aurora

Also, I'm surprised that Macauley even refers to the Mariinsky's A1 village waltz...comparing that the MT fields more dancers in the waltz. Doesn't he realize that he saw a totally different composition here in Zurich? Like comparing apples to oranges.

I think in your rush to the airport you mistook his meaning. I understood him to be comparing it, not to the current Mariinsky production, but to the 1895 one that was acting as Ratmansky's template.

Thank you Jennie Somogyi. I have only been attending NYCB since 2011 so I missed a lot of her career, but whenever I saw her I was impressed.

Thanks for posting this. I was rather surprised not to see a thread for this. I couldn't go but the event meant something to me personally so I was hoping to see it celebrated on here.

Ahh the video where McKenzie makes the unintentionally amusing fauxpas in the final act!!!

This was the height of hilarity to me as a child...

I have a lot of respect for the way major dancers like Baryshnikov, Whelan and Guillem have conducted their post ballet careers by finding new projects and new choreography that works for them. None of them have taken a trip back into yesteryear by trying to go back to old roles that made them famous years after retirement. The fact that Ferri has chosen Cornejo as her partner instead of Bole makes it even more of a puzzling choice. I thought Ferri was doing very well in finding new projects for herself, but I have my doubts about her return to Juliet.

Guillem returned to Manon in 2011 after a hiatus of 6 years. It isn't quite the same but similar.

No one has mentioned this yet, but I wonder if ABT will also engage Ferri to do some coaching with principals in roles she performed herself, perhaps even R&J.

she has coached dancers at ABT in it before. She coached Osipova in it before her debut.

[sorry my page didn't refresh properly and I missed Drew's post!]

I am really excited about this. I'm viewing this as an amazing opportunity we didn't think we'd have to see the best interpreter of this role I've ever seen.

But I understand a lot of people here prefer to see it as yet another opportunity to whinge about an opportunity taken away from their favorite (ahem Stella)--when we don't even know that this is the case.

Monotones 1and 2 I would love to see live. But can ABT can dance Ashton well? Not so sure. I would have loved to see the RB bring those instead of The Dream.

They do The Dream wonderfully and Sylvia as well and have had great success with Cinderella the last two.

Obviously some dancers are more comfortable than others, but Macaulay has consistently said ABT was superior to the RB in The Dream in recent years.

So yes, ABT can dance Ashton well.

Nunez was a dream as Cindy. Can we keep her?

seconded! She was so warm and lovely. the shifts between crispness and melting softness were just gorgeous (sorry for my poor wording; bad night of sleep).

She really seemed so happy to be here and to be so appreciative of her partner, the conductor. It was really lovely.

I liked Salstein giving Whiteside his bouquet, nice touch.

Whiteside was a good partner and much better overall than Hammoudi had been on Tuesday.

That is not true uniformly: depending on the stager or choreographer, dancers have been asked to audition beyond company class. Plus, once chosen as part of a subset of candidates, work in the studio -- whether in style training or the actual choreography, the dancers are often auditioning to be cast or to keep the role. A documentary aired on CBC on the making of Ratmansky's "Romeo and Juliet" for National Ballet of Canada shows this.

An AD can push for dancers if there is a guest stager or choreographer, but an AD uses company class plus other factors -- whether the dancer picks up steps easily if needed, whether she or he works compatibly with or is appropriate physically for a dancer who is already chosen, his assessment of work ethic and current physical condition, etc. -- to cast.

Many dancers are in a perpetual audition.

Good points!

I should have said that formal auditions are not the general norm (though as you point out, do happen on occasion). But yes, your performance throughout is how you are being judged and thus are certainly a kind of constant audition! That is what I meant by mentioning company class, and of course, what you do on the stage!

https://instagram.com/p/4lHqYkRWtA/?taken-by=robbiefairchild

Pretty sweet

Thanks for the explanations Pique Arabesque much appreciated! Seems to be that NYCB has a bit more fair playing field if that is the case? Since my question would be how would any AD see successes if some of the talented corps is not even given the chance to audition for the roles? Perhaps roles are given based on height and need? Then again, how does Martin do what he has done to nurture his corps or dancers?

