SandyMcKean

For those of us who love PNB dancers of the past, this week's performances by the Seattle Dance Project will not only give us a thrilling look at some of our favorite dancers from the past, but also some of the other incredible dancers who also make their home in the Seattle area. Seattle Dance Project is composed of 10 dancers:

Julie Tobiason

Timothy Lynch

Alexandra Dickson

Dana Hanson

Kory Perigo

Oleg Gorboulev

Michele Curtis

Melanie Skinner

Betsy Cooper

Joseph Anderson

Project Two will be performed on 1/22, 23, 24 at ACT's Fall Theater and will consist of 4 new works by:

Kiyon Gaines

Heidi Vierthaler

Edwaard Liang

Maureen Whiting

Tickets can be purchased from ACT:

https://www.acttheatre.org/TicketsPlays/Play.aspx?prod=2105

For more info see my post in the Heads Up BT subforum:

http://ballettalk.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=28718

Julie Tobiason and Tim Lynch's relatively new professional company the Seattle Dance Project (SDP) is giving its second major program this coming week. As in their first program, Project One, they will be doing 4 new works: done by up and coming choreographers. In Project Two we will see works by: Kiyon Gains, Heidi Vierthaler, Edwaard Liang, and Maureen Whiting. As I see it, SDP's niche is to extend the territory of classical ballet training into the contemporary sphere -- sometimes with clear classical aspects, sometimes only rooted in classical, and sometimes far a field. All the dancers (10 of them) are highly trained: some from the ballet side (e.g., PNB, Forsythe Company), and some from the modern side (e.g., Maureen Whiting Company), but all with impressive classical roots.

If Project One was any indication, Project Two promises to be a fascinating look at what intense classically trained professional dancers can do when freed to express themselves in a more modern idiom.

For company info: http://www.seattledanceproject.org/

For tickets: https://www.acttheatre.org/TicketsPlays/Play.aspx?prod=2105

For an article: http://broadwayworld.com/article/ACT_Centr...roject_20090107

I think there are a lot of PNB fans who will be heartbroken by this news......

Put me in that camp. Just as Boal said "She is irreplaceable....".

There are many superlatives being used in connection with Louise, but I've always liked the word Helene uses above: "exquisite". That's Louise Nadeau....exquisite. Other thougths that come to my mind which perhaps don't get mentioned as often are her acting abilities and her humor. No one at PNB is more willing and more able to throw away all inhibition to become a character like Louise does. Remember her in Robbins "The Concert" last year?? I defy anyone to do ironic humor with the convincing abandon than Louise mustered then. Someone mentioned Lady Capulet in Maillot's R&J......WOW, that performance still sends shivers down my spine.

Yes, I'm heartbroken especially since I know just as PeterB said, she can't be replaced. Exquisite.

To quote her from Campbell's PI story:

"I began thinking about retirement two years ago," Nadeau said. "I could see it coming, especially with my recurring hip problems, but I wasn't ready yet. I am now. I have physical limitations I didn't used to have, and I didn't want people to say about me, 'I wish she had left the company last year.' I wanted to go out in good form and loving what I am doing. Also, Peter is bringing in some very contemporary ballets not suited to older ballerinas."

First Noelani, now Louise......OUCH.

I've read the powers that be did remove the material from livejournal, but here's a link that has at least some of the material:

http://www.joeydevilla.com/2009/01/10/the-...y-edward-gorey/

Many thanks for your report Sandy I missed this year's run due to the unexpected snow.

Come on Helene! What's a little snow to a ballet lover like you .

You know me......I enjoy walking thru brick walls. I had bought the tickets well in advance and wasn't about to not go. If I remember right, the previous day's performance was cancelled. They said this one was on, so I put the chains on the car, devised the flatest route I could design, and took a "test drive" down to McCaw Hall the nite before just to see if I could make it (I did). But let me tell you, it was still quite an adventure. How all those parents got those kids there from who knows how far away I'll never know. Interestingly, just before the curtain went up a PA announcement was made thanking the audience for doing whatever it took to get there. The audience erupted in applause (each no doubt having their own story that night), but also appauding I think in appreciation for what it took PNB to hold the performance at all (about half the house was empty).

