lampwick

Petrouska's always been one of my favorites, and I happily found Clavigo available through Netflix. I'm adding it to my queue immediately. Thanks for all the tips. I'm sorry I'm too much a lurker on these boards:) In my own little corner of the ballet world, I'd add Jose Mateo's House of Ballet (1993), set to Alfred Schnittke's Gogol Suite. I try to avoid shamelessly plugging work I've danced in...but this one is truly creepy and very good. Vaguely about a crazed balletomane's world

I'm so grateful that I saw her dance Juliet (about a year ago at the MET). She gave one of the rare performances I see that evokes a genuine emotional reaction. Absolutely stunning. All I could see was Juliet...I can't even give any technical details of her performance. Just that she embodied the character and was 100% perfect. I've had the fortune of seeing her in class a number of times and actually dancing right next to her at the barre. Very gracious, lovely, and friendly. Best wishes to her.

I wanted to mention Jose Mateo's Ballet Theatre. They're currently finishing a two season program, 20 Years By Mateo which is a retrospective of his work. http://www.ballettheatre.org/ I hope that anyone traveling to the Boston area would check this company out. It's a lovely theatre and the performances have been going really well. I'm an apprentice with the company, so I hope it's OK to mention here. Just thought that it's worth mentioning. Some excellent work to see in Boston.

Oh, thanks. I LOVE the opportunity to learn and dance this repertory. But believe me, I'm lowly. But I only meant to say that because I didn't want to seem presumptuous about Maria's knees and back! I've seen a few things now...and you can't judge based on what you *think* you know about someone's body, based on thier technique. Too many factors.

I made that post so long ago! It's so strange to read it... Maria is amazing. She's *quite* a special talent. I'm working in a company now (well...as a lowly apprentice). After experiencing a lot more, I'd NEVER presume to predict what area of a dancer's body is prone to injury. At least...without knowing them personally and knowing thier patterns of pain, history, etc.... But back to the topic at hand... A dancer like Farrell appeared, to me...from what I see on tapes...to have a focus that allowed her to muscle through her turns, while off her leg. It appears to have something to do with her commitment to the music. She doesn't seem to adjust, and put herself back on...she can simply get throught he turn while "off". From what I've seen from Kowroski (on stage and in classes), she appears to have a control over finding her "plumb line". I've seen her go off in multiple turns, but has such control that she adjusts her body into the correct alignment...even while doing multiple turns. She can go "off her leg", but has the control to correct it. She can put herself right "on". In either case, the mental focus is remarkable. Tall, loose bodies are difficult to control. They have really amazing talent

I think took a Master Class from him a while ago at Jose Mateo's Ballet Theatre in Cambridge Mass. I think he comes to guest teach occasionally for the summer intensive. It must be the same guy...Andrew Kelly from Dutch National? He taught a Vaganova class...level 8.

I think last fall was supposed to be Rite of Spring.

I thought Sylve looked fantastic, actually. Didn't stike me as lacking anything at all. I wouldn't expect that final line of 4 women to be perfectly together, either. I, for one, would have fallen flat on my butt or barely missed knocking over my fellow dancers before even getting to that point, so it's all pretty impressive to me

There was a minor glitch in the computers at the ticket window, and I hadn’t given myself any extra time, so I sadly missed most of ALLEGRO BRILLANTE. From what I saw, both Philip Neal and Miranda looked good. Too bad I missed it. I can’t believe how a dancer known for her geometry and angularilty can be so feathery. Wendy Whelan just flows so beautifully. I love the choreography and music of Liturgy. Albert Evans is gorgeous and I’m happy to see him filling Jock Soto’s roles so well. He has a grace which matches perfectly with Wendy. MONUMENTUM/MOVEMENTS was flat. Darci Kistler and Chuck Askegard were fine, as was the corps. It wasn’t anything special though. Ashley Bouder was thrilling in Bizet. The energy through her legs never wavers. Explosive and exciting. OK—I’m going to disagree a bit about Tess Reichlin here. Honestly, I thought she looked sloppy last night in the feet. They relax before they hit the floor. And every single last one of her leaps they were almost completely flexed until the height of the jump, when they point. She’s an amazing dancer, and I like her a lot. But this bugged me. I thought Savannah Lowery looked like she’s improved a lot. Her shoulders look better and the entrechat sixes were great. Those are hard, not everyone can do them, never mind do them so well. I thought Abi Stafford’s turns were fine. They weren’t 100% “on”, but I kind of don’t expect such a difficult sequence to be “on “ every single night. They were executed acceptably and cleanly enough so that the choreography looked good. But, yes, in the very final line, they were noticeably a bit out of whack with the others. I marvel over just how together these dancers manage to be. That choreography is hellishly difficult and fast. It was a nice night.

