koshka

<from Natalia>

Class of '98 were Anton Korsakov

Aha! Now I realize why Korsakov looked so darn familiar on a visit to StP shortly thereafter--I saw both BAM performances that day. Sure wish they'd do something like that again.

About age limits in gymnastics:

Some competitions have junior and senior divisions (eg, US championships, European championships) and some are effectively seniors only. A gymnast must turn 16 in the calendar year of the competition to compete in the Olympics and _usually_ at the World Championships. For Worlds, an exception is made in the pre-Olympic year: age-eligible gymnasts for the following year's Olympics may compete.

Thus, at the 2006 World Championships (not a pre-Olympic year), competitors had to turn 16 in calendar year 2006 (ie born 1990 or earlier). At the 2007 World Championships, competitors needed to be 16 by the end of 2008 (the Olympic year), meaning born 1992 or earlier. As a result, there were a few 14 year olds competing, but they were all due to turn 15 by the end of the year.

For many, many reasons both physiological and other, few young ladies continue in gymnastics at the elite level beyond age 18 or 19.

First about the class on Saturday:

I thought it was fantastic and will eagerly sign up if it's offered again.

There were 40 in the class, with a _very_ wide range of ballet experience from practically none to a lot. I would put about half the class in the category of "fewer than 10 ballet classes last year". It was held in the upstairs rehearsal room, which is big and has a good floor and mirrors but is otherwise quite ugly, with no windows and an industrial look.

It was a fairly standard ballet class, albeit at a basic level with relatively simple combinations. I think there was something that everyone could take from the class.

Now about Sunday night's performance:

First up was Mozartiana. The principals were terrific--energetic and yet precise. I was not particularly taken with the young dancers--they were cute and their entrance and poses were very elegant and polished, but some of the later choreography struck me as under-rehearsed.

Next was the Scene d'Amour. Somehow it didn't capture me as much this time, although I still enjoyed it. Du still struck me as too rigid at times.

Divertimento Brilliante was, alas, the weak point. Mladenov danced unevenly--at some times pure elegance and at other times unbecoming awkwardness. Parsley,likewise, had an uneven performance: the allegro portions were sharp and sparkly, but the adagio partnering was weak. It was not clear if they were under-rehearsed or if one or the other of them (or both) was having an off night.

Slaughter was just as fun the second time around (and I was still disappointed to see no more of Mladenov after the prologue), although Katelyn Prominski (Thursday night) was a much more outgoing Striptease Dancer, at least to my eye.

One problem with the production is that the at least one of the people sitting near the gangster (who sits in the audience and is spotlit at times), an older lady, seemed to be bothered by the spotlight. Considering that there were a fair number of empty seats tonight, I think the ushers should have warned people in the neighboring seats and should have offered to reseat them if desired.

I'll report on tomorrow's "movement" class later. The information indicates that no experience is necessary, but then specifies "leotard, tights, ballet slippers" as the attire, which suggests that it's likely to attract adults with at least some ballet experience.

I really liked the program as a whole. There were a few wobbly parts, but then Balanchine's choreography and partnering are often quite challenging. It's amazing to see very difficult choreography made to look easy, but I don't mind the occasional reminder that it's hard. There was indeed probably a bit more than the usual amount of wobbliness because of the cast substitutions and varied partnering casts.

but toward the end, two measures into the violin cadenza on which Holowchuk has a long, interesting solo which we want to be able to see better, the lighting designer, Jeff Bruckerhoff, chooses to dim the lighting slightly, making it harder to see her instead. This fussing is all too common today.

I have to disagree with Jack on this one--I thought this change in the light was quite beautiful. I was in the front row--maybe it was easier to see or appreciate from there.

I had never seen the Bejart Romeo and Juliet Scene d'Amour, and I thought it was beautifully done, though, as Jack said, perhaps the character was a bit underdeveloped on Du's side.

