KayDenmark

Has Kyra stated what her future plans will be?

I work for a large financial corporation, and there is a succession plan for every single management job here - there is even a guy whose only job is planning successions. The idea being that if, God forbid, someone is hit by a falling brick, the institution and all the people who depend on it can keep running. Peter Martins may be young and spry, but hundreds of people rely on NYCB for their livelihood, so in my opinion he should have a succession plan in place already. Not having one is scary.

I wonder what type of administrator Woetzel is. He is a notoriously moody dancer. When he's on, he gives 110%, and when he's not, he gives 10%.

Interesting to see Janie Taylor in "Ecstatic Orange." I see that Tess Reichlen is doing Stars and Stripes - it seems like a role that would be well-suited to her presence and personality. Also nice to see a prominent role for Albert Evans. I noticed several photos of him in the Winter brochure. It seems that as the other dancers of his generation either fade (Neal, Hubbe) or retire (Soto), Evans is really coming into his own. I've long been a fan, so that's good news in my book.

I can't say I'm surprised by this. Even when Wheeldon was a dancer, he and Martins never seemed to be close, either personally or stylistically. I can't recall Wheeldon dancing a major role in any Martins ballet. As a choreographer, he's also gone his own way. The dancers he chooses are, with a couple of exceptions, rarely Martins favorites. And his style doesn't build on Martins' - it goes off in another direction entirely. What's interesting about his departure is the question of who is now the "heir apparent" at NYCB. Martins has just turned 60 years old, and most 60-year-old CEOs have a succession plan in place. Most of Martins' immediate subordinates - Sean Lavery, Merrill Ashley, et al - are almost as old as he is. Wheeldon was of the right generation and had choreographic talent, although it's impossible to know if he has adminstrative or fundraising skills. But who else would be appropriate to lead NYCB five or ten years from now? Damien Woetzel, perhaps? What about Wendy Whelan? Albert Evans has the advantage of also being a talented choreographer.

I also enjoyed the interviews with the dancers at the end of the article, and thought it was significant that the older dancers had a much more thoughtful take on their lives and their art. Can't believe Maria is 30! I always think of her as a young dancer, but I suppose she is mid-career.

The New York Times posted this PDF of a page from its 1975 arts section as part of a tribute to CBGBs, which is covered at the bottom of the page. At the top, however, you can see Clive Barnes' review of a double Balanchine premiere - Chaconne and the Steadfast Tin Soldier. Look how much ink the latter gets - and I'd hazard to say it is the one is performed more often today. http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/arts/20061016_CLUB.pdf

I would say most of the people on that roster weren't born in 1974 - and many of them weren't born in 1983, when Balanchine died!

Am I correct in that Kyra's retirement will leave only one active NYCB dancer who danced under Balanchine - Darci Kistler?

Always a good idea. These kids are not only the audiences of the future, they're the dancers of the future. When you read biographies of NYCB dancers, they nearly always mention the first time they saw a performance and thought, "I want to do that!"

On a completely different note, I just want to say how much I'm enjoying the expanded repetory section on the site, which seems to offer photos of every production back to the Ballet Caravan days. Those of us who complain about bum ballets now never had to sit through "Filling Station" (1938) or some of Balanchine's own duffers, like "The Figure in the Carpet" (1960) which has everyone done up in mock-Thai makekup and costumes. I'm not anticipating a revival.

I don't think it's a dumbing down at all - just an acknowledgement that you can't fill the State Theater for 23 weeks a year with a limited group of balletomanes. But I also don't think that the new block programming is dumbed down. You and I know what type of ballet Tschaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2 is, and that it's entirely different from, say, Kammermusik No. 2. But the casual balletgoer doesn't, and people have to be casual balletgoers (at least once) before they can become passionate ballet fans. For the general arts fan flipping through a subscriber program, putting the ballets into general categories is a big help. The block programming is a way to attract young families, modern dance fans, and other people who otherwise would have never considered attending a ballet. I understand what Sioban is saying, even though it wasn't expressed (or quoted) very gracefully. People have a lot of entertainment options these days. We should show them why ballet is a good one.