I'm an apprentice in a small non-union company. This is the first time I've ever worked with a professional company. Shoes are reimbursed and all classes at the school are free. As far as I know, performances are not compensated, but that's OK by me for now. My roles are not terribly demanding, but I am getting some time on stage which is very valuable to me. I was spending a BIG chunk of change in NYC for training, so am actually able to save a bit as an apprentice and receive the type of "finishing" to my training that I *really* need at this point. I'm continuing to work on the things I need in class to be better, and am able to essentially "work" with the company all day long during productions. I've already learned more I ever could have gotten simply in technique classes about a wide variety of things. I have external sources of income ( 5+ years experience in graphic design/programming/ type of work). Right now, I'm actually still receiving a salary and benefits (vacation time for NUT) and am returning to work in NYC after the show ends (long enough so that I can earn my pension...two months to go!). Am kind of nervous about Spring season. Most likely, I am not going to be offered a contract with this company in the Spring, but would like to continue apprenticing and relocate to the city where the company is located. I'm actually seriously considering a night job as a waitress or bartender. I have a Master's degree and don't *need* to bartend. But I know that there's good money in it at the right places. I will try and find freelance work in graphic design too but would like a few options to make money. Teaching ballet is one option as well. The exhaustion factor is huge. Just so many hours in the day and just so much I'll be able to handle. Especially as an apprentice, I will need to focus on improving and get stronger. I can't cut back on the training now. I guess one has to see "ballet" as the career, and making money as making money... Even when and if I get offered that coveted contract, I'll need some extra sources of income. During the season, it's *just* enough to live on. I'm not a kid, and have gotten accustomed to a nice standard of living (with health insurance). It'll be a change. I also have a friend who's a massage therapist. But I'm *very* worried about what will happen if I'm injured and need an MRI and/or treatment. Or if I (god forbid) fall ill. It's scary, but I can't dwell on it (too much) Hey, ever here of an apprentice in classical ballet with a pension and 401K? And 19 year olds try and tell me that they're "too old". You should see the looks when I tell them my story (and age)

Cheryl isn't dancing for Suzanne Farrell right now? Last I saw her (a few weeks ago) she was training, and looked to be in good form. She has such beautiful quality in class, and I'd love to see her perform.It may have been her... I don't really know Cheryl personally...but no sister that I've heard of. Could someone post a cast list or roster? I'm very curious who's dancing for Ms. Farrell. I'm not going to be able to make it to the performances because I have Nut obligations further North...and I'm very sad I can't make it to DC. I was looking forward to it. And I would have LOVED to see Alexandra with them.

I'm intimidated to write here, because I don't have so much knowledge. But I wanted to add something to the discussion. I seem to remember Allegra Kent talking about how little preparation time was given to the dancers under the reign of Balanchine . Doesn't Ms.Farrell also take a very "hand-off" approach to coaching her own company, preferring to let the individual dancers find thier "voice" and interpretation of roles? Didn't Gelsey Kirland need to seek out additional coaching on her own during her time in NYCB because she was frustrated bythe lack of it within the organization? Perhaps Peter Marins really IS carrying the torch in the way that Mr.Balanchine would have liked. It seems like this is the way that NYCB has always operated. I know nothing about the organization except from what I've gleaned from autobiographies and such. And I haven't been attending the ballet for many years (only three). But from an "outsider" perspective...if I compare tapes from the 70s compared with the performances I see now, I think the re's been an obvious "technical" progression. I can see a subtle difference in the way the dancers motivate thier movement. There's less kinetic quality or something...it's hard to quantify. It's almost like the dancers now ARE so technically "good", that something gets lost. It looks more comfortable. Can it be something as simple as the fact that the dancers are just more capable now, it *appears* like there's less daring or something? The technique becomes more transparent? I disagree that the dancers are less interesting or individual now. Whelan, Kowroski, Ansanelli, Bouder? They're all so different. The firsttime I saw Wendy Whelan dance, I sat with my mouth gaping open. I had no idea that ballet could look like that. She's a big reason why I'm trying to become a professional dancer. I'm always thrilled at the ballet. I want to see more Balanchine, as well. It's his choreography that I'm interested in seeing when I buy a ticket.

I'm 29, and I buy tickets specifically on Balanchine evenings. It's that repertory that interests me. But I'm a dancer. And I've always had a strong interest in 20th century modernism in the arts. I don't want to offend Mr. Martins, but none of my friends (all in their 20s--mostly younger than me, and dancers) enjoy Martins ballets. The Stroman thing was popular. Personally, I thought it was fluff, but entertaining. I'd bring a date or friends to see it. My non-dancer coworkers, also all young artists types, prefer City Ballet over ABT. They like to see a mixed bill. A variety of programming in an evening. When they give me feedback, it's usually about the dancers, rather than the content of the work.

Not if you set it up properly with all the content contained in an external XML document. But you need the resources to hire someone to set up the site properly in the first place... Too many dance organizations have such awful-looking sites. It's really a shame that an artistic entity should be represented with such bad design.