I haven't seen Slaughter on 10th Avenue enough times to remember that the danseur who appears at the very beginning never reappears, so I'm always a little disappointed when he doesn't. The piece is really fun and it was played to the hilt all around.

All in all, a great evening, and I'm looking forward to Sunday's program.

However, I do think, in general, it's "not in the right spirit" to leave before the curtain calls. Most of the excuses for leaving early are just that -- excuses.

I absolutely agree, and it does seem that life is more "hurried" (and perhaps people are more selfish). But, as another poster said, life is too short to try to second-guess every person running for the exit, carrying a scooter, or whatever. You just never know, and why waste the mental effort to guess?

All that said, the audience at the Suzanne Farrell Ballet performance at the Kennedy Center was quite well-behaved as far as I could see--the only "bad" things were two episodes of applause when the music was playing (one case) or about to restart (another).

Now I'm curious about the scooter--are we talking about a little Razor-type scooter, the kind that folds up to something the size of a full-size umbrella? Or something bigger? If it fits under the seat AND the patron can manage to get it to and from a place under the seat without whacking into anybody, then I see no harm. Of course, this is why theaters have cloakrooms.

(Russian theaters are very strict about what goes into the theater vs. what goes to the garderobe!)

But I would never leave anything just hanging around in a theater corridor/lobby unless I had the explicit blessing of the ushers!

I have tickets for the Thursday and Sunday night performances and the Saturday afternoon class/seminar/thingy.

My take is that everybody has their own idea about when a performance is "over", from when the curtain drops or the last note is played to when the ushers chase everybody out to when the stars leave from the stage door.

I dislike disruptions _greatly_ (can't stand latecomers and theaters where they just seat people whenever they show up), but on the other hand I can't imagine blocking somebody from trying to enter or leave my row.

Yes, I find disruptions during a performance disappointing and distracting, and if the person were sitting near me and were a habitual offender I might say something, but I'm not willing to get into the business of second-guessing who's desperate to get to the restroom (or a once-every-two-hours train or...or...or...) and who just wants to get out of the garage faster.

At a collective level, though, I agree that it's a lot nicer when the whole audience isn't heading for the door the moment the curtain closes.

Much more irritating, though, are the noisemakers, electronic and otherwise. For these there is no excuse: even if one needs to be "on call" for something, they all have silent modes.

And Leigh, you got 3 out of 6. That's halfway to being an economist!

Trust me when I say you do not want to get any closer than that!

I'm going to have to back up Hans on this one: DC doesn't have quite the dance richness of New York, but the dance scene is pretty darn good, and there are many "livable" options that put the Kennedy Center and other theaters in easy reach, including my own rather suburban (read: grass to mow) area, which is a quick run to the KCen by car or metro.

As for the crime, etc., as in so many cities, despite the impression that the whole region is totally infested with severe crime, that's not really the case.

I'll take either one over the folks who have loud conversations about anything and everything before the ballet and then again during intermissions.

Well, loud/profane/etc. is not really ever good, but who cares what others are talking about before curtain and at intermission? I mean, yes, it's lovely if your neighbors bring you into a performance-related discussion, but when I attend the ballet with friends (or see friends there), we often use the intermissions, etc. to catch up on all manner of news--travel, kids, work, ballet class... Why this should concern anyone else is beyond me.

As for leaning: a most interesting and enlightening discussion for me.

I sit in the front row (orchestra) whenever possible as I strongly prefer that vantage point. On one occasion, though, I was in the balcony in NY and I leaned forward and was immediately asked not to. I complied, but found the request very puzzling at the time.

Cute story about the KCen: my front-row subscription seat is near the center, behind the conductor. At one of last spring's performances of Sleeping Beauty, a woman was next to me with a tiny girl, 4 or 5 years old. When the conductor came up to face the audience before each act, he was pretty much eye-to-eye with the little girl. Before the first act, his look seemed to say "I hope you behave but I'm a little skeptical". But she held up magnificently, and she got a little look and smile from the conductor before each subsequent act.