No companies have people "audition" for the roles. They take company class every day. In any company issues of need (height, rep, etc.) are going to play a role. This is not particular to one. NYCB has an advantage in their rep in having more "featured" roles available to give people a shot in.

Yes, it occurred to me that Lendorf's presence won't do anything to increase Simkin's workload, and it may also impede Gorak's progress, because it’s difficult to imagine how the company could accommodate four conspicuously short leading men.

I don't think anything could impede Gorak except injury. He is too good.

And I was so hoping she'd be Captain of the Starship Enterprise.

Congratulations to her

I wanted that or Doctor Who!

Aurora wrote:

I pointed out that, actually, it was the case at the time for Part among Ballet Alert! member. sidwich did not claim that every Ballet Alert! member agreed. Ballet Alert! members' opinions are not, of course, necessarily universal. However, there was much carping about Part's technical deficiencies, almost as much about her not doing the "harder" option for Lilac Fairy in the new Ratmansky, as if this were the YAGP finals.

Copeland's technical proficiency vs. Part's technical proficiency is a different issue. How much the technical issues impacted people's enjoyment of both dancers' performances is also very, very different.

The post you are quoting from me was made before your own. I'm not arguing!

From my recollection, Veronika Part's "big break," so to speak was Aurora in Sleeping Beauty. And if you just Google "Veronika Part" and "Rose Adagio," you'll see that it wasn't exactly a technical triumph. But I'll let the reports of BalletAlerter's speak for themselves...

This was 2007, so in the year leading up to her promotion to principal. And I'm not so sure how much of her promotion to principal was an uptick in her technical abilities, and how much was McKenzie moving away from casting her in pieces to which she was not suited like Sleeping Beauty.

For the record, for a long time, I let Part's technical deficiencies detract from my enjoyment of her performances. It was not enjoyable to me to hold my breath, waiting to see if she was going to make it through a variation intact. But I attended a Bayadere some years ago, and realized that there was so much that made her special as a dancer and transcended the technical. I really look forward to her performances now, bobbles and all.

Um. She doesn't have nearly as many of them (bobbles), so...

Also that was the premiere, and nerves used to clearly be a major issue for her. She did it afterwards and did not have difficulties. I'm not going to go back and find a thread from 2007 (seriously??) but she was very controversial among board members at the time and you have posted pretty much universally negative assessments. I'm sure that was not the case at the time.

I also know I saw her do one of the best Auroras I've ever seen. It remained in her rep until that production was dropped in favor of this one. And she has been given other technically challenging roles since: Le Corsaire and Don Q.

If there was a white (or even Asian) dancer who could not do the steps or choreography, no way that dancer would get the free pass Misty is getting. And get promoted to principal?? No way in any other company. I wonder how many RB dancers not doing a show have seen ABT this week (I'm venturing a guess none, since I've seen them in the audience or at the stage door). No wonder NYCB dancers have such contempt for ABT.

Can we let dancers fight their own battles if they choose? They do in fact seem to frequent each others' shows and if they want to be nasty, let them be. Do we have to do it for them?

This is quite unpleasant. And if true makes NYCB look quite bad. Fortunately I won't take your word for it.

Yes, nanushka, you're absolutely right, and IMO that's yet another example of his lack of vision. Perhaps one reason why he hasn't tried to find her a suitable partner. So sad.

Veronika Part is probably my favorite principal, certainly she is my favorite in Swan Lake. Still ballet is subjective. It is art. My favorite artists are not everyone artists and that is as it should be.

I don't think it is fair to criticize someone for "lack of vision" for not recognizing her as the "reigning Swan Queen" of the company.

Nor do we know what he has or hasn't done with regards to finding her a suitable partner. He may think, even if we disagree, that Cory is a suitable partner. Veronika may think so as well. He did bring in a new guest with her this year, lest we forget.

I too don't think he is under utilized, given that he just was made a soloist last year. While his technique is seemingly flawless and beautiful to watch, I think he is still a bit underwhelming when it comes to characterizations. He could use with some serious coaching in the acting department. The thought of his departure to NYCB is an intriguing one. It won't happen, but his style and technique would seem to fit better into the world of City Ballet. He would most certainly get more dance opportunities than he has currently at ABT. Also, I just want to say; why are we calling him "Joey" when he's clearly listed in the program as Joseph. The diminutive seems sort of infantile for a grown man. MO.