P.S. For you BT'ers that are used to snow in your city, snow of this depth and temps this cold are highly unusual in Seattle. The city basically just stops. We don't use salt and we don't have the equipment to handle that amount of snow. Even many of the buses stopped running -- with many of them simply abandoned in the streets.

bart,

Helene covered your questions in her usual enlightening style. Sorry, I should have realized that a "legend" would be useful.

I appreciate your compliment. It's interesting how we humans can get trapped in our own "what I know/like". I think your analysis of the additional latitude a choreographer might have in the Nutcracker party scene compared to other situations is very insightful. I hadn't thought of it like that, but now that you say it, I think you are on to something. I was actually quite impressed how much "individuality" (to use your excellent word) there was in all that "background" pantomime and gesture.

PNB is doing Stowell's Swan Lake in April. If I remember, I will let you know if my new found appreciation for this side of Stowell's choreography exhibits itself in that situation.

I didn't get to any of the Nut this year -- the snow and family schedules got in the way. Did anyone here see the production, and if so, how were they doing?

I saw PNB's Nut twice this year: 12/22 and 12/29. To be honest I am not a fan of K Stowell choreography (except sometimes), and there are things about this version that bother me plotwise, but hey, it was Xmas, so what the hey!

I did my normal ho-hum on 12/22. Mara Vinson was Clara, and altho I have nothing against Mara, she has never excited me for whatever reason (it was good to see her back after having her baby). Highlights for me were: Jordan Pacitti who always nails the character roles (Drosselmeier here); Barry Kerollis was impressive as the Sword-Dancer Doll (he's going to be one to watch I think); Kiyon Gaines used his incredibly powerful body to real advantage as the Mouse King; I will be watching Sarah Orza more often now having seen her do the Peacock segment (shouldn't that role be called "Pen-hen"?? ). But the star of the show that nite for me was Maria Chapman as Flora. I don't put Maria at the top of my stack, but she never disappoints. Given how boring it must be to do the Nut over and over again during this "make the cash" season, I thought she gave sparkle and life to not only this role, but to the entire night. On a disappointing note, I thought Seth Orza struggled with the Prince role. My opinion is that he has genuine potential, but he still needs experience, or practice, or both. I had the feeling that he was forever running to be in the right partnering spot, and to have his hands in the right partnering spot, when partnering Vison's Clara.

Then I went again on 12/29 for one reason, and for one reason only: Leslie Rausch was doing Clara. Since I am Leslie's self-declared number one fan, I had to see her in this. I was not disappointed. I literally had tears down my cheeks watching her thru binoculars in the PdD at the end of Act I. It didn't hurt that her Prince was Batkurel Bold. His sure and clean partnering was in stark contrast to Orza's a week before. I made it a point to look for our new sensation (or so I say) Kyle Davis. I picked him out in the crowd of Moors in Act II -- he continues to strike me as one of the most graceful male dancers I've ever seen. In the coming season, I recommend changing nights if you have to just to see him. I was looking forward to seeing Laura Gilbreath as the Peacock since Laura is taking my eye more and more these days with her long, long body, and talented acting. Somehow her Peacock didn't work for me -- a certain lack of confidence I'd say. I wonder if she's done this role before? It was exhilerating to watch Lin-Yee, Seth Orza, and Tisserand literally having "athletic fun" doing the Dervishes dance. It was all testosterone I thought and superbly entertaining.

I had one big surprise during the 12/29 performance......I warmed up to the choreography! Instead of resisting Stowell's seemingly endless gestures and pantomime, I let myself flow with it. Thru my binoculars, I watched individual couples (fathers and mothers) in Act I instead of the oh-so-familiar "Fritz and his buddies run around with their swords a-waving" action. I found myself won over by Stowell's elegant attention to the details of everyone's movement during the Christmas Ball. After this relevation, I am now looking forward to seeing PNB's Nut again next year (now having given Stowell this chance ).