Er, don't these places have ticket policies? The Kennedy Center simply requires that every audience member have a ticket, even a baby. Seems to cut down on a lot of problems, especially in the Opera House.

About the shoes: in principle shoes match tights, so the idea of coloring (usually with makeup) would be to make them match the skin rather than the tights.

Russian pointe shoes are exceptionally loud when new, and yet a quiet jump is prized. Hence I'd think dancers would choose shoes that were as soft as possible, but still strong enough to provide the needed support.

The orange/yellow costumes were severely in need of a cleaning.

One more thing--unlike other productions, which start with a slow, quiet prologue bit of the music, this one opens right up with some of the more "busy" music, which seemed to my ear to be waaaaaay too fast. Other bits seemed too fast too, but perhaps it's just fast relative to my DonQ CD, not fast relative to what's "usual" in the theater.

It's hard to say. I think the sign said something about Russian TV cameras, and one of my Russian friends (the aforementioned not-ballet-fan) said that they show ballet all the time on TV there. I'm not sure if ballet fans would use "all the time" to describe airing of ballet on Russian tv, but...

Not much to add here, just a few tidbits from the Sunday matinee.

Osipova was all that the others have said she is, thought I can't say that she meets my personal "sparkle" benchmark of Nina Ananiashvili.

Did not see much sign of nerves from Vasiliev, and he too is a remarkable jumper and turner--on multiple occasions he finished a 6+ rotation turn by gliding to a stop, still on demi-pointe. Also, his "teaser" double cabrioles--in which it seemed as if he was doing only a single beat, but brought his lower leg back in for a second beat seemingly too late to land upright--brought gasps from the audience. Also, IMO his greatest move as a partner came at the very end: Osipova basically flubbed a supported double (yes, after those crazy fouettes). Vasiliev basically set her right, then took his hands away so that she could show a beautiful long balance in retire--as if to say, "see everybody, that turn was a just a momentary aberration". I don't know if the choreography calls for that balance or not, but it sure looked gentlemanly.

A few notes:

I nearly always disagree with Kaufman's reviews...

Put me with the lovers of kitsch: I liked the banister-sliding and the dancing teaset. Did not think the horses/Blue Angel/diva fit the plot _at all_ (and what was with the princesses from foreign lands that appeared for about 1 second???)

I could not figure out Cinderella's emotions at the beginning, though I thought Shipulina was a lovely dancer.

The Prince's four friends were very often woefully out of step with one another.

The stepsisters/mother were fun but tedious. The dancing instructor was terrific in every way.

From my seat just behind the conductor, the temptation to give him rabbit ears during the part where he appears on the curtain at the back of the stage was...strong.

Overall, I thought it was an interesting production, but once was enough.

More general Russian ballet questions:

--It seems that a lot more of the dancers are wearing Gaynor Mindens, or something that looks a lot like them--any word on this? It seems quite un-traditional and un-Russian, and thus quite interesting.

--Do the leading ballerinas still have costumes made for them (and owned by them)?

Thanks for the review/preview, esp. the part about the Man in the Moon. I know ballet isn't really about plot, but I usually have trouble following stuff like that.

Have a not-ballet-fan friend visiting from Moscow who said, "but haven't you already seen Cinderella?"

Is it 2 acts/one intermission/2 hours?

And did anyone catch the dress rehearsal yesterday?

About the mousies with covered faces:

--There should always be at least one dress rehearsal, especially with costume elements/props that might be challenging.

--The Nut production I know best (with mice in the 8-10 age group, I think) uses headpieces that are modified baseball caps. Their faces aren't particularly visible, but they can generally see IF the headpieces stay in place.