I'm appalled by all the hand-wringing on this board about a simple schedule change designed to make the company more financially sound. Ballet doesn't fall from the sky - somebody needs to pay for all those beautiful Balanchine bodies and the stage they dance on. Martins admits it may not work, and if it doesn't, he'll change it. I think it's impressive that after all these years at NYCB, he can still see things with eyes fresh enough to try something new. Incidentally, I discovered NYCB through one of his truly tacky ideas - a series of subway ads in 1997 that said, among other things, "Woo! Look at the bodies on those dancers!" I was in my 20s at the time. If this new approach to programming helps bring in the next generation of ballet fans, then I say, good on 'em. I get so fed up with ballet fans who fear any sort of change. If you had your way Violette Verdy would still be dancing Emeralds.

Sadly, Denmark has just had a "Romeo and Juliet" style murder of a young girl who picked a partner her parents didn't approve of. The judge ended up sending nine people in her family to jail for conspiring to kill her and the boy, who was only wounded. In other words, Martins could set "R&J" in Denmark in the present day and still have it be accurate and relevant.

God, no, not Ratmansky. His Anna Karenina at the Royal Danish Ballet was unwatchable. The only thing that kept me from fleeing in the middle was some great stagecraft and scenery, which I'm assuming he didn't build himself. I'm with you on the Per Kirkeby sets, however. He's seen in Denmark as a master painter, but I sure don't see what makes him special.

I agree with SingerWhoMoves - I think it'll be refreshing to see a very young woman as Juliet. That's not to say an older dancer doesn't have something to bring to the part, but it is certainly something different than what an inexperienced (if talented) 17-year old can offer.

It's interesting for me to see Ratmansky being spoken of as ballet's great hope, since I found the pieces he did here in Copenhagen for the Royal Danish Ballet to be major duds. Anne Karenina, in particular, was terrible - watachable only because of some great set design. Perhaps he's better at non-narrative works.

Well said, HBL!

I've heard for years that a new website is "just about to be launched." Is there anybody closer to the company who can check the status on this?

Morris continues: "For example I will never work with New York City Ballet because Peter Martins has ruined the company. ... And if they can't take care of [George] Balanchine's work, they're sure not going to get a piece from me!" What a jerk. Thanks, Mark, for refusing to work with NYCB. That'll make it easier for me to avoid you! I'm not sure his style, which I've never much liked, meshes well with the company anyway. Back to the main topic of Martins. I'm a relatively new NYCB fan, having followed the company for less than ten years. Martins has kept the company alive for people like me to enjoy. It could be that turns were sharper and coaching was better in Balanchine's day, and it could be that Farrell or one of the other Balanchine dancers would have brought a better artistic patina to the company. We don't know know, however, how that mythical other person would have run the administrative side, so crucial to keeping a company living and breathing. Could that person have maintained a company of 100-plus dancers through the dance boom, into the dance bust, and to the current day, nearly 25 years after Balanchine's death? I'm no Martins apologist - he's promoted some terrible dancers, let talent rot on the vine and perpetrated some truly awful choreography, in addition to a few gems. But the company is here and dancing, and I'm very grateful to him for that.

Sounds like a great idea, Amy.

A fun interview - he sounds like a real "guy's guy." There can't be many dancers who say their "favorite thing" is beer! Interesting that the lead in Prodigal Son is one of his aspirations - I note that others on this board say he would be suited for it.

That's a good point, Helene - at least the Balanchine canon is alive, if imperfectly preserved by some accounts.

I agree - it was a well-thought out and balanced piece. Hadn't heard the idea of Damien Woetzel taking over, however. Hope that if he does, he will not impose his choreography on us. The pieces I've seen make Martins look like a genius.

I saw Merrill Ashley in Ballo della Regina near the end of her career, and it seemed to me that she wasn't able to give the ballet what it deserved. How does a dancer know when to leave a beloved role behind? Particularly a role that is - as Leigh expressed it - a custom-tailored suit.