Helene

I don't think New York ABT audiences looking for story ballets would go back for repeat performances of "Anna Karenina" because of the score, based on what they are able to sell. Yuri Beshmet's chamber orchestra can play Shchedrin, and so can the Mariinsky Orchestra, but I wouldn't listen to that score played by the ABT orchestra based on how I heard it play "Sleeping Beauty" the other night. Conversation with friend, who's seen over 20 performances this year: Me: Are they always this bad? Her: Yes.

I have mixed feelings about "Anna Karenina", and I wish I could be around long enough to see it again, especially with Kondaurova, to get a better sense of it. What I liked were things I found characteristic of Ratmansky's choreography: the changes of direction -- ex: front to back, clockwise to counterclockwise -- at unexpected moments, the way he had the chorus of women burst from an undifferentiated blob upstage center into lines, having multiple things go on and off stage during a central pas de deux. I particularly liked the scenes that were acted with posture, gesture, and movement -- it's not really mime, but is mime-like -- in lieu of dancing, in particular the Prologue until Vronsky burst into a solo dance -- I thought the scene lost it there -- and the one where servant after servant came in to Karenin's study to wait on him. I like how he used the universal gesture for "I own you", when a more offers his arm to a woman, and she has little choice but to take it, or vice versa, like most of the time in "Giselle". Until the very end, which was sturmy and drangy, I was impressed by how restrained Vishneva's Anna Karenina was; I think this is built into the role. There was very little hair and head flinging. Rather, Vishneva showed her emotional state from her core. Also to the end she was always attached to someone: her son, Vronsky, Karenin. She got her solo only when contemplating and committing suicide. This, I think, was true to the novel, as well as the scene, about which I'm still on the fence, where she is shunned by society, another dramatic scene without formal dancing. (I really disliked the singing, which sounded miked.) They put her in a bright scarlet dress for that scene, against the light-colored dresses for the women; I'm surprised there wasn't a big "A" tatooed to her forehead. My main problem with "Anna Karenina" is that apart from the scenes where she's shunned and the too-short scene where she attempts a stealth visit her son but is stopped by Karenin, most of what I think are the really interesting parts of the novel were dropped, such as the chapters where she tends to Vronsky's family and the relationship between Levin and Kitty. (We only see Kitty's initial rejection of Levin and her heartbreak on losing Vronsky to Anna Karenina.) In the book, at the end of one chapter she's about to embark on the affair, and at the beginning of the next chapter, the affair is established. Of course, none of this would make a good ballet; the "juicy" details are what Tolstoy leaves out. I just don't find all of that romantic angst particularly interesting, and I think Vronsky is a self-involved bore and that Kitty was lucky. There are a lot of named characters, but, frankly, apart from Kitty and Levin, most of the secondary characters were simply a list of names in the program. Alexei Timofeyev was quite fine in the thankless role of Levin. Yevgenia Obraztsova portrayed and danced Kitty beautifully. I could see a bit of Juliet in her portrayal. Yuri Smekalov substituted for Konstantin Zverev as Vronsky. He looked great from the Family Circle, and he looked like a very strong partner, dance- and drama-wise for Vishneva. I was most impressed by Islom Baimuradov who danced and portrayed Karenin with power and authority. The music is relentless. I really like the score, apart from the vocal section, ugh, but not for this work: the resulting ballet is grim. The book might have been tragic, but it wasn't grim like this: I might have had a pit in the middle of my stomach reading it, but I rarely felt kicked in the head. While I liked a lot of the composition on stage, I don't remember much inspired choreography, and there were several scenes that were unclear, like the one in which Anna is ill and Karenin forgives her, but somehow Vronsky is around for the pas de trois. The scene where Anna sneaks in to see her son on the sly is preceded by stage business and characters I didn't understand. There's also an entire scene in which, according to the synopsis, "Karenin is puzzled at his wife's behavior. He tells her not to take any unconsidered steps and reminds her of the laws of morality, which, when broken, must be followed by punishment. Anna pretends that she does not understand her husband's warnings, but secretly resolves to stay away from the young man." What I got from that scene was "Karenin is upset about something". It all felt a little thin, particularly the first act.

I also don't think that it should defy belief that someone might lose/accidentally leave behind a briefcase or purse or had a purse stolen, traveling or not traveling. I traveled extensively for work, and I once lost a watch on the way to the airport, left my cell phone on the bed in my hotel room in Paris, and dropped my Nano somewhere on the flight from Denver to Seattle, all in the same trip. I think Osipova has far more on her mind than I did during that trip. And Yo Yo Ma famously left his $$$$$$$ cello in the trunk of a taxi. Of course, we only know there were passport problems, which could be a lot of things.

