kfw

I was too at first, and then when it was clear he was enjoying himself, I enjoyed him as well. I wonder if the producers expected and encouraged him to showboat a little, in a way that would have been inarguably obnoxious in a younger man, as a way for everyone to pay tribute to him in a lighthearted way. Just a thought. As a sort of wink-wink joke on herself, you mean? It's the hauteur - the unearned, as if it is ever is arrogance - of so much fashion that turns me off, in contrast to so much ballet, where aristocracy and nobility go hand in hand.

I assume (presume?) the book has a co-author. It will be interesting to see how much of the D'Amboise's irrepressible personality comes through on the page.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Neryssa. It looks like the book will be released on March 1.

Yes it would. But Britney Spears? Isn't she long off the charts? I can see you must be living right, since you have even less familiarity with that segment of commercial pop music than I do. On the other hand, I had almost managed to forget Spears before I read your post. No thanks to you for reminding me.

I don't think of you as a little people either, patrick. And I agree with what you said earlier, that this will hardly be the ruin of the company or anything. And I don't have any real desire to go to a gala either, although it's fun to see famous people one admires. But it's the symbolism of the event that puts me off: the fact that opening night is a socialite's plaything, and that they're trivializing the art (although I can understand the argument that Maple Leaf Rag is all in fun anyhow). Of course you and Kathleen are quite right about the money aspect. But that doesn't mean I don't find vulgarity disheartening. Except this time. Well I don't "resent" them, although if I were a Graham aficionado I might just resent what they're doing here. I don't see the connection, though.

Perhaps they could find a bigger theater? Thanks for the correction, abatt.

You make good points, Kathleen, but tickets to the actual performance run $600, effectively excluding the "little people" altogether. So the company's opening night becomes the private plaything, in more than one sense of the word, of the rich.

Sad, yes, that the satisfaction of aiding the company (and having their names on the donors list in the program) isn't reward enough. But this is just a logical extension of the "naming opportunities" that give us the "Koch" Theater and the Your-Corporate-Name-Here sports stadium. Call it egotism, call it the fulfillment of a fantasy (funny, I never, ever dreamed of partnering Patrica McBride) it's really nothing new. What really fascinates me is the thought that a gala audience might countenance this display. I've heard of Dancing with the Stars. Dancing by My Upper East Side Neighbor? Will the $600 and up gala attendees really accept this? And what does it say about the company that their gala excludes people who can't or won't pony up 600 bucks?

Thank you!

That's interesting. Without having searched through all my Balanchine books, I'm wondering if this was in the original text. In the Biblical parable, God's grace to the wastrel is dramatized by the fact that the father runs to meet his son. I've always been a little sorry Balanchine didn't include this element in his ballet. But if Balanchine made the father blind, that casts a different light on what he left out.

Thank you very much, Marc. I've enjoyed all these interviews, not just for what they provide us of the dancers' personal history but for the glimpses of personality and thoughtfulness they afford. Kowroski's hard won wisdom about her perfectionism is an especial pleasure to hear. One small quibble: she's articulate enough to tell her own story. In my opinion, the background music detracts from, rather than enhances, her individuality.

I disagree strongly. I believe every person who sees a performance -- what is put on stage before him/her and not some future potential -- has the right to evaluate the performers in what they see. Of course, and it shouldn't need to be said. Until the Kirov starts giving tickets away instead of selling them, dancers have a responsibility to every ticketholder, and no performance is a good one unless it's good from every seat.

She's listed that way in the Auditorium Theatre program.

NYCB was at the Auditorium Theatre for two weeks in 1979, in April. I don't have the full schedule and they must have danced Union Jack more than once, but my old program shows it was performed on Friday, April 20 along with In G Major and The Four Seasons. I would have thought that was Maria Calegari at the far right of the shot, but for what it's worth, the corps dancers listed in the RCAF section along with Frankfurt are Helene Alexopoulos, Bonita Borne, Judith Fugate, Catherine Morris, Delia Peters, Lisa de Ribere, Majorie Spohn, and Sheryl Ware. Perhaps both Lopez and Calegari were substitutes. Thanks, rg!

I took him to mean not that Vishneva was somehow being selfish, but that, for whatever reason, instead of losing herself in the role she was trying to perform it in the way she thought the public expected. Whether or not that was true of that particular performance, that's likely what happens with many dancers when they're having an off night. Can anyone really judge his or her own taste in this way? I think a good critic has to have great confidence; if he can't trust his judgment, he can't judge.

Perhaps you're right. It seems odd that she wouldn't want to weigh in on a new work everyone was talking about, but perhaps it just didn't engage her and she knows she gets just so much space a year and wants to save it for something else.

I could hardly believe they didn't give her space to review Ratmansky's new Nutcracker!

That link is expired but there is a working one here. Look for lecture # 4, Ballet and Sex.

Yes, and I was struck throughout the opera with how sharp the acting was. With their fierce glares and out of focus eyes, these three women had great presence even apart from their gestures. I also thought that James Maddalena was perhaps in better voice than he was during the opening night broadcast.

Here's what Nancy Goldner has to say in Balanchine Variations: And I love it.

Oh, I've had this in addition to the rest. I think you can get rid of those by clicking the arrow to the right of the counter and it finally goes away. While I'm at it, I'll add that the person who wrote me on Jan. 31st hadn't seen my message from back early Jan. himself. But then another person wrote and a pop-up appeared as well the email notification. A third person wrote and no popup appeared but it was in email. Thanks, Patrick. I will be consulting you on any further difficulties.

My PM notification problem is that the darn things don't disappear after I've read the message. I've had the same message of 3 pms for weeks.

Cristian, I love your story of showing up to see the Trocks unaware of what you were in for. Would you say a little more about their Cunningham parody? Did they use a backdrop? Did they wear unitards? Did their facial expressions convey that they found the steps awkward or difficult? Did they intentionally fall out of positions? I would have enjoyed seeing the Trocks do Cunningham. However, while you were watching that, I was in Richmond, Virginia watching the real thing! (And feeling a little sad that I’ll have only one more chance).

Doctors aren't qualified to treat this malady but not that one according to their gender however. The practice doubles the fun! Anyhow, no disrespect to Portman, but if the categories were combined, I'd be rooting for Colin Firth.

Thanks, Kyeong!