Dale

Hans, since you said that you hadn't seen NYCB in three years, how do you know which dancers at NYCB don't match-up against Farrell, McBride etc... I guess that is just obvious, because Farrell and McBride are two of the greatest dancers of our times, but if you don't see the dancers at NYCB, how can you judge? A lot can change for better or worse in three years. For example, Ringer has expanded her range a lot in the last three years, Whelan has worked hard to become more conventionally classical, Somogyi was developed and Weese has added more emotional depth. I just don't like people lamenting the decline of NYCB when in some cases (and I don't mean Hans) they only know the company from their TV appearances. And I don't think of NYCB putting on the "classics." I think of them as a neo-classical company with their own style Swan Lake and Sleeping Beauty. They could be coached better in them. They would benefit from, say, a guest coach from the Kirov, but then when I think of classical style at NYCB, I think of Theme and Variations, Divertimento No. 15, and Symphony in C. It's classicism through Balanchine's eyes. And it's done in the Balanchine style, not the Russian style (although Balanchine's style uses the Imperial Russian style as a base). And I think, ABT's male virtuosos aside, NYCB (on the whole, especially in terms of style) dances T&V better than ABT, which is so obsessed with the attention-grabbing aspects of the choreography - holding the balances while ignorning the music, chopping up phrases, adding turns etc...

I think of the old adage in basketball when it comes to promotions - it's not the starting five, it's the five who finish the game and who are in at crunch time. Putting aside the money that comes from being principal, it's more important how many parts a dancer is doing, not what her/his title is at NYCB. I've seen it many times, a corps dancer does a ton of stuff, but then practically disappears when promoted. I bet they were happier before. And I was happier seeing them on stage too.

It's at the Met gift shop near the box office.

Without going into what's wrong with both companies (we do that a lot around here anyway), I hate to chose because I believe that each company has its own mission and they are different. NYCB by virtue of its Balanchine/Robbins inheritance and its school (which also provides dancers for ABT), it is placed among the top international companies. While I am sometimes the first to pick it apart, I feel maybe its like setting up the perfect drawing room, only to slightly adjust one small picture. On the other hand, things are very uneven there. Yes, the Balanchine should be cast, coached and set better. But, at least it's scheduling Balanchine (one could argue that they have no alternative), unlike many companies who pay lip service to their heritage (ABT with Tudor and it's Americana ballets, or the Royal and Ashton [next year is an improvement for his centennial, but they could duplicate NYCB and perform an entire Ashton season or month). And as Alexandra wrote, the Balanchine ballets are recognizable, most of the dancers are recognizably from the House of Balanchine. However, there are often too many qualifiers in the performances (a technical dancer with no projection, a ballerina with soul but with the wrong body, a ballerina with the best body but no soul, a good partner who can't get through the variations, a dancer who projects but is uneven technically). That's one aspect that puts American Ballet Theatre among the best in the world. The high quality through the entire roster, especially among the principals and soloists. There is concern that some of the male dancers are put in Danseur Noble roles that are really demi-character (or Soubrettes who dance Swan Lake), but at least they can get through them and often know where a role is going. You do want a Seigried who can actually dance his part. Performances are less likely to look like dress rehearsals than at ABT (that's something that impressed with me about the Kirov, the polish of every performance. Yet the tradeoff is less spontanity than that of a NYCB performance). While NYCB is an "international level" company, ABT might be a national one in the most exalted sense in that it actually travels around the country and the world with more frequency than NYCB. It really does represent us, as Americans (where ever the dancers might be from), around the world and does a pretty good job of it. It also attracts world class stars from around the world, something NYCB doesn't and shouldn't. As far as enjoyment goes, I don't like to choose I'm happy having both companies around. As for NYCB, I love Balanchine and I love the values of the company as I still believe them to be. Almost nothing makes me happier to see Ringer, Weese, Nichols, Boal and many, many others weave their magic through those magical ballets. On the other hand, two of possibly my favorite dancers (Meunier and Part) are at ABT now, so the highlight of the spring season for me was seeing the two of them dance side-by-side in La Bayadere. And La Fille was simply glorious, now about Stanton Welch and all those other pretenders....

I'm not going to comment one way or the other until I gather my thoughts, but I do find it interesting in an article propounding the idea that ABT, as a company, is better than NYCB, has its main focus a guest dancer (Cojocaru), who performed only two nights.