It may not be common in NYC, but in Seattle, I've received calls from volunteers to renew subscriptions, as well as for fund-raising activities.

I'm glad he confirmed this. Osipova has had several high-profile cancellations, once at the command of Bolshoi management (per a published interview with Burlaka), once because she was hospitalized, and recently because of passport problems. Hopefully the set of three is complete, and it will be smooth sailing for her going forward.

I received a PM from a friend who said that Isaac Stappas was the dancer in the gray tunic, not the dancer in the brown tunic with gray sleeves. (Not to take away from any of his other great performances.) I wish I had been able to see faces clearly from Dress Circle

Great photos and some amusing snark in the captions. Thank you for posting, mussel. At least Lopatkina knows the difference between "Canada" and "America" when she says that this is the first time American audiences will see her in "Carmen Suite". She danced a truncated version -- no chorus -- in Vancouver during the Olympics as part of the Cultural Olympiad. (They didn't even list the other three dancers and roles in the program notes.) For those who've seen the film, she is very, very different than Plisetskaya in the role.

I saw Friday night's performance of "The Sleeping Beauty". I hadn't seen the original Kirkland/Chernov version, and I've read that and how it has been changed; all of my comments are based on the latest version. I also sat in the Dress Circle, and how the mime looked to me might be very different from what it looked like to people who were closer. I particularly liked the patterns in the Prologue: while the corps was often in lines, horizontal and on the diagonal, there were a lot of circular, protective patterns for the Fairies and their Cavaliers. I found this very pleasing. I also thought it was a good touch to have the Lilac Fairy enter across from the royal bassinet to do her variation, which made sense of how she didn't give her blessing before she danced. I also loved how Catalabutte remains kneeling for a long time until the King decides to re-enter his state of denial after the Lilac Fairy mitigates Carabosse's curse and to forgive Catalabutte. Act I started with an extended scene in which four gossips dance with a spindle and are caught by Catalabutte and his herald. The King sees them, there are explanations, the King pontificates and dictates that Catalabutte should be killed. I love mime, and I would love this scene, if 1. The rest of the mime were developed to match, because it looked like a 4x4 swatch of Hieronymus Bosch's "The Garden of Early Delights" was superimposed on a quick pencil sketch and 2. The mime was structured, focused, and clear. It took place out-of-doors, seemingly on the same kind of palace terrace I've seen "Swan Lake" Act I staged. I suppose this is to explain why the peasants are in the palace. The Garland Dance was not a visual highlight, apart from the bower the dancers made for the entering Princes. The last two acts, though, are a mess. I won't even call them a hot mess, because they don't have the appeal of watching a train wreck around the set pieces for Aurora, Desire, and the Lilac Fairy (in the Vision Scene). They were dull, confused, and unclear. Act II was set in swampy shadows -- if a company is going to set "Sleeping Beauty" in a swamp, why not just use the sets from "Swan Lake" and call it a day? -- there was no way to differentiate the Countess from the rest of the group, or to feel that the Prince was making much of a choice by going to another court, and the entire scene felt like a throw-away. I don't know what they were thinking in using the Fairies for the divertissement music for Act III. If they all did a group dance, I suppose it might be a stretch to think their qualities blended into the perfect whole, but to have three dance in unison and two be featured, when only the Fairy of Joy had any dancing that suggested her virtue, made little sense. The music doesn't have enough gravitas for the Lilac Fairy's solo, which isn't a cherry on top or a summation and is followed not long after by Aurora's great variation, and it looks like an excuse for more dancing, rather than explaining the Lilac Fairy's stewardship of this whole adventure. The fairy tale characters, showing the darker and more humorous side of "fairy-ness", appeared in the intro and coda of the Wedding Scene divertissement only, and the dancers did a remarkable job of creating character with very little opportunity. What they did was far more interesting than the Fairy divertissement. I agree that it was a mistake to have the Grand Pas de Deux follow the Bluebird Pas de Deux, which is a more delicate, other-worldly kettle of fish. Sarah Lane gave a very honest, clear performance of Princess Florine. The only distortion was the stylistically jarring high side extension; I'm still not sure by which law of physics she did not fall over, since she looked far out of alignment to reach it. Daniil Simkin, until his final solo, looked like he was punching out his jumps to get the biggest performance, almost to match what Johan Kobborg would do later with ease. When he went back inside his own frame in the last solo, it was elegant and had delicacy needed for the character. Under the theory that there are no small parts, I judge solo dancers by how well they dance in the ensemble portions as well as their solos. Among the male Cavaliers, Jose Sebastian was a standout, his movement bright and whole from his head to his wonderfully articulated feet and toes. He dances big, with ballon, and makes it look effortless. He stood out so forcefully simply by dancing so classically and so well. For me, he is the total package, including star