SandyMcKean

I saw the performance last night too, and completely agree with Helene....Leslie delivered big time in her debut as Giselle. Her musicality and grace (especially her arms) never cease to amaze me. For me, there is only one element in the "needs improvement" category for Leslie -- I'd like to see her "connect" more directly with the audience. You're great Leslie (easy for me to say as I self-describe myself as her #1 fan ), relax into that and allow us, the audience, to be up on that stage with you.......let us in. We love your exquisite dancing (to use Helene's word). You're there now, you've reached the heights, so be there.

I encourage everyone to take Helene's advise and go on Saturday afternoon....but go in any case to see this wonderfully alive production.

OK, people -- we know you've seen it. What did you think?

I was there on opening night (last Friday); I will go again tomorrow to see the Rausch/Bold/Dec "team"; then again Friday to see Nakamura/Postlewaite/Chapman. I'll reserve my comments until I've seen all these casts.

However, I will say that Carla Korbes knocked my socks off as Giselle on opening night (she is a wonderfully dramatic dancer); but having said that, the highlight of the night for me was Carrie Imler's Myrtha. Carrie has a way of creating character, not so much via acting, as via simple "being". Of course, her technical skills are legendary. Overall, she's just the most accomplished and professional ballet dancer I know (remember I don't have access to many other companies).

Just an interesting (hopefully) aside......

I've heard at least 3 ballerinas at PNB remark how they all love, love, love to be partnered by Karel. The reason? They say he instinctively "understands" how their body's move, and exactly where to provide support such that they (the ballerina) looks good. They feel secure in his hands, and they feel free to dance with abandon since he knows just what to do to give them the support they need.

My guess is that Karel is getting lots of exposure because the female stars clamor to be partnered by him.

Obviously, this thread has gotten me thinking about the movie The Company (which I last saw maybe 5 years ago). After our interchanges here, I starting wondering what the critic community thought of the film at the time of its release. I did a quick check using Netflix as an "index" into such critic articles.

As it is likely to be expected when it comes to an Altman film, The Company got mixed reviews......but the majority were positive, some strongly so. I've come to rely on Roger Ebert over the years, so I read his review in detail. He said something I thought was particularly germane to this discussion (and quite thought provoking in its own right). I wonder what others think of this statement:

"I know that this movie reflects exactly the way he works -- how he assembles cast, story and location and plunges in up to his elbows, stirring the pot. With Altman, a screenplay is not only a game plan but a diversionary tactic, to distract the actors (and characters) while Altman sees what they've got." Roger Ebert 12/23/03

The threads on "The Company" (from 2004) that Helene supplied were much appreciated by me since 2004 was before my time on BT/BA.....so I had never read them before.

Frankly, I am always amazed when the folks, who typically don't like Altman films, complain that there was no plot, or that they were bored waiting for something to happen (as was said several times in those threads). If you're looking for a film with plot, then I don't recommend Altman; but if you're looking for fascinating 3 dimensional characters caught in "the act of life" rather than simply caught by a camera, then Altman may make most other films seem boring to you (yes, the one's with plots ). Altman films have 10 layers of life happening all at once....not easy to grasp in a single viewing (especially dialogue), but his films normally reward you time and again on multiple viewings as you peel back onion layer after onion layer. And his humor!.....(well, OK, often a bit cynical, I'll admit)

As always.....to each his own.

P.S. It just occurred to me to wonder whether my life, at this precise living moment, has a plot?? Maybe I'm just waiting for something to happen.

Allow me to suggest that your reaction likely has much to do with who directed the movie: Robert Altman. Many, including me, consider Altman to be one the greatest directors of all time, but others dislike his work intensely. Altman often does not go where an audience would expect. His film making point of view is more as an observer rather than as a craftsman who carefully leads his audience thru the story and the character's emotions. One either likes that or one doesn't.

I am reminded about the first time I saw what has become my all time favorite movie: Gosford Park. We went with friends to the theater. My wife and I were totally captivated by the film, but our friends thought it was one of the worst movies they had ever seen. They were totally bored, but we were on the edge of our seats. True, the movie is not easy to follow, and where our friends saw nothing, we saw such depth that we went back to the theater the very next night to see it again (the only time I can remember I've ever done that).

