Amour

Thank you Leigh! I thought this forum was about the performances not about the merits or appropriateness of tattoos. I find it extremely surprising that of the 29 posts on this forum re: ABT at City Center so far, less than half have addressed the actual performances while the rest have been individuals voicing their personal opinions/aesthetic tastes about dancers' personal modes of individual expression. I think we've really gotten off track.

Cornejo was indeed wonderful - truly poetry in motion. I am increasingly amazed at the finesse of his dancing, how his strength, great jumps and (almost) perfect turns and balances never look forced but display both grace and complete control. Blaine Hoven is a recent discovery for me - I first noticed how good he was about 3 weeks ago when he and Hammoudi performed their duet from Clear at a Guggenheim's Works and Process evening. I agree, however, that his face seemed a little too concentrated last night; in addition, I would enjoy seeing him elongate his arms and neck, to lengthen his line. But those things are possibly the next level for him and something to look forward to. Overall, though, a wonderful performance of the piece. I also thought Julie was amazing in Leaves - I used to consider her something of a cold dancer but in the last 3 or 4 years her artistry and expressiveness have vastly increased . Even her technique seems stronger. But I didn't think she and Marcelo had enough chemistry last night ( I was actually somewhat disappointed in Marcelo's performance). Having recently re-watched the second PDD of Leaves performed by Amanda McKerrow and John Gardner (on ABT's Variety and Virtuosity DVD) I believe their partnering far exceeded Julie's and Marcelo' (of course, though, Amanda and John are married). Since Amanda and John set the piece, I can't help wishing they could have imparted a bit more of their seamless partnering skills to Julie and Marcelo. But this still didn't detract from the beauty of the piece, which I thought was performed beautifully by everyone.

It has been VERY hot during the day but the nights actually (except for one or two) have been much cooler and breezy. Interestingly, though, when you walk around and see all the open windows (not to mention going into cafes or trattorias) you realize that air conditioning is simply not a basic here, in the way it is in the States. The agent who rented us the apt. where we are staying says she doesn't like air conditioning and doesn't have any in her home. So, I don't think the heat was the reason for the poor attendance. I think that Italians love opera first and if they go to see dance, it's going to be some kind of modern dance (unless you are in Milan or Rome where there are some opera house ballet companies).

I think you're right. Last year we saw a company (not Maggia Danza) in Fiesole that was very much like Momix - there wasn't a large crowd but those that attended were appreciative. It's true that starting with the last few days in July (and for all of August) Florence pretty much empties out and everyone goes on vacation (to the beach). In August the only large festivals are opera ones, in Verona and Lago di Puccini. But I think this discrepancy in attendance between Momix and NYCB had more to do with the type of dance than the fact that fewer locals were in town.

Although I'm not speaking to the point of full-length vs. rep programs, I'm actually very excited to see Baker's Dozen performed, even by ABT. Tharp hasn't had her own troupe (when she has one) perform it in NYC for years. There is probably a recording of it somewhere in the PBS vault, but when I've called to try to obtain it, I'm told that Tharp will not agree to renew the rights to her videos and that no one (except the few university libraries that already own copies) can buy or view the tapes. I've also been told by choreographer friends that Tharp won't allow people to view her videos in the NYC Performing Arts research library. It's really a shame, because I think her modern dance works (not her pseudo ballet pieces) like this or Sue's Leg are her real artistic achievements.

Amour, you may be based away from NYCB's home -- Mr. B. revised Apollo in about 1980, when Mikhail Barishnikov joined NYCB (briefly). He deleted the prologue (with the "birth" scene) and, since he didn't need the structure with the stairs for that part, eliminated them from the end as well, altering the choreography (and shape) of the coda. I hope you enjoyed this new version. I'm actually from NYC but haven't seen NYCB perform Apollo in many years (only ABT). I also didn't know about this later version - thank you for the info.

Am I right to assume that second "Apollo" is a typing slip for "Diamonds"? It was billed as "Homage to George Balanchine" -Etoiles and Solisti dei New York City Ballet (Given the title, I don't know why they decided to perform the Tharp piece). Oops, yes, I meant Diamonds.

Absolutely. Philip Neal,Rachel Rutherford, Yvonne Borre and Megan Fairchild danced Apollo (Megan was Terpsichore, Yvonne the first muse and Rachel the second). Abi Stafford and Jared Angle danced Tchaikovsky PDD; Philip Neal and Yvonne Borree danced Diamonds PDD; Tom Gold and Megan Fairchild danced Tharp's Junk Dances; Who Cares was danced by"tutti" (all 7 dancers listed above). I liked both Megan and Philip better than I have in NYC. Yvonne wasn't terribly good in Apollo