9.3° is a nice wide field.

My 5x15 Nikons have a 9° field and I find that wide enough for almost anywhere in the house -- I've been quite happy with that viewing angle for several years now. On top of that you will see that wide view at 7 power instead of my 5 power (altho mine have the compensating advantage of being quite small.....it's all a trade off). I love mine, but to satisfy my picky tastes I did have to spend almost 10x what you did .

Unfortunately, that documentary ("Wonders are Many") does not seem to be showing on PBS here in Seattle. Our PBS station may have a lot of money problems because it seems they are doing little but "encore" broadcasts.

Thanks for the link.

I loved, loved seeing that clip (BTW, there is an index scrollable menu on the right so you can go directly to this spot in the broadcast).

We rarely get to see Bejart here in Seattle (or maybe I'm just not looking hard enough ). Frankly, I'm a bit of a neo-classical snob, so I'm not usually crazy about much of the modern I see here (usually at the University of Washington). But THIS....this Bejart....I was hooked by the first 5 notes of Stavinsky's unforgetable music in the news clip. I loved the "eagle wings" motif of some of the men's arm movements. God, I'd love to see this "Rite of Spring" (I have no French to say it properly.)

Fully agree bart.

Somehow I've not truly considered the impact of computer technology on opera and ballet until now. Of course, I did realize that computers are all over the mechanics of production (such as sub-title timing, or lights), but somehow I hadn't really opened up my mind to the possibilities on design itself until this production of Faust. I did get a glimpse when I saw Seattle Opera's Parsifal a few years ago, but that was using video as a sort of "substitute" for traditional design elements (wonderfully done tho). Faust opened up whole new worlds I hadn't even imagined.

That it might take us all a while to adjust ain't too surprising

What a treat, a review from someone who's seen both the live and the b'cast performance! And from none other than Helene who always illuminates dark corners for me. Thanks Helene.

For the first time, my wife and I went to the same Met HD b'cast a 2nd time. I never expected that to happen, but this production contained such beautiful music and singing, and most compelling, the use of ground-breaking digital effects, that we couldn't resist. We weren't disappointed. Some of my reactions to a 2nd viewing were not expected. I actually found the many camera angles, plethora of closes ups, and camera motion, less bothersome the 2nd time around. I concluded to myself that the reason is that with a 2nd viewing I came to better understand what the video director was trying to do. During this 2nd viewing each of the camera choices made sense to me. I still think they went too far, too often, but I was amazed how this camera direction element of seeing opera (which is of course totally missing when one sees a live performance) is just another aspect of opera that one needs to learn to understand and appreciate.

To Helene:

......Susan Graham, who blew me away as Iphigenie last year

Where did you see this?

By using the vertical space to full advantage and a reflective background,.....with the muted mirror effect....

I really like your insight into the use of vertical space instead of the usual horizontal space -- I hadn't really understood how fundamentally different this production was in that regard until you spelled it out (altho visually the effect is obvious). I am puzzled by one thing tho. Your description made me think that you are thinking that the designer purposely went for a "reflective background" with that "mirror" effect. I have been assuming that the reflective character was an artifact of using whatever video display screens they had to use rather than by design. I found the reflections distracting and would have loved to have seen this production without any reflective quality. IOW, I've been assuming that those reflections of people etc were something that just had to be tolerated rather than a positive design aspect of the production. Am I misreading your comments?

The chorus was fabulous....

I couldn't agree more. I was completely moved (both times) by the vision of of hell and heaven in the last scenes. In fact, I mentioned to my wife that I had never been so present to a vision of Christian hell and heaven as I was sitting there watching/hearing the finale to this production. It created a vision such as only art, the highest art, can create and bring to life. The chorus was a major, perhaps the major, component of that artistic vision. I shiver again just thinking about it. (As an aside, I have no belief whatsoever in a God or in Christian myth, but if I were ever to waiver and worry about the conscious entity I call "Sandy" having to spend eternity in either a heaven or a hell, given the vast difference such an eternal existence would be depending on whether Faust or Marguerite were my companion, the vision of hell/heaven created by this production and Berlioz's incredible music could push me over the edge into belief. Maybe one day I'll have a death-bed conversion ........not likely.)