Did Ashley shorten her name? Because she is listed as Ashley Ellis. Nancy Ellison has had several books of photography produced and gallery shows. This is her third ballet book, the others being the one on Romeo and Juliet with Herrera and Corella and one on Swan Lake with Nina Ananiashvili. In addition, she often did the promotional photos for ABT, where she is a major contributor and is listed as a Trustie. Ellison appears to be her maiden name, as she had often been Nancy Ellison Rollnick in print (her husband is/was William D. Rollnick), but I noticed this year she is back to being Nancy Ellison.

For those interested in De Luz at the Met: Wed. Eve., June 11, 8 P.M. ROMEO AND JULIET – Vishneva+, Malakhov, De Luz

I heard somebody mutter to his companion about the rain and the Yankees being at home, but I don't think that's it. I think it is just the economy. It's more than ballet being out or not having an audience. Unless it's really something to see (especially if it's new, like Carnival of the Animals, which was helped (I think) by the NYTimes article), then people are just going to save their money. Every theater offering (broadway, symphonies etc...) are feeling the heat from the lower number of tourists from abroad since two years ago and the shallower pockets of the locals. I'm romantic enough to believe that if you put on a wonderful show, people will come. But that's probably wishful thinking... I hope the dancers on both sides of the fountain don't get discouraged.

I saw it Wednesday night and I thought it was the best thing I've ever seen Murphy do. The steps sparkled but she also was quite involved in illustrating the story and her chemistry with Stiefel (who was very good, without the haminess that sometimes creaps in when he's trying to "act") finally shone through. Barbee was the Widow and his interpretation is pretty broad, but I read that was the way he performed it last year. Peterson was better last year, but I have yet to see Graffane. The corps was really the backbone of this production and they are still excellent. I also appreciated Cornejo, who played Alain as an immature boy, spoiled too, but not a simpleton. His dancing was excellent without making technique the focal point. Too bad about the empty seats. I sat in the balcony and it was about as empty as I've seen it. Even the mixed bill had better attendance. The family circle had about six people in it.

A picture book/introduction to ballet book is out with photography by Nancy Ellison and text by Hanna Rubin (with additional passages by Susan Jaffe) called, "The Ballet Book; Learning and Appreciating the Secrets of Dance." It's in hardcover for now and costs $45 at the Met, but it might be cheaper elsewhere and on the net. It's an attractive book, with straightforward photos of the company as it was in summer of 2002. I haven't finished reading it but the sections explain ballet positions, auditions, coaching etc.. and has a section for several ballets that comprised ABT's spring 2002 season at the Met.

Wasn't it Kirstein who wanted a more varied rep.? I had read that once Balanchine become a true part of the establishment (at the time of the opening of Lincoln Center and the Ford Foundation grants) he exerted more control over the rep. and some of the varied ballets Kirstein liked were gone.

I agree with you a bit foryourinfo. While I like Somogyi's dancing, I have noticed in things like last winter's Symphony in C that she never once did real entrechats, she just jumped and sort of crossed her heels once. In addition, she is often lauded for her turning ability, especially in things like Hypolita in Midsummer Night's Dream, but many times in fouettes, she travels quite a bit. Not all the time. Last winter, she did an electric set of fouettes in Who Care's?, but many times she travels. That doesn't bother me, but the lack of detail and clarity in her foot work is strange.

NYCB confirmed to me Alexandra Ansanelli's promotion to principal dancer: ALEXANDRA ANSANELLI PROMOTED TO PRINCIPAL DANCER New York City Ballet has announced that soloist Alexandra Ansanelli has been promoted to principal dancer. Ms. Ansanelli was promoted by NYCB Ballet Master in Chief Peter Martins on Friday, May 23, and gave her first performance as a principal dancer as Swanhilda in Alexandra Danilova and George Balanchine’s Coppélia at the matinee the following afternoon. This performance also marked her debut in the role. Born in Laurel Hollow, New York, Ms. Ansanelli began her ballet training at the age of 10 in Roslyn, New York with Danny Holstein. Ms. Ansanelli began taking courses at the School of American Ballet, the official school of New York City Ballet, in the fall of 1990. In 1996 Ms. Ansanelli was invited to become an apprentice with NYCB, and she joined the corps de ballet that December. She was promoted to the rank of soloist in November 1998. Since joining New York City Ballet, Ms. Ansanelli has appeared in a wide variety of works in the Company’s repertory, dancing principal roles in the ballets of George Balanchine, Jerome Robbins and Peter Martins. Ms. Ansanelli has originated roles in such ballets as Peter Martins’ Guide to Strange Places, River of Light and Walton Cello Concerto; Mauro Bigonzetti’s Vespro; and Christopher Wheeldon’s Carousel (A Dance), Morphoses and Polyphonia. In 1998 she was selected by Jerome Robbins to perform the lead role in the NYCB premiere of Les Noces. In 1997 Ms. Ansanelli received the Princess Grace Award for emerging artists from Prince Albert of Monaco. New York City Ballet’s 2003 spring season continues through June 29 at the New York State Theater. For information on any NYCB performance, call 212-870-5570.

