Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Roma

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    190
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Roma

  1. Pierre Lacotte revived it for the Bolshoi three years ago with Nina Ananiashvili as Aspicia. Petipa's choreography was mostly or completely lost, so this version is Lacotte after Petipa, antique imitation being his specialty. It is a wonderful spectacle, and I believe is about to be taped for French television with Zakharova.

  2. I saw the company both in Princeton and, yesterday, at NJPAC, and it was precisely the consistency of style, which surprised and delighted me most. They have wonderfully pulled up and open upper bodies; the movement has range, attack, breath, beautiful, finished phrasing, and a unified sense of purpose. They look like a company. Perhaps some of the dancers don’t have the polish of an NYCB, but the ballets haven’t looked this alive in ages.

  3. The event at Symphony Space is as follows:

    Wall to Wall George Balanchine

    This year’s free 12-hour marathon "gift to the City of New York" from Symphony Space will break new ground in our 33-year history of free Wall to Wall concerts. It will focus on one of the great geniuses of the 20th century, who expressed his musicality by creating a new American school of ballet, collaborating with composers from Igor Stravinsky to Richard Rodgers, and building the New York City Ballet, one of New York City’s premiere arts organizations. The day-long program on Saturday, March 20th, from 11am to 11pm, will include performance of Balanchine classics by members of New York City Ballet and other Balanchine-influenced companies, as well as by students of the School of American Ballet, founded by Balanchine and Lincoln Kirstein. Rare video archives of great Balanchine works in rehearsal and performance will be seen, introduced by great dancers of the Company’s history, including Merrill Ashley, Suzanne Farrell, Peter Martins, and Maria Tallchief. Experts will discuss, with dancers illustrating Balanchine’s work with Stravinsky and other collaborators. Wall to Wall George Balanchine is, as always, FREE!

    Tickets Not Required. Symphony Space members receive priority admission.

    Tickets: FREE! No tickets necessary

    Venue: Peter Jay Sharp Theatre

    Mar 20, 2004, 11:00am

  4. re Divert and Sleeping Beauty. I was so intrigued by the idea that there might be a relationship there, I went back to watch the tape of the old Kirov version with Assylmuratova. I am not sure that my eye is sharp enough to clearly differentiate all the fairies by employ, but my jaw dropped when I saw them line up (arms around each other, a corps girl holding “the end of the line” on either side, and two supporting the Lilac Fairy) and then do an arabesque, developpe avant, which is the same exact thing that the women in Divert do (supported by the three men), only in reverse (developpe, then arabesque).

    Re: Neary’s Rubies. I can see how it might be tempting for a stager to present the role she happened to have danced as THE role in a ballet, but probably about as desirable as having an overbearing Lilac.

    Rodney, judging from pictures and descriptions, Marie-Jeanne was a soubrette type dancer—small, virtuosic, and quick. I often get the feeling that whenever you have a soubrette doing a role in a classical (or romantic) vein, you also get a danseuse noble that acts like a spindle around which everything is wound (I am thinking of the tall girl in Rubies, Myrtha, Lilac). But the classical ballerina doesn’t need anyone else; she IS the Queen Bee :). Of course, there are too many exceptions to this in every direction. No idea where that would put “Mozartiana” with it's classical ballerina and a male second soloist. :unsure:

  5. Petipa was giving us an 18th century neoclassical ballet fairie, but I don't think anyone got it

    That’s so interesting, because in so many Balanchine ballets, it’s the second soloist, not the ballerina, who is the organizing principle of the work (Tchaikovsky No. 2, both Emeralds and Rubies, Gigue in Mozartiana).

  6. There is no gratuitous brilliance, there are no cheap tricks, and neither does she knock you out with flashes of technical bravura (although the Shades Act showed some truly magnificent dancing), yet by the quality of her plastique alone she reveals more of the drama, appearing real and true, than anyone I can think of in this company.

    Just what I remember from her performance last summer. Marc, I am green with envy :yes:

  7. Alexandra, Ratmansky is a very interesting dancer. I am far less certain, however, of his merits as a choreographer. I haven’t seen his two latest (and they were hailed as great successes), but I did see about twelve of his works, including “Cinderella”. They ranged from truly awful and amateur (Nutcracker), to just bearable, to watchable. Most lacked structure of any kind and an understanding of how to use stage space effectively (this may come with experience). He is inventive, but not a couturier (most of his work looks like it was made on him, rather then on his dancers), and lacks range (all of the ballets I saw were done in the grotesque genre, and that’s about as far from classical dance as Bejart is, in his own way).