The image of the conductor that Sandy identified from the last scene was actually visible throughout most, if not all of the opera, as the mirrored part of the lowest level of the grid reflected the conductor and top of the orchestra.

Naturally, I looked more closely at these strange apparitions the 2nd time. It sounds like in the live performance you saw far more of these reflections than in the b'cast version (I presume that the reflection you saw would depend on where one is sitting in the opera house). In the b'cast version, I've become convinced (altho not 100%) that the reflection I was seeing was not the conductor directly, but rather a reflection of some TV monitor that had the image of the conductor on it. I'm pretty sure such TV monitors are used in opera productions so that the conductor can be seen from all angles on the stage. The main reason I concluded this on my 2nd viewing is that the image, when most clearly seen, seemed to be in black and white, and most importantly, the image would morph as the camera angle changed from a roughly rectangular image to an ever skinnier one than sometimes approached a 1 dimensional straight line. That is precisely the behavior I would expect from a flat surface (the video display screens) reflecting another essentially flat surface (a TV monitor) from various angles. Of course, the reflections you were seeing in the live performance and the artifact we were seeing in the b'cast version might not even be the same phenomenon.

PNB issued a postcard mailing that tickets would be discounted 15% thru the T-day weekend. I didn't take that as a good sign.

I wonder if this is based on the same material as the 2005 documentary that can be rented on DVD entitled Ballet Russes (see link below). The DVD is 2 hours long (and quite good), so I assume it is something different. In addition, the DVD really starts at the end of Diaghilev's reign and has little on Diaghilev's Ballet Russes but rather gives the story of both Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo and Original Ballet Russe. I hope this 30 minute documentary is on the actual Ballet Russes since that part of the story (pre 1929) is almost entirely missing on the DVD in spite of its title.

http://www.netflix.com/Movie/Ballets_Russe...d=127600539_0_0

but something called 120 Hz technology can reduce, though not eliminate, LCD blurring.

Be careful here. There are 2 kinds of 120 Hz processing. One can make a big difference, the other is pretty much just marketing hype.

The "marketing" 120 Hz rate is usually called "refresh rate" and will make some difference. The "real" 120 Hz is usually called "processing", and if you actually get this "real deal" variety, it can truly make a difference on blur. (More can be found on the internet of course).

A nuimber of people commented on this at our theater. I assumed it was a glitch, possibly a left-over phantom image of one of those swimming spirits we'd seen earlier. Sandy, your solution makes sense. Did you notice how often the singers themselves were reflected from the back -- as though the back wall behind them were made of plate glass -- as they performed on the scaffolding? I wonder how that was achieved and whether it was intended or or not.

I was of the same mind for most of the performance. I thought that maybe it was an artifact of the digital process (as you say some "left-over phantom image"). But near the end I finally saw quite clearly an image that could only have been a distorted image of Levine waving his arm as he conducted. Then I realized that's what that "phantom image' had always been -- it just looked different from time to time depending on the angle from the camera to the digital screen and then back to Levine. (Note the reflection might also have been of a TV monitor that showed Levine's conducting rather than Levine directly. I know that opera houses have such monitors so that singers/chorus/etc can see the conductor's direction from odd angles.)

As to the singers reflections....at first I thought that double image was another video artifact. Then I thought it was designed that way to purposely make the video screens look like plate glass or mirrors. Then I went "duh* -- the 2nd image was of the back side of the person and therefore could not possbly be the designer simply telling the system to add a duplicate image to fake a reflection. There was only one explanation left, a true optical reflection from whatever presumably shiney screen they were using to display the video images. After a while I convinced myself that's exactly what those reflections were -- especially given how the 2 singer/person images changed in relation to each other as the camera moved thereby changing the reflection angles. At some points I also saw clearly reflected spot lights in those screens. I wonder how noticable all these reflections were in the actual theater.

