the post-performance discussion) from Pennsylvania Ballet. In Act I's great pas de 6, the men had to practice collision avoidance because the stage of the Eisenhower Theater was too small for Septime's and Charla Genn's exuberant choreography. Plus, almost all rehearsal time was in the company studio without sets, leaving only a day or two to adjust to the sets and Eisenhower stage (this, again, from post-performance discussion). Guess we should add a bigger stage and more on-stage rehearsal time to our wish list. In the past year or so, we have heard a lot about the future direction of the company - more classical, and not just that, but more *everything*. In my own mind, this production was the first demonstration of what the future has in store... an exciting topic that deserves a whole new thread, so I'm going to sign off now and start one, unless somebody else gets there first!

I saw the Sunday matinee, with a different cast from Friday's in Emeralds and Rubies. Good in spots, could have been snappier in others. I was quite taken with van Kipnis in Emeralds (she has really great feet, and her attacks were right on), and Weese+Hubbe in Rubies. The corps I mostly didn't notice... too bad, since in Balanchine the corps is as much the "star" as the principals. Generally I had hoped for more pizzazz from this company, like I remember from 20 years ago. Granted they must have been tired at the end of the week here at the end of the season there. I also thought some of it could have been due to the orchestra's surprisingly bland playing. Live music should inject energy into the dance, and I didn't feel that happening here. As for the sets, while I thought they were kind of cheezy, the audience was enraptured... oohs, aahs, applause at the beginning of every act... go figure. By the way I was really happy to see a full house on Sunday afternoon. This seems to augur well for the company's popularity. It's great to have them back!

They rehearsed Sonatine (loved it!) and Four Temperaments (ditto!) on the 14th. Wish I could see the whole program, but I'll be in Cambodia then. Am looking forward to reading comments on the board when I get back. Guess this is a Ballanchine tribute year, as there was a special on PBS last night... lots of archival footage, including a conversation between GB and Stravinsky. There was an interesting comment from GB to the effect that "I work in the present, not the future... when I'm gone, somebody else will rehearse the dances and they will look different." He seemed ok with that.

(Sunday Matinee) Thanks Jack for posting Farrell's commentary! It was wonderful to hear it from Farrell herself; that made it much more personal than just having it printed in a handout. I really liked the program. An all-pas-de-deux evening in other hands could have turned into a dinner that was all dessert, but not in this case - there was so much variety and interest. Afterwards I realized that there was not a tutu onstage the entire evening; wonder if that was deliberate? Great verve, and I think excellent preparation, by the dancers. Even "Stars and Stripes" seemed fresh. Among many first-rate performances I'd mention Chan Hon Goh in "Sonnambula" and Ryan Kelly in "Unanswered Question." Overall a very successful program. How about next year - anybody up for "The Balanchine Solo?"

From the program (Friday, October 24, 2003) - "The Washington Ballet Studio Company connects The Washington School of Ballet to the professional company by giving budding professional dancers the essential performing experience and intensive training needed for a career on stage. In its inaugural season, the Washington Ballet Studio Company enganges seven dancers, each of them a Trainee with the Company. In addition to performing in larger repertoire of The Washington Ballet (The Nutcracker, Coppelia), The Studio Company pursues rigorous technical training through daily classes with both The Washington Ballet Company and private Studio Company classes. In addition, The Studio Company plans to tour throughout the city, engaging in education and outreach performances, particularly with schools participating in The Washington Ballet's DanceDC program." In short, if you're an enormously talented preprofessional who is accepted into this program, your reward is to work twice as hard as you ever thought possible, but you get to dance a lot Lucky them, and lucky us who get to see them just before their names go up in lights! The inaugural program of the Studio Company took place, appropriately enough, in the bare-bones large studio of the WB. You all know the drill: concrete walls (but at least the paint is fresh!), barres on two sides, wall-to-wall mirror on the other, bleachers (holding 100 people max) on the fourth side. I was one of the very fortunate 100 (how did they ever let me in?) who got to see these seven amazingly talented dancers as they begin their transition to major careers. The evening opened with "Pas de Quatre," choreography by Jules Perrot, reset by Anton Dolin, and perceptively staged for the Studio Company by Victoria Leigh. Dancers Allison Walsh, Maki Onuki, Emily Vonne SoRelle, and Martina Chavez. After a brief pause, we were treated to Septime Webre's beautiful pas de deux, "The Poet Acts," danced by Washington Ballet stars Brianne Bland and Jared Nelson. There followed "Airs Anciens" (music from Respighi's "Ancient Airs and Dances"), choreographed and staged by WB master John Goding, dancers Martina Chavez, Dori Goldstein, Chris Louk, Maki Onuki, Stacey Price, Emily Vonne SoRelle, Allison Walsh. Then came another special treat, as WB star dancer and choreographer Jason Hartley reprised his recent Kennedy Center success in "Nocturne Monologue." The evening was brought to a stand-up-and-cheer conclusion by Jeff Edwards' staging of Balanchine's "Who Cares?" (music by Gershwin), dancers Maki Onuki, Allison Walsh, Martina Chavez, and Chris Louk. This evening didn't just exceed my expectations, it completely blew them away. It was pre-advertised only as a Studio Company performance, but in addition we got to see three established Washington Ballet Company stars! Seeing these amazing and world-class dancers (Bland, Nelson, and Hartley) in two world-class dances, fresh from their Kennedy Center season openers and this time up close and personal from about two feet away, was an experience that will always stay with me, a completely unexpected and incredibly generous bonus. The three Studio Company performances, danced exclusively by WB Trainees, stood up proudly, even to the above stars' firepower. "Trainees" is really the wrong word, even though it is their official designation in the company - these dancers are the new stars that we will be seeing onstage, and soon! Among so much new talent it seems almost unfair to single anyone out, but I saw some very strong dancing from Allison Walsh (Pas de Quatre), along with loads of good dancing and some real charisma from SoRelle, Onuki, Chavez, Goldstein, Louk, and Price. The evening ended on the best possible note, with a rousing and delightful performance of "Who Cares?" You can tell when dancers are authentically happy, especially when you are watching them from two feet away, and these dancers were *really* happy, and so was the audience; I think it was from dancing Balanchine, and from the security of Jeff Edwards' staging, and from their knowing that they had totally nailed this piece!