Wendy Whelan is smaller than she appears.

vagansmom brings a very important perspective to this discussion. I work with a lot of scientists, artists, and people in computer sciences. Many are eccentric and/or unpleasant. Many are "nice". People are all unique. A LOT of "great" minds are attached to "unpleasant" personalities.But they've contributed something very important to our lives whether it be a deeper understanding of the nature of the Universe, a beautiful painting, or a piece of music. Great Art and Science stems from a individuals who are capable of seeing the world in a different way. And discovering the means to express thier perspective. Because of these differences, they may not appear "normal" or behave in "normal" ways. In addition to this I'd like to add this. "Normal" people can be very judgmental and cruel toward those people who are different. They are afraid of being "abnormal" themselves, so engage in a witch hunt of sorts. This can result in much anxiety and neurosis in those who are persecuted. Especially if they are not supported in childhood and given the understanding/tools that they need. I'm not making any point, nor am I excusing "bad" behavior. I just feel that sometimes a life of being made fun of/being made to feel "different" can take it toll. Plus I've seen some very smart people who can't seem to accept others differences (even if the person isn't doing anything harmful to others---they get teased). It makes me angry when I see somebody get teased/shunned. Especially when it's in an adult setting. People's behaviors can usually be figured out. But most people don't want to bother. It's too bad, especially when someone has obvious talent and good traits that are overshadowed by thier behavior. Maybe they just need someone to tell them to get therapy if they have neurosis/chemical problems. Or some understanding if they have neurological/learning style differences. But no, people just don't like anyone who's "different" . Can't be bothered with them. Easier to write them off and tease them.

Marga, I know that I've looked down at her to make eye contact. She's shorter than me. Again, she's got some very long feet... Then again, my chiropractor always told me he'd make me taller. Maybe I really have grown from all that spinal decompression! I thought he was joking. I've been meaning to measure myself. Wendy may shrink and grow too. I know that Alexandra Ansanelli does. Scoliosis can do strange things...

Oh, I think she's a tad taller than 5'. Maybe 5'2" or 5'2 1/2". Then again, it's hard to tell without really standing beside the person and measuring. But I've been around her, and she's not super super short.

I believe Peter Boal danced the pas de trois with Kathleen and Zippora. Wendy Whelan was also in that. Can't recall who the other men were. My roomate has a tape of that at home somewhere... That performance was the first time I saw Agon as well. I LOVE that ballet. Last season, I saw Maria K. dance the lead pas de deux. She was absolutely incredible. I gasped when she did the first fast supported ronde de jambe into attitude.

She (Wendy) always looks tall in person, too. One of my friends pointed out that she's actually short. I didn't believe her, so I made a point to pay attention next time I was standing beside her. I was surprised! En pointe, she's tall, but not flat. Most people guess I'm about 5'7" or 5'8" (and they guess I weigh much less than I actually do). It's all about proportions and illusion. Very difficult to guess someone's height and weight. I was very surprised at how different the body types and sizes are at NYCB. I see the dancers in class, and they're all quite different from one another.

It's funny. I always thought Wendy Whelan was about 5'7". But she's tiny! She has very long feet and is tall en pointe. Standing flat, I look down at her and I'm only 5'51/2". She's actually quite a bit shorter than she appears. I'd estimate she's only 5'4" max. She has some ballet magic that makes her look tall. Maria Kowroski on the other hand is actually very tall. About 5'9" ...maybe more.

Link to the Merrill Ashley picture a few comments back shows Russian pas de chat. Pas de chat vole, "cool pas de chat thingy with developee", etc...

Russian pas de chat is one of my favorite steps to do. If you get it right, you can really fly. I'm having fun with chaine turns lately too. If you get them going really fast, on the music, they're a lot of fun. Some dancers make simple pirouettes look like a lot of fun. Alexandra Ansanelli pulls some great ones on stage. I don't so much of a thrill out of seeing every guy turn ballet into a spinning contest, but occasionally they really can be thrilling. Helene--it's funny. I love a developpe with really builds to it's climax, but I find a wrapped foot really disturbing. There's something about a wrapped foot that seems extraneous and fussy to me. It's a stupid thing to get on my nerves, but it does. I like to see the foot go straight up.

That was a wonderful tribute to Mr.Fayette. I really enjoyed the step duet in Emeralds as well with Jennifer Ringer. It was one of the few really special moments I've had as an audience member watching the ballet. I was mesmerized and affected. I would sell my soul to go back in time and have an 18 year old body with the open heart and knowledge of art that I have now. People can truly see this in your dancing. Suzanne Farrell said that the way you dance is who you are. As a VERY FORTUNATE SAB student about to begin a career, it would be prudent to really watch, and to really think about what you're seeing on stage. You don't have to "like" every dancer. But there's a very good reason why someone like Mr.Fayette would be promoted to Principal status and there's probably something very valuable you can learn from him.

But there's only a two week total rehearsal period