Allow me to add my plea to that of bart. I'd love it if someone who was actually in the Met theater were to comment on how things looked.

To compensate for the monster set, the director opted for numerous close-ups. These were not always flattering and sometimes made it difficult to figure out what was going on elsewhere on stage.

I completely agree with this. In fact, this is my biggest complaint about seeing this amazing opera in the movie theater via HD b'cast. It was not just that they were so close, but that they panned too. Sometimes they panned while the image was also moving.....one got practically sea-sick. I have nothing per se against the "moving camera", but they did the "close up" thing too often in this b'cast IMHO.

I am still wondering why there was so little applause in the movie theater and why the production left me strangely unmoved by the marvellous score.

There was good applause at my theater in Seattle. I do agree that one could have been left less moved than one might otherwise be.....I'd say because the spectacle was so amazing and interesting that oft times I almost forgot to listen to the music.

the other was a minor quirk, probably specific to the movie: as Marguerite ascended to heaven, there was some small white thing happening in video behind her, and I couldn't make it out.

I too saw that; in fact, I saw it (or a similar "it") several times. I finally figured it out. If you looked very closely, you could just make out that this little moving imp was a reflection of Maestro Levine being reflected off the video screens. I don't know if it was of him directly or perhaps of a monitor that contained his image. Once I figured it out, it was definitely a miniature Levine conducting.

There was dancing in it, and it actually was ballet. The women used the balcony railings like a barre at times, and I thought the movement suited their roles and the music.

This was my wife's (Kathy) favorite part. I too found it extremely effective.

Plays and operas don't have the same problem.....

Altho I agree with your overall view on this, one could add a wrinkle and perhaps put these art forms on a more even footing. If one were to consider the notes in a score for opera, or words on the page for plays, then opera and the theater have the same rigidity as ballet (more so even). Since ballet is nearly all visual (leaving the music aside), it is far harder to modify that visual with integrity -- just as one would be reluctant to change one of Wagner's notes or Shakespeare's words.

Overall, I think I am in the "loved. loved, loved it" camp. I almost certainly would be if such productions cut back on the "too much, too many" principle (as bart called it), took out much of the camera movement and close ups, and generally showed us less video tricks (such as Helene's rightly criticized flaming Marguerite) while retaining the many excellent visual effects. I think I'm going to have to go to the "encore" performance 12/3 so I can get totally off the fence regarding this production (not to mention our likely exposure to such video effects in many other productions to come).

Did everyone else love the riding horses as much as I did? I found it not only mesmerizing but was struck at how well the images fit the libretto -- I can't imagine how traditional staging would reflect that wild ride of Faust and Mephistopheles as the words in the libretto describe it.

I was astounded. I'm not saying I approve (yet), or that I even completely liked it, but it is certainly something that has never be available to opera spectacle until recent years. I found some of the video effects inspiring and others distracting (especially the reflections off the video screens). Who knows where this is all going to lead.

It's a tough act to follow.

That about says it all when it comes to Mr B.

I think Morris just nailed it with that solo....

I think we will agree..............so did Benjamin Griffiths ).

I'm with dirac on this one.

There is that photo of Mr B in his early twenties standing at the rail of a boat in Venice I believe. He looks "gorgeous" in that photo, but that's the only time I can think of that he looked more handsome than exotic.

I'll leave it for the woman on the board to say definitively, but it would seem to me that Balanchine should be cast with a more "intriguing" look than a "handsome" look.

OOPS, I forgot.....

sandik, I too was struck by the "bell" sounds in during the performance. So at the intermission during my last performance, I went down to the orchestra to have a look. There were 2 instruments (or maybe just one) I presumed to be glockenspiels (with metal bars), as you surmised, sitting up close to the conductor's stand. Right behind them were 2 larger vibaphones (with wooden bars). There was also a celeste sitting next to the harpischord.