    Furthermore, and this is highly debatable, of course, I just don’t think that a choreographer (unless he is on the same level as Ashton or Balanchine, which Ratmansky definitely is not) should be running an institutional company. Mikhail is probably right in that nothing can be as bad as Rozhdestvensky’s term, but what the Company needs now is another Fadeechev (or better yet, Fadeechev himself)—someone with strong managerial skills who can command the respect of the dancers, has clear ideas about the direction of the Company, repertoire, who can organize 250 dancers, commission new works, arrange tours, etc, etc, etc. Will Ratmansky be able to do all that WELL (and still choreograph)? I hope so, but I am not holding my breath.

  8. Originally posted by carbro

    I think the cynicism lies less in the complainers here, more in NYCB's Marketing Department, which has wasted no opportunity over the past two years to tantalize the audience with the prospect of the 2004 Centennial. [/b]

    carbo, that is what I meant, of course. Sorry, if it wasn't clear.

  9. What I find appalling is the level of cynicism on display. I wasn’t expecting much from the Celebration, may be a few revivals. An all Balanchine season was the height of my hopes. I didn’t for a minute imagine that Martins would suddenly invite those who should be coaching the Company daily to come in for next season. He has no reason. But Stroman, Eifman, the Georgian State Dancers, and his own Sleeping Beauty and abissmal “Swan Lake” “to honor [balanchine’s] classical heritage”… Then again, this is just business as usual.

  10. Saw "Dream" with McKerrow, Belotserkovsky, Lopez on Wednesday afternoon. The more I see this ballet, the more I love it, but on this occasion the dancing itself was less then thrilling. Lopez's Puck is basically Alain in tights. Belotserkovsky was a commanding elf whenever he wasn't dancing. Both men had more affinity for the floor than the choreography requires. McKerrow was somewhat less than queenly, and her dancing was unfocused.

  11. I thought Reichlin was quite wonderful last night. She had a very clear, musical attack, lovely use of upper body, and an adagio color in every step (something I thought was often lacking in Whelan ). I just couldn't take my eyes of her. Tewsley looked better than he did last season, but I think he needs a softer plie (kind of reminded of Korsuntsev)

    Borree was like nails of a chalkboard to me. I usually try to avoid her, and if that's her personal best, why is she a principal in this company? Stiff and clenched everything. I am very glad that Hubbe is back, but I thought Woetzel's performance was much better in pretty much every way, except stage presence.

    Agon. I haven't seen it danced this well in many years. Kowroski was fantastic. The tension between her and Soto kept building throughout the pas de deux. I've almost come to expect that kind of performance from Boal and Somogiy but last night they took my breath away.

  12. MCB also gave a performance at NJPAC on Thursday. It was a mixed bill made up of Slaughter, Four Temperaments, and part of Villella's "Neighborhood Ballroom"--"The fox-trot: dancing in the dark". The house was only half-full, which is a shame.

    If Villella's ballet was a little anemic and a times amateur, it was also harmless. However, I am not quite certain that the best way to attract the ever-elusive "new audiences" to ballet is to show them mediocre works.

    Slaughter was given a dry and noncommittal performance by Jennifer Kronenberg and John Hall. He especially seemed to be phoning in from a distant land on bad connection (think Nilas Martins), botching the finale. The highlight--Villella played the Gangster himself (think Don Corleone), was very funny, and the audience delighted in seeing him up on stage. He is still a magnetic presence.

    Four Temperaments was absolutely wonderful. The women in the core de ballet were magnificent throughout, and so were all the principals with the exception of Deanna Seay who was completely miscast in Sanguinic. Michelle Merrill was stunning in the Choleric section and it was her dancing (as well as the corps) that held the ballet together. She took the stage as if she were a tigress, Croce's angry goddess to be appeased by the entire cast.

  13. I'll say it--I thought Petit choreography really was lousy. Granted, I only saw it on tape, but it was at odds with the music (Tchaikovsky's Sixth Symphony) to such a degree that it made me quite literally queasy. I could only watch it in ten-minute increments, and just barely then.

×
×
  • Create New...