quality, and given the chance, I would see a performance based on seeing his name in a prominent role. Many thanks to my friend who ID'ed him for me. Although technically not part of an ensemble, I was impressed by the men who danced the foreign princes. I noticed little of the retreat and boredom that telegraphs to the back of the house when a dancer is not the one performing for Aurora. In particular there was one Prince whom I wanted to marry by the time the scene was over. He wore a brown tunic with the blue/grey sleeves and his hat was dark on top with red around the sides. (Not the red beret or tam.) He started by standing alone upstage left -- the other three Princes made a diagonal line starting upstage right -- during Aurora's Act I solo. He did not stop his performance for a single second on that stage. Every gesture was elegant and finished through his fingers, and there was energy in his posture, no matter where he was onstage or how peripheral he was to the action. If anyone can tell me who of Blaine Hoven, Isaac Stappas, Eric Tamm, and Roddy Doble (assuming there were no unannounced substitutions) he was, I'd appreciate it. He is a prince. For the Fairies, there were a number of circular, turning bourrees with changing upper body positions. They aren't just supposed to be pretty or academic: they should be gracious and inclusive like the visual pattern. The only Fairy who struck me was Simone Messmer, who, with her wonderfully shaded epaulement, open shoulders, and head tilted on her shoulders, imparted a quality to her part in the stage picture, which she extended beautifully in her solo variation as Fairy of Ferver with bold, space-eating dancing. I also think that the Lilac Fairy should very clearly be the leader, not the starriest one in the pack, and while Yuriko Kajiya danced correctly, there was no sense that she embodied the abstract dance quality and inherent power to run day-to-day Fairy affairs, let alone to take on Carabosse, especially when that Carabosse is Martine van Hamel, who in one sweeping arm movement and "Here I am" pose looked like she could have swept the stage clear of all of the frou-frou. The Fairies might not be able to take on Carabosse, but they should not be superfluous decoration, no matter talented they are -- which they are -- or, specifically, how lovely Hee Seo's hands were in her variation or how differentiated Misty Copeland's quick, pointing arm and finger movements were from the soft crowns in high fifth that finished each phrase. If the Lilac Fairy can only equal the Aurora in dance -- and very few dancers are a match for Cojocaru -- it's critical that she embody experience and wisdom that only experience can bring, and if she can't equal the Aurora in dance, she had better bring something else. The Prince and Princess might be taking over the earthly realm from her parents by the end of the ballet, but they don't replace the royal fairies. There were far too many performers who didn't seem to know why they were in this drama. Victor Barbee and Susan Jaffee as the King and Queen were remarkably dull, with little stage presence, which was the biggest surprise and disappointment for me. Apart from Messmer, their abstract virtues were rarely embodied in their dancing beyond quick gestures. The group scenes felt generic. Despite valiant efforts by a few, this did not look like a coherent production by a major company. The point to me of being a major company, even if stars are imported, is to have the numbers and depth to provide the context for the story at every level and not to look like a background sketch for live theater. The orchestra did not help: the tempi in the Prologue were sluggish and slow, and only picked up with the intro music to Act I. For the rest of the performance they were inconsistent, at best. By contrast, Cojocaru and Kobborg brought It. They have the type of comfortable partnership, that the ease characterizes the parts they dance. It's not just that when Cojocaru danced the Rose Adagio, it felt like it happened in a minute, and there was not even a glancing thought or worry that she might go off balance, it's that she developed the character throughout the three acts, and that she imbued her performance with so much detail and reaction that she almost made me believe everyone around her caused her to react. (Now that's a pro.) I would prefer lower extensions from her, but I give her great credit that every one of them is controlled on the way up, and that she gives them a little grace note breath at the top before she lowers them, again with complete control. It was quite beautiful when, during the Rose Adagio, she looked back over her extended leg and shoulder to acknowledge and thank the last Prince before going on to the next. The most visceral characteristic of her dancing is the invisible transition from quicksilver to slow and blossoming and back. Her Act III variation was exactly as it was meant to be in the drama: a seamless integration of the virtues with which she was blessed at her baptism. It doesn't get any better than that.

Osipova was hospitalized that Saturday night and missed the matinee the next day, according to newspaper reports at the time.

Nice thread topic, angelica. I hope The Powers That Be are listening.

I did, too. I feel your pain.

That list of special guests: wow, wow, wow.

This is the last post on this, since "discussing the discussion" is off limits apart from when we have to explain policy: we've weighed the pros and cons of having references to critics in the company forums, and we've made this decision based on that analysis. We've asked this several times before, but we don't assume that everyone reads every thread, which is why I've asked again, rather than deleting the reference.