I was sitting in a high box so I could see most of the orchestra pit. I can't be sure, but it seemed to me that the celeste was played during "A Garden", and the glockenspiels and vibaphones were played primarily in the Steve Reich music.

Balanchine’s story would make a better miniseries

You've hit on the solution.

I'm calling HBO in the morning!

We need to cast the following:

Danilova

Geva

Zorina

Tallchief

LeClerq

Farrell

Aroldingen

Too tough.

Maybe we count our blessings if we can cast just Farrell and perhaps one other as a true character. I envision alluding to the other loves, and then somehow injecting an old film sequence of that lover's dancing. Tallchief doing Firebird; the Zorina clip out of some Hollywood movie......you get the idea.

I've been derelict in getting this written. I'm determined to write something even if I kid myself that I can do it quickly. The trouble is I feel I could go on for days about my PNB experiences over the last couple of weeks.

First off, thanks of all of you who posted to this thread. You gave me much insight as I saw these performances. I even printed ALL the longer posts and took them with me for the last performance so I could read through them all at each intermission. I don't agree with you all on many things, but you all gave me new and enlightening ways of seeing what I was seeing.

I saw this program 3 times: 2nd performance (11/7); midway performance (11/13), and last performance (11/16-mat). I can't remember taking quite such an extensive journey while seeing the same program multiple times as I did with this program. I'll try to give a flavor of that journey.

I'll start with "One Flat Thing, Reproduced" (OFTR). I've seen this now 6 times (3 times last season, and 3 times this season). I didn't particularly like it the first time I saw it (I wrote about that at the time on BT). The 2nd time I started to warm up to it. But it was the 5th time when I had my breakthru. Doug Fullington gave me the key at his pre-performance lecture at my 4th performance: the dancers take all their cues from each other and none of the cues from the music (if you can call those sounds music). Of course, I had realized that there were some cues coming from various shouts (such as "reset", or "go"), but I didn't appreciate until Doug's comment that the dance had no relation in time to the music. I knew that the piece is sometimes done in ~15 minutes and at other times in ~20 minutes, but I never connected that at no time in the choreography do the dancers directly reflect the beat of the music (except perhaps incidentally). Suddenly, I saw the team work; suddenly I saw what I can only call PdDs, or quartets, or even corps work; suddenly I saw the precision; suddenly I saw big sweeping themes that repeated themselves just as they do in "Swan Lake" or in any other classic ballet; suddenly I saw the Balanchine in Forsythe's work.....it was a revelation. If Peter Boal hoped to reach at least some of his audience by the unusual move of repeating such a difficult work in the very next season, he reached me. I'm grateful to him. I can't say that OFTR is one of my favorite ballets, but I will say that it is one of the most important ballets I have ever seen, and that it taught me more about ballet than anything since "Agon".

Continuing my backwards remembrance. Millepied's "3 Movements" was my favorite. As Helene pointed out, his use of the stage, all of it, was remarkable. I'm a sucker for minimalist music in contemporary ballet (e.g., "In the Upper Room"). I love the way it tends to build and build to a feverish pitch. It carries my emotions on a roller coaster -- and there is nothing I like more in ballet than to be overwhelmed by emotion. The piece made me think of New York City: the streets; the bustle; the alienation; the fleeting, but powerful relationships; the raw emotion and the self-centeredness (don't get me wrong...I love NYC and NY'ers to boot). It seems that chocomel, tutu and I all felt something like this about this ballet. I want to mention one dancer of many I could highlight: Laura Gilbreath. To my eyes Laura is more and more a stand out dancer at PNB. Her long body, incredible extension, and dramatic abilities are making it hard for me to watch anyone else at times. This was one of those times. I don't suppose she can do all roles, but WOW when it fits, it's electric.