I agree he can also strengthen his characterizations, but that will come (most likely).

I do not think his style is more NYCB. He is very classical, with pure lines. I don't see him as a Balanchine dancer at all though with his technique I'm sure he could thrive there.

He is being called Joey because that is what everyone calls him (see articles and interviews)--other dancers, ballet masters, and the AD. I assume it is what he goes by.

Yes, I agree. I don't think he's being underutilized. He's one dancer in the company whose abilities and opportunities are, in my opinion, in very good proportion. (One among too few.)

If someone's "next in line," though, I'd just prefer it were Gorak rather than Hammoudi. Four years ago or so, I thought Hammoudi showed very good promise. Then he just never seemed to grow as a dancer or performer.

Oh I agree on that. I'm really not convinced Hammoudi is principal material. I think he has shown progression this season but still, not enough. To my eyes Gorak is the next potential star (though he still needs to work on his partnering!)

Indeed, Gorak's artistry is underutilized at ABT. I sometimes fantasize about Gorak defecting to the New York City Ballet to dance "Agon," "Apollo," and other Balanchine gems.

He's done a bunch of principal roles this season and was promoted to soloist just last year. I hardly think he is being underutilized.

I also think it is a sure thing that he make principal, we just may have to wait another year.

I saw Matthew Golding in the Royal Ballet's "The Dream" last night. He's a principal dancer there and definitely looks the part. His bio says that he joined ABT in 2003 and left for Dutch National Ballet in 2009, before joining the RB. He was stellar last night, handsome, a gorgeous dancer with a beautiful line, both on the floor and in the air. From my seat in the second tier he looked tall and regal. How did ABT let him get away?

Because these things happen. You might similarly ask the Royal how they let Xander Parrish get away after rotting in the corps for 5 years...

Kevin McKenzie has been artistic director of ABT for quite some time, and Misty has been a soloist there for quite some time. It's not like there has been a change in administration at the top of ABT's artistic direction recently. So one has to ask why McKenzie pretty much ignored her for lead roles up until very recently. I'm talking about roles where she had to carry the evening on her shoulders, like O/O and Juliet.

I think it is worth remembering that just as she was given one of her most notable roles to date -- Firebird -- she had a fairly catastrophic injury that almost ended her career. These sorts of things do put careers back, it is not surprising she is just taking on full evening leads in the last two (?) years.

Did she do fouettes during the Washington performances? If so, how many? I'm just questioning why there would be an assumption that she could do the 32 in the studio, but not on stage, unless someone has insider info and observed her working in the studio.

The NYTimes review of that performance notes that they wandered but implies she finished them.

I saw the matinee and evening performances so I can't swear that it was Teuscher and not Paris but I'm pretty sure that I noticed it first at the matinee and then again in the evening performance.

It was Paris, not Teuscher.

I thought Teuscher was underpowered at some parts of the variation, but I am almost 100% sure she did the entrechat six at the matinee, as I remembered seeing it, and then it being a glaring absence in the evening performance.

nysusan was there. I believe she talked about the performance but it's a few pages upthread. She was not impressed.

That is not what was being asked.

In fact several people discussed the performance, including those who were impressed. But again, that is not what was asked.

The question about Anderson and Wilkinson has been answered I believe, but in case not, to my hearing there was no announcement.

Oh look! Apollinaire Scherr has been reading us!

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d8c0d452-1b1a-11e5-8201-cbdb03d71480.html

I think the link may end up behind a pay-wall but if you search the article you should be able to read it.

"Meanwhile, balletomanes debated her worthiness, with members of one online forum accusing the 32-year-old of having a too “womanly” figure for ballet and of “tacky” self-marketing — in other words, of being overly sexual and aggressive (that old story). But with two major debuts this month, the spotlight returned to her dancing."

It is a very favorable assessment of both her Romeo & Juliet and Swan Lake, although with notes on improvement