kfw

Violette Verdy . High but lovely.

Amen to that. And it'll be interesting to see how "Haieff Divertimento" is received in Farrell's staging. Wasn't it last seen when NYCB revived it for the Balanchine Celebration in 1993 with Whelan and Martins? Anna Kisselgoff liked it then, but if memory serves, other critics thought it was flat without the original principals. In Repertory in Review, Nancy Reynolds writes that despite many calls to revive it, That amuses me and makes me want to see it again.

Oh, I’m sure they do. I just thought he sounded a trifle sanctimonious. If the criticism is fair, it can and should stand on its own without any little homilies about the bad example Kistler is allegedly setting for young dancers. I don't think it's necessarily sanctimonious. Young dancers can naturally be expected to heed, if not always follow, the example of a longtime SAB teacher rightly revered as a dancer favored by Balanchine himself. A critic can be expected to find that heeding worrisome, and to hope against hope that he can make them see her current performances in a different light. I don't read him as defending his criticism, which in any case isn't his alone, but as trying to be heard by the audience that counts the most.

I understand feeling irritated when a critic is unfavorably disposed towards a dancer most people love (I wonder what Macauley would have thought of the meltingly lyrical performance I once saw Whelan give in the Divertissement pas de deux of "Midsummer Night's Dream"), but it might be more accurate to say that Macauley has never praised her unreservedly. He has written of her "authority." For example in an article last November, he wrote that

I suppose there are dancers who think they can learn from critics and dancers who dismiss them, but while I winced for Kistler, I was actually heartened to read that part of the piece.

Ray, I'll have to watch the First Theme dancers carefully the next time I see the ballet, but have other dancers, not having heard that story, copied Marjorie S.'s move?

Yes, many thanks to everyone here who has helped the non-New Yorkers among us picture and imagine these exciting changes. And carbro, I've just bookmarked your friend's site.

Thanks, DeborahB. Of course the style appropriate for a subscription brochure is not appropriate for a press release, so that alone doesn't tell us if the same person wrote both, although it does suggest that someone knows the difference. I have worked as both a journalist and a copyeditor, and I disagree. If the copyeditor has not only to correct an occasional typo or tricky bit of grammar, but has to adjust phrasing too, then who's doing the writing? Whoever wrote that brochure has little feel for written English, and shouldn't be working as a professional, which makes me wonder if he or she really is even a freelance professional, which makes me think someone with NYCB wrote it. But maybe you're right. In any case, someone at NYCB approved that amateur prose and doesn't know good writing from bad, and that's no crime, but the dancers, and the company's legacy, deserve much better.

Ray, I don't know if that's funnier than it is sad or sadder than it is funny. Over on the Femme Fatales thread there is this bit from The Independent about how these dangerous creatures . Some day we're going to have to de-sedimentize back to grammar, syntax, and the dictionary meaning of words.

Thanks, Bart. I pictured an excavation operation, "reality" having been covered in sand I guess. Same general idea, of course. You're a brave man. I guess he de-sedimentized all that neo-classical and PoMo stuff back to classical ballet.

Pedagogy, really? Doesn't that involve clear communication? Love that "de-sedimentation."

Thanks so much for taking the time to write that rich and really enticing review, Helene. It makes me a little sorry that PBS just broadcast SFB's Nutcracker. Wish they'd waited and filmed this instead.

Interesting distinction. I think you can be charismatic certainly without being glamorous (President Bill Clinton springs to mind). But I think Charisma is probably an essential element in glamour. I don't really see that peacocks are charismatic though. Charisma is, to me, a force of personality that I don't see that one can ascribe to an entire species of birds. I too see charisma as a force of personality, a power of attraction. In regards to elegance . . . well, spirituality is probably an overused word, but I do think of elegance as an inner quality, especially in comparison to glamour, which, however delightful and alluring it can be, seems trivial and superficial and superimposed (whether by the person or the audience or both) in comparison.

I have really enjoyed reading these reviews. Peter Boal has interesting things to say (naturally!) on his Director's Blog about Violette Verdy's staging of "Emeralds." Sample: Apparently, this is only the second blog entry Boal has posted (the first was on Twyla Tharp's residency last year). I hope for many more! RSS feeds of the blog are available here.

I was in row M of the orchestra Friday night, and there were empty seats from that row down on the left side at least. But not too many. Oh, and Rosa, thanks for that great, detailed recollection and review!

I couldn't agree more, Drew. I'm sure there are some things NYCB management could have done better, and money that could have been better spent (as is doubtless true of Miami City Ballet and other companies that are having to cut back) as well. It is also a characteristic of contemporary American capitalism to turn to layoffs as a first rather than a last resort. But based on the information we have I don't see any evidence of dastardly behavior on the part of Martins. Those are wise words, as were Bart's, and my "abused his position" last night was too strong. I certainly didn't mean to suggest "dastardly behavior" or that Martins is a "villian." I do think he's made the situation worse.

Speaking of that jump off the cliff, Gomes made it both spectacular and ardent Friday night. Part jumped at a bit of a angle to us, but Gomes positively leaped, and at such a diagonal that we saw him sail through the air for several seconds it seemed. It was beautifully done.

It would surely have been very hard for Martins to tell any principals what they must have read from many other sources. But that was his job. The company's history would not be so celebrated if many leading dancers had overstayed their welcome as long as they have. Put simply, Martins has abused his position, has arguably made it necessary to fire promising corps members in order to pay the salaries of underserving principals, and has undoubtedly cut into the company's current revenues by presenting those principals to a discerning New York public that years ago tired of them.

What they just might show are some of the clips that were distributed free on DVD and are now on You Tube -- like this one.

That smile was a killer! She and Gomes brought everything I remembered from the last time they danced this here, and a good deal more. Memories fade, of course, but I don't remember her malicious glee, her confidence, her projection of triumph, her overall characterization of Odile being quite as sharp last time. Whether in black or in white, she was more beautiful than ever. Thanks for your review, Natalia.

All I saw was the credits rolling by, but there is an interview with the show's producer and director, Judy Kinberg, here. I expected much more Broadway than ballet and was pleasantly surprised at how much ballet we did get. There were also Balanchine and L'Clerq photos I'd never seen before, and it's always such a pleasure to see how former dancers look like today (good!). Re: Windmill/Watermill. Thanks for the laugh, Bart.

This season before the performance, next year during intermission as well? Ugh, ugh, and ugh again.

I agree ... and remember those experiences quite vivdly. The joy of getting older is "re-visiting" such works. And the joy of getting really old is discovering the works for the first time as it were, since you don't remember reading them in the first place. Or so I'm told. Gosh, I can't wait. My wife and I are currently reading (my 2nd rereading) The Brothers Karamazov, but when I read fiction for pleasure I mostly read classics that are new to me. I don't feel any obligation to read them; I only wish I had time to read more of them.

cubanmiamiboy, I think unsophisticated it a good way to describe it. I have to wonder if the booers were really moved by the ballet's story, or if they just perceived the whole performance, tragedy though it is, as light, pretty entertainment. But I don't think it's rude to be unsophisticated. And that was my point.

I see your point in regards to Englund's performance, but in general, would an audience boo after an indifferent performance of a villian's role, or at least boo as much? I'd rather cheer the performer than boo the character, but it seems to me that either response is a tribute to a role well done. I feel bad that Englund misunderstood, but I don't see anything rude in a little silliness. Thanks for the review; I wish I'd seen this.