It may have looked better on film, where they could do close ups so that the audience would not be aware of the limitations of Blythe's movements.

Naturally, I have only seen the production "on film", but I'd say you are right. I was slightly bothered by the fact that the 2 singers could not physically interact, but I think the close ups and the cuts back and forth btwn the two singers minimized the problem you saw.

Speaking of that scene, I did think Fricka's entrance and exit in her "chariot" was quite effective.

I loved the end of Act 3, though.

I agree. The "fire on the rock" sequence at the end of the opera did work well -- especially at the very end when the "fire colored" lights shone thru the planks, but that only lasted for 20 seconds, and I felt some nervousness as they set the scene up while they locked Voigt down so they could start to tip her nearly upside down (that wasn't a double was it??).

I also pretty much liked The Machine in Das Rheingold. The decent into Niebelheim was fantasic, but even in that opera I was distracted by the clear discomfort of the human beings that played the Rhein daughters in the opening scene. They weren't comfortable, so I wasn't either.

No doubt some good uses of The Machine are yet to come, but after Die Walkure, I've pretty much come to the conclusion that the upsides are not worth the downsides. But of course the jury is still out until the final curtain after Valhalla is snuffed out with fire and water .

......how the horses for the Valkyries were "planks" that moved up and down while they stood on them....

I didn't think that worked at all. It looked dumb to me, and IMO the strangeness of this image detracted from what should be one of the most dramatic moments in the entire Ring. At this point I'd be willing to dump "The Machine" on the scrap heap of history.

P.S. They didn't stand on the "planks" per se, but rather they sat on a ledge just above the "plank" while their legs dangled down the "plank" as it moved up and down like some sort of see-saw or Loch Ness monster. Most distracting of all, I thought, was the dismount when each Valkyrie slid down the plank like a 7 year old down a slide at the playground. All I could pay attention to was the relieved look on their faces once they hit ground without stumbling so they could go on with the show.

To return to the topic of this thread: which reruns this summer will you be attending?

I'm planning on M. Butterfly (for the same reasons as you bart); Tosca (I'm fascinated by the character of Scarpia....loved those eyes in this production); Don Carlo (too big and grand for me to absorb in my single and only viewing).

BTW, I saw all the MetHD operas this season except "Le Comte Ory" due to having a schedule conflict on every single possible date.

I too saw Die W today. I loved the signers (my God Siegmund was awesome), and the orchestra, but I predict this production will not last. I was very disappointed in Le Page's concept of this opera. I rather liked what he did with Das Rheingold, but not this time. I will remain hopeful for the next 2 operas, but my gut tells me the use of the "machine" as the foundation of the spectacle was a mistake.

(hard to read your run-on sentence post without any paragraph breaks or capitalization and all the typos!)

I can only hope that I could do as well as Roger did if I wrote such a post in a language that was NOT my native tongue.

Here is the line up. Operas from the last 2 or 3 seasons. It will be wonderful to see some of these again.

Madama Butterfly

June 15, 2011, 6:30 pm

Don Pasquale

June 22, 2011, 6:30 pm

Simon Boccanegra

June 29, 2011, 6:30 pm

La Fille du Régiment

July 13, 2011, 6:30 pm

Tosca

July 20, 2011, 6:30 pm

Don Carlo

July 27, 2011, 6:30 pm

Three cheers for Helene and Jacques........

To Helene for her clarity, objectiveness, and historical knowledge......

To Jacques for his openness, creativity, generosity, and courage to exposure his inner thoughts (apparently without fear of nibbling criticism)........

“who on earth would give that dancer such an unsuitable role?”

I don't mean this as a criticism, but rather as a way to expand your thinking (also, not everyone is likely to agree with me on this). I suggest that rather than asking yourself the question above, you might ask yourself:

"What would have it be that it appears to me that this dancer is mis-cast? I wonder what I'm missing?"

It could be a bad casting decision, but far more likely there is a constraint it might be interesting to understand (see Helene's excellent post above), or it's an opportunity for you to better understand that dancer's capability or potential.