I like "charming". It means I was charmed. I don't use it to describe bad performances, because I don't find bad performances charming.

Siff has it the worst: as sometime co-host of the Met Opera broadcasts on Sirius, he has plenty of air time with Margaret Juntwaite, and he's not there to criticize.

That's what we've been trying to do. That place is called "Writings on Ballet". We've found that when critics' opinions are brought into the picture, yet another thread becomes about the critic, and many posters stop discussing what they thought, which is the only reason why we have these forums in the first place. You're welcome to start your own board with your own guidelines if you are unhappy with ours

I'm surprised "overparted" hasn't made it's way in, especially since it avoids a full phrase or sentence. I'll fix the title.

I knew what you meant when you posted. I'm afraid, though, that any mention of Macaulay is like honey to bees and the thread topics drifts to him.

A gentle reminder that the company forums were created to discuss what you think about what you've seen. To discuss Macaulay's views, please post in the Macaulay thread in the "Writings on Ballet" forum:

Let's not forget ABT is the company that did not permit any exchanges for the day of that blizzard in Dec 2010 - you remember, the one where there was NO public transportation and we got about 20 inches of snow. If companies were to refund tickets based on guaranteed casting, there would be no opera or ballet company in the world that would be in business. There's a reason for that fine print about casting subject to change. I think over the years fans decide for themselves how much to trust the casting lists, especially when they are published well in advance, where illness, injury, overwork, etc. can't be anticipated (at least most of the time).

Everything you described was why, looking at the casting and knowing I'd have to make one tight round trip to Seattle for one performance, I couldn't choose.

She received a bouquet from Kevin McKenzie on stage after her last performance of O/O. When we get official news about her whereabouts, we'll post it here.

The pricing scheme to which the article refers -- i.e., adding a substantial mandatory contribution -- was instituted when PNB moved into McCaw Hall after the renovation, when Francia Russell and Kent Stowell were still Artistic Directors. However, they were originally going to retire after 25 years, not 27, and only stayed on because there was a very large deficit after many subscribers, ticket-buyers, and donors bailed during the seasons when the company was forced to perform in a hockey arena, which still had a level of ugly, stained, permanently mounted seats that faced what had been the ice in the center, not the stage at one end. I'm not sure how much they had to do with the decision to follow the opera's example. They were very busy trying to get the company back to solid financial footing and re-translating the company's rep to the new facility. Under Peter Boals' tenure, there was an attempt a few years ago to move everyone down from the Second Tier and close it for the triple-bills, probably the equivalent of the Second and Third Rings, but I don't think they jacked up the prices when the section was open, like the Seattle Symphony did, doubling the price over two years. I think the Second Tier Center (in Seattle) seats had always been pricier, but they're more like sitting in the Third Tier (in NYC), and even a little farther back was like being in Fourth Tier A-B. He started before the financial collapse, when the full-lengths, mostly "Nutcracker", could subsidize the rest of the season. (PNB had two devastated "Nutcracker" seasons since he took over, one when wind storms took down area electricity went out the weekend before Christmas and took up to a week to get back up, and a year or two later, when there was a big snowstorm the weekend before Christmas, and the city nearly shut down.) However, there were quite a number of cheaper seats in the Orchestra with quite fine sight lines, which were a treat for those who had sat up top for cost, but preferred sitting up close, and there are seats that start at the far sides of the Orchestra and ramp up, widening from 2-3 seats to 6, and then becoming the side extension of the front of the first tier, the most expensive seats in the house. (Equivalent of Met Opera Grand Tier.)

I will always be grateful for standing room @ $2.50 when I was in graduate school. Ironically as airlines have been cutting the number of fares, the "LA Times" reports a trend for using variable, demand-based pricing and premium seat prices for tickets: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-dynamic-pricing-20110706,0,2760675.story It's interesting that they mention PNB: When PNB moved into McCaw Hall it took on a pricing scheme from Seattle Opera, by assigning a mandatory contribution to the best seats, which may have included entire sections, raising the price substantially for loyal subscribers who had similar seats before the auditorium was re-configured, which was a different flavor. I do remember sitting out for hours on a blanket in Central Park to line up for Shakespeare in the Park tickets, and happily handing over a relatively low donation to be able to get a pair of tickets in advance. I also remember the years when NYCB's "Nutcracker" would sell out for every performance before Christmas, and how someone had the clever idea of reserving some snazzy seats -- I think First Tier -- for each performance and selling them for quite a premium to people who didn't mind throwing money at it to know that they were guaranteed seats, but hadn't been able to stand on line when the box office opened. (NYCB fans will remember the poster board in the lobby of the New York State Theater with a list of all of the performances and colored dots to show what tickets were available and what was sold out.)