I completely understand where Wheeldon is coming from. But what worries me is that whatever one thinks of McMillian or Balanchine - they are, to me, complete opposites. That is worrying for me. If Wheeldon were going to be doing MacMillian-esque works for NYCB, that probably would by opposed to what the company stands for. On the other hand, we've seen the work of those who are supposedly Balanchinites. Personally, I find many Balanchine works more emotional than MacMillian's, despite all the rolling around on the stage and wailing that is done in the later's work.

I will ask about Lithgow and Saratoga.

In an increase from years past, the City Center season will be from October 21-November 9, 2003.

Bringing this over from the links: http://www.nj.com/entertainment/ledger/ind...85834223270.xml Robert Gottlieb Jr., ahh no, I meant Robert Johnson didn't pull any punches on this one: What is going on at ABT? I'll researve my comments on Artemis when it reappears for the second mixed bill, but I thought there was something wrong with this season when it was announced and there were more ballets by Welch (3) than by Tudor (1), whom McKenzie calls the concsience of ABT (what does that say about the company?). The company failed to build on the high from last summer's performances of two Ashton ballets with a lackluster City Center season that featured more Welch, more Weir and more Lubovitch. The choreographers used by the Studio Company are often more interesting and more rooted in the vocabulary of ballet than the trio ABT has hitched its wagon. Yet the company should be on a high - it has great stars and some artists (can the company come up with a choreographer interested in doing a ballet for Ananiashvili), interesting dancers of both sexes - not just the men - and by many accounts the corps de ballet is doing its best work in years.

Paul, thank you for your reminiscences. John Taras has frequently said in articles that if you hadn't seen Marie Jeanne, then you didn't see Ballet Imperial or Concerto Barocco. Some attribute the change in Concerto Barocco to Farrell, who smoothed out the jazziness to suit her legato style. She was stunning on CB, but I believe the changes occured earlier, if films can be trusted. Regarding Ballet Imperial, when the ballet was revived for the Royal several years ago, it was later version done by NYCB, but according to an artle in Dance Now by Stephanie Jordan, it was then reworked into the version set on the company by Balanchine in the 50s and notated. So there are more than a few versions out there. I think the ABT production was the 1964 version. I think it's good to have the version with the mime and Balanchine's later setting. And both sets of costumes work for me, although I don't like the wigs in the Royal's production. PNB does Ballet Imperial with tutus. Is it the '64 version? I guess it would be since Russell was ballet mistress during that time.

I don't have a problem. But if you have it bookmarked as a favorite, you might have to change it. Try typing in the url instead.

Bouder in Piano Concerto, that is exciting news, AmandaNYC. Too bad I won't be able to go (work), so I'm sure everybody will report back. According to the casting, Ringer is back and Tewsley is expected to perform.

On Thursday, May 22 between 7-10:00am (EDT), NBC’s Today Show will broadcast a feature on Christopher Wheeldon’s Carnival of the Animals.

Leibs, Nichols has done the lead. Farrell was the lead for the 1964 revival and I remember it as one of her best roles.

I'd have to agree with Leigh. To me, the demi-soloist role always seems to be danced by those who often then go on to do Sym. in C first movement - Ashley, Nichols, Lopez, Somogyi. Or by a trusted tall senior corps member like Reyes and Gifford. On the character of the role, if the lead couple are queen and consort (or queen and king, depending who is dancing), the demi-soloist is a princess. She's not just the little girl who can do all the fast, hard stuff. I'd hate to see that role cast that way.

News Sat. night - After a very long 2nd intermission, it was announced Robert Tewsely was injured and the company would only be able to perform the first movement of the Tchaikovsky Piano Concerto No. 2, minus any part with the danseur. We'll have to see how this pans out in casting, but that's the news. (With moderator hat on) Let's have not gossip about it. Thanks.

Tango49, my original comment was not directed toward any competition. I only looked at that particular web site, saw that about one in every three picture on it was of a high extention or an over-split jump and relayed my observation. That was it.