In my experience Artist Directors, Ballet Maters, and choreographers have excellent eyes for what dancer is best for what role (as you would expect).

This is an irrational post........

It's just that I can't stop thinking about what a spectacular performance Barry Kerollis did of Puck last night (Friday). Bravo Barry. We are losing a major piece of our future with you leaving. Best of luck!

puppytreats,

Somehow we are talking apples and oranges here. Your original question seemed to focus just on the relationship btwn Oberon and Titania. My response only concerns that. There are no "unintended consequences and mistakes" in that relationship. Oberon knows just what he is doing, and Puck makes no errors in carrying out Oberon's wishes when it comes to Titania.

OTOH, your comments regarding "unintended consequences and mistakes" absolutely apply to the 2 mortal couples in the ballet (and in the play). Puck definitely screws that up (hence all the "mistaken identity" type comedy in the ballet), and Puck's errors regarding the mortal couples definitely infuriates Oberon.

Also, I certainly agree that revenge plays no part in the "unintended consequences and mistakes" that occur in the Helena, Hermia, Lysander, Demetris relationships, but I never said that it did, and in fact, you never asked about that. My comments were directed only to what you had asked about; namely, is revenge a part of Oberon playing his trick on Titania. I believe it does.

The potion was to make T love O and therefore give the boy to him, which she ultimately did, I thought, out of her love and maybe even obedience, not out of being chastened or forcibly coerced or regret after realizing she had been a victim of revenge.

Maybe this part is different btwn the Balanchine and the Ashton versions; but within the Balanchine version, I see this part of the plot completely differently than you. T and O have always been "in love", or at least "in respect", but they are playful gods/fairies/sprites and are forever playing tricks on one another (well beyond the time frame of the ballet plot). In the ballet they have one of their many spats, this time over the page, so Oberon seeks to "get even" (revenge) with Titania. His spell is to make Titania fall for Bottom as a sort of practical joke. In the end, after having his little joke, Oberon uses another flower (at least I think it is a 2nd flower, and I think Oberon does it, but he might have Puck do it.....I don't quite remember) to un-do the spell. Titania forgives Oberon for getting the best of her this time (surely there have been, and forever will be, times when Titania gets the best of Oberon as they play their spritely games), and gives him the page as a sort of peace offering and acknowledgment that he got the best of her.

------ as a aside ------

Allow me a bit of personal speculation here about the larger themes in MSND: love occurs for the god/spirits and for the mortals very, very differently. In the world of mortals, with their finite life span, love is central to their lives, their emotions run high, and love-lost is a painful experience. In a word, it dominates their lives (hence errors in love have grave consequences). But for the immortals, love is just a game like everything else. I think there is a subtle slap in the face that Shakespeare gives to the "gods" here. I believe part of Shakespeare's message is that living forever ain't perfect. Being a "god" who lives forever is essentially to be bored and to be denied the meaning humans find via love (sort of a Mr Spock curse). So the "gods" play jokes on each other out of boredom, and unfortunately on us humans too.....we are essentially at the mercy of bored "gods" (who, thankfully, are kind at heart in the final analysis). Our consolation for being mortal is that we get to feel strongly and experience true love (that which Mr Spock so desperately craved too).

Quiggin,

Are you perhaps an editor yourself, or work in that field somehow? I can see on a technical level what you say makes sense in terms of editing. BTW, D'Amboise was very complimentary about Knopf and his editor (one can see that on the acknowledgment page of his book too).

There is also some ambivalence about what d'Amboise really wanted in his career, regarding making movies for example, and whether he really wanted to be head of City Ballet after Balanchine.

On Tuesday night these subjects were touched upon. He was quite definite that he was not very interested in his movie career. He implied he could have done more of it, but consciously choose not to. He said he strongly disliked the "culture" found in movie making -- he even told a story of how he went to a 9am call at 7am in order to "warm up" and be ready to "go on stage" as it were, but that it was 9:15am before anyone else even showed up and that was some stage hand casually drinking coffee and eating a donut!. He made it quite clear this lack of discipline was not his cup of tea. He touched on the "head of City Ballet after Balanchine" issue too. He was less definite about that. But he clearly indicated that he didn't think he was the "right" person to do that job, that he had no regrets (he strongly said that), and that his true inspiration at that time came from envisioning a future teaching children to dance and to love the arts. Judging from how he relished his role that night as a sort of "teacher" to we, the audience in the room, I think it was clear to all of us, just how much he indeed loves teaching.