I remember to this day the first Kiyon Gains ballet I saw. I immediately said to myself (and to him directly at the Q&A that followed) that here was a powerful new choreographic talent. I have little doubt he has a bright future. To me "M-Pulse" is a cornucopia of ideas, endless ideas, perhaps not yet fully formed, perhaps without "structure" as Helene mentioned, but Kiyon is a well spring of choreographic possibilities that probably he himself has little idea where from. For example, there were movements that were reminiscent of break dancing, or some other "street" moves, that I found particularly striking. Kiyon spoke at one of last week's Q&As and made it quite clear that dancing was his main focus with choreography a side line -- it was obvious by his remarks that he can't get enough of the joy of actually dancing, but as Kiyon matures, and demand for his choreographic vision builds, we are all going to see his ballets one of these days. In another Q&A that didn't feature Kiyon, I asked Peter Boal how exactly did it occur that such a young dancer's work was featured in a regular season program. Peter said a few things, but the heart of it came when he made the simple declaration: "I believe in his talent." Well, that makes 2 of us. (BTW, I love Helene's phrase "lack of faux sophistication" when she wrote of this work. There is something so alive, natural, and genuinely joyous about Kiyon's vision -- he just does it instead of thinking about it.)

As nearly everyone else has commented -- Lindsi Dec is amazing in this piece. I have been a fan of hers for some time (yes, I say she will be among the next wave of promotions). I remember her in the "tall girl" role in Rubies, and other times when not only her dance, but also her style, was on display. Well, she was a force of nature in this piece. Later I discovered one of the reasons at a Q&A. Kiyon worked the hardest with Lindsi, and Lindsi worked hardest with Kiyon. It was nearly a co-creation. Peter Boal said that when negotiations were happening regarding whether Gaines or Millipied would get a particular dancer, Kiyon all but said without Lindsi the ballet would not be possible. To put a fine point on this, some of you know that I am the self-declared Lesley Rausch #1 fan. I picked the Sunday matinee just so I could see Lesley in this spectacular role. For the first time ever, I preferred someone else in a role over Leslie. Since Lelsey was 2nd cast, she likely just didn't have the time to rehearse the role sufficiently, and certainly not to the extent that Lindsi worked one on one, for many hours, with Kiyon the choreographer. This is not a knock on my idol Lesley, but a full out compliment to Lindsi.

I can't move on from "M-Pulse" without mentioning the "knock your socks off" solo done in the 1st cast by Carrie Imler and in the 2nd cast by Kaori Nakamura. This is a tour-de-force that requires a high speed, precise foot work, and dynamic performance while the dancer commands the stage with confidence and a big dash of panache and drama. In other words, a role taylor-made for Carrie Imler. Is there anything Carrie Imler can't do to perfection? She owns this role. Nakamura could not compete in my estimation. Kaori is one of the most refined and skillful dancers I know, but this role requires talent across all aspects of dance. Carrie is the only PNB dancer who has everything, perhaps not the best in every category, but who none the less has it all. She can do the last movement of Jewels and be a stomper in "In the Upper Room" with equal quality. She rarely fails to amaze. (Kiyon's problem with this piece may be that without Lindsi and Carrie the piece can't work.)

As others have said, I think Morris's "A Garden" suffered from being on a program with 3 other such powerhouse works (be they good or bad). Somehow "A Garden" got lost in the fireworks. But having seen the program 3 times, I had the opportunity to focus on "A Garden" too. I like Mark Morris ballets very much (I know not everyone does), and now I see more clearly why. He is so subtle, so sweet, so respectful of the classical tradition, not to mention his humor. Like Helene I was blown away by the point work in this ballet. If I were to dream of ballet, it is this ballet I would like to dream (OK, with different costumes ).

I can't finish without mentioning Kyle Davis. Kyle is the young dancer who recently won a Grand Prize at the prestigious Prix de Lausanne and decided to spend his year with PNB. He is officially listed as an apprentice. Remember this name. Rarely if ever have my eyes been so struck by a brand new dancer. He is so musical, so lyrical, so liquid, so confident. Strangely, his dancing made me think of the best of both male and female dancers -- almost as if he were both at once.