During a Boston Ballet performance of An American in Paris, at the end, when they all walk across the stage from one side to the other and back again (the departure scene, I guess), one dancer appeared in enormous sweatpants. Didn't seem to be part of the costume, but...the costumes were varied. Sure enough, that dancer disappeared into the wings and the sweatpants disappeared before the dancer made the second trip across the stage.

This year at the Washington Ballet Nut, the female Arabian dancer's top came completely unfastened in the back. They adapted the choreography a bit on the fly as the top hung in place ok when dancer was upright, but...oh my.

The torn hems, sliding headpieces, etc. are too numerous to count.

Naming: Seems to me one could ask that the name chosen be the name of someone the donor respects, rather than the donor's own name.

Also, I think there might be some laudable reasons for having one's name attached to a gift (I personally avoid it, but...) Suppose that donors think that having their names out there is a way of encouraging others in their set to do the same. That is, to get others thinking, "hey, this money doesn't come from nowhere, or from people with way more money than we have--it's something people in our set (whatever that set may be...) do. Maybe we should do that."

Or maybe I am just hopelessly optimistic.

For me there's no such thing as too much DonQ.

I would also really like it if US audiences would catch on to the idea that DonQ is a great ballet for kids (well, maybe not the Eifman version).

If they were to do a more traditional mixed-bill plus story ballet combo, I'd like to see

-Satanella pdd (or more)

-something Balanchine--maybe Jewels or, for a really different take, Western Symphony (!)

then Fountains for the story ballet.

As for the Protegees idea--does anyone know or remember how well that played here? I personally loved it, but I wonder if it was generally "successful" enough to repeat.

I would love to see Fountains and other works that aren't often performed here.

Of course, what I'd really like, a la "Protegees", is for them to bring the Vaganova Academy graduation performance--yes, the whole thing. Hey, I can dream, right?

I think the sparse attendance for the mixed bill (and, I'm expecting, for Othello) is in no small part due to the fact that the Kirov will be here in just one week doing R&J. Budgets for money _and_ time are limited, and the Kirov retains its "exotic" aura to many. R&J is, of course, better known to boot.

About Tuesday: loved Shades. It was beautifully done, and it was lovely to see it 2.5 times (1.5 times at the open rehearsal and once in performance. The corps was spectacular, as were the soloists.

Dark Elegies doesn't do it for me, but then I guess my tastes in ballet are shallow: I come to see beauty and artistry, not brooding and/or political statements (a la Green Table, which had its merits artistically but was not otherwise that compelling to me). I suppose one could have a long philosophical argument about what Art is supposed to be and do, but...those are my tastes. Give me an abstract Balanchine piece any day.

I enjoyed Rodeo, but it seems like we've seen it several times recently at the Kennedy Center, and a part of me just kept thinking <whine> but I want to see Western Symphony for once</whine>.

Now, a couple of questions:

About the tap solo in Rodeo: is it expected that a top male dancer can pick up tap, or is it a requirement for the role, or can something else be done instead, or???

About the Bolshoi's Cinderella: Is this the same production we saw a couple of years ago (which, IIRC, was a relatively new staging) or something altogether different?

Wandering a bit far afield, but...

As far as I know, some U.S. states require party affiliation to match primary voting and some have "open" primaries, in which anyone can vote in any (one) party's primary. Open primaries can lead to some rather interesting primary outcomes if members of one party have no reason to vote in their own party's primary (e.g., strong incumbent candidate) and decide to vote in another party's primary. Also, in the U.S. one may register to vote without stating any party affiliation.

In any case, I'm not sure whether that aspect of voter registration is a matter of public record in the US--I don't think it is, but I'm not sure.

Just for the record, not all gymnastics fans are happy with the trend in the sport toward more tricks and less artistry, and some consider the sport to have peaked in the 1980s.

In addition, gymnastics (especially women's gymnastics), like ballet, is supposed to look effortless and elegant.

Just this week, many fans are mourning the recent death of Elena Mukhina, a Soviet gymnast of the early 1980s whose hallmark was her elegance and style.