He spoke of Melissa Hayden in the same way at her memorial service/tribute performance several years ago.

Very interesting. Jacques kicked off the "acting" part of his Hayden story by referring to his part in the memorial service. He even repeated the poem on death (with fully animated movement) he had customized to incorporate aspects of Hayden's life. So he basically recreated the moment you mention above (as a sort of performance of that memorial event, but in a very authentic way). Then he started with his memories of her at her death bed. In that part he seemed to be re-living those moments -- it too was very authentic. It was during this 2nd part (creation in the moment) that everyone in the hall became especially moved.

P.S. I note that I used the word "authentic" twice above, and it strikes me that word is exactly how I would describe this remarkable man: authentic. Very impressive.

puppytreats,

This is not a direct answer to your question, but I do have a response regarding your premise. Having just seen Balanchine's version last week, I do think revenge is present in Balanchine's "Midsummer's Night Dream". In the version PNB does, there is a very definite clash early in Act I (the ballet is in 2 very dissimilar acts) btwn Oberon and Titania over a very young page boy. Oberon wants Titania to "give" him the page so that the page can help to hold out Oberon's cape to Oberon's advantage (in how our Oberons do this, it is made quite clear that Oberon is being very egotistical about his image and prestige). Titania strongly refuses, and again it is made quite clear that Oberon is miffed at this and he is clearly not used to being denied.

Oberon later comes across Titania sleeping. He does some mime that makes it clear he gets an idea to use the flower with its love potion to "get even" with Titania. As part of this scheme Oberon has Puck create the donkey out of Bottom, and to place Bottom near Titania so that it will be the donkey-Bottom that she sees when she awakens. At the end of Act I, it is also made clear that Oberon and Titania make up when Titania graciously "gives" the page to Oberon which pleases Oberon very much.

I have not seen the Ashton version so perhaps Ashton emphasizes this revenge aspect much more, but in the Balachine version, I'd say Oberon's revenge is definitely there as a response to Titania's denying him the page. This aspect of the plot is rather prominently displayed.

I would have thought that a person has the right to write about their own life just as it occurred in their own experience (as long as they do so without knowingly making stuff up). The obligation to be scholarly and "unbiased" seems to apply more to a biographer than a autobiographer.

He was extremely generous when describing Allegra Kent and Karin van Arolingen.

Perhaps you missed it (since you were late), but Jacques reserved his highest praise for Melissa Hayden.

Peter Boal asked him to say something about his favorite dancer(s) and listed off about 20 names of the most incredible NYC based dancers we all know and love. I thought Jacques might beg off such a loaded question, but after thinking a while he strongly said: "Melissa Hayden". He then preceded to tell story after story about her including an extremely poignant one about how he went to visit her at her death bed (I doubt there was a dry eye in the place).

P.S. I've never heard/seen Jacques d'Amboise live before (DVDs yes, but never live). He is of course a hero of mine, but in person, I found him to be one of the most inspiring people I've ever seen. He is quite simply: a great human being.

Lesley Rausch was regal as Titania (she really resembles Patricia Barker more and more.....

I've often had that same thought (altho based almost entirely on her dance style).

Thanks Jayne. I find this puzzling. The news that PNB plans to fill all 8 slots (assuming it's true) puzzles me; it also blows my theory that many of the departures are for purely financial reasons. I guess I could reconcile the situation if I assume that the 8 new dancers will all be entry level and therefore save money over the old salaries. It would presumably also provide opportunities for Professional Division PNB students......God knows we gotten some incredible dancers out of PNB's PD in recent years.

But frankly, I'm very surprised that 8 new dancers are going to be hired (perhaps there is some sort of misunderstanding).

I was having trouble keeping my eyes on them all.

I know what you mean! Perhaps it was the tears in our eyes .