Hi all, It's great to read so many posters to the WB! I saw the Sat. matinee but didn't post right away (was distracted by a dear friend from out of town who came to visit shortly after - too bad she just missed the performance, as I'm sure she would have enjoyed it too.) It seems there are a variety of opinions/reactions to the individual works on this quite diverse program, but everybody found something to like: Momentum - compared to my earlier memories of this piece, the ensemble seemed to hesitate in one or two spots, although nothing fatal. It was great to see it again. In the mid-80's the WB was *the* Choo San Goh company, and while they have grown and diversified greatly since then, it is such a great heritage that I want them with all my heart to keep that magnificent flame alive. Poet - I really liked this, so I hope you don't mind if I go on about it. It was very evocative for me, and Bland/Nelson danced beautifully (are they a couple? They sure dance like one!) Choreography, staging, and music worked together seamlessly. The basic movements are actually allegro, but put together with a long-line adagio feel - a very winning development in Septime's choreography! I can't wait to see what he puts around it in the longer work. It was originally conceived as an Annunciation, but (perhaps cued by the title) I felt it during performance as a "poet and muse." Bland and Nelson generously danced this again last night (Friday, Oct. 24) at the Studio Company performance, and in close up it holds beautifully, even in a bare-bones studio setting. I'll go out on a limb and predict that this artistic and psychologically deep pas de deux is going straight into the permanent repertoire. Nocturne - a Jason Hartley production from start to finish, this piece - half yoga, half gymkata, all Jason - left me slack-jawed in admiration. The barely controlled, push-all-boundaries athleticism of its central section is bracketed by a short, but compelling, "monkey dance" sequence (derived from Indonesian Kechak?) that opens and closes the piece. The inexorable transition from stillness to explosive energy, and back again to stillness, is mesmerizing and highly effective. When Hartley danced this at the Studio performance, you could hear groans from the audience as he hit the floor, repeatedly but in perfect control. Amazingly - I swear this is true - in both performances, he didn't even break a sweat. I credit his prana (abdominal breathing, which was prominently featured in the dance.) I'ts an astonishing physical intelligence, and - it almost goes without saying - another one for the permanent repertoire, assuming, that is, that anyone other than Hartley could ever prove capable of dancing it. Hartley and Elizabeth Mertz (another fine yoga-dancer and former WB member) should marry, and produce numerous dance offspring. Middle - I have to admit that I am not a huge fan of Industrial Chic (the basic milieu of this dance), but let's give Forsythe his due. 90% of dance is illusion, but Forsythe's goal in this piece was to show the physicality behind the illusion: the bare and unadorned stage, the dancers' bodies as they are (tights + fishnet tops), the isolated movements, the sheer effort, the work-in-itself. It's a great challenge, and the company rose to it magnificently. Firebird - in any other context, the company's fine performance of this neoclassical icon would garner favorable reviews. However, when presented side-by-side with the modernist choreography and gut-physical excitement of the previous dances, this Firebird seems to have flown in from a different program altogether, an incongruous (when compared to the afternoon's other works) reminder of a different time and culture. Putting together a coherent program is a great, and too-little appreciated, art; this firebird would have been happier in some other, more neoclassical, assembly.

I caught part of this on PBS Wed. (competing with Cunningham and Juilliard, at the same time but different PBS channels - is Wed. Culture Night on PBS?) It is a very effective theatrical piece, but - and I've been waiting a long time for the opportunity to say this - Othello, and Lar's story ballets in general, seem "all story and no ballet" to me. His mad gesticulations drive me mad, too.

I caught part of this on PBS Wed. (competing with Cunningham and Juilliard, at the same time but different PBS channels - is Wed. Culture Night on PBS?) It is a very effective theatrical piece, but - and I've been waiting a long time for the opportunity to say this - Othello, and Lar's story ballets in general, seem "all story and no ballet" to me. His mad gesticulations drive me mad, too.

Septime made some comments in Q&A, after Saturday's performance, that reinforce this. He said that his goal for the company repertoire was balance and variety, that each year he wanted to do at least one contempo, one story ballet, one Balanchine, etc. I guess it makes sense, then, that he would want the school to support his vision for the company. Compared to where they have been in the past, he is taking the company in a more classical direction - so I would have thought the school already supported that. Maybe it is a matter of wanting the school less classical, and the company more so, in order for them to meet in the middle? Seems like it would be a natural (from this perspective) to add Balanchine training to the school, since this is not currently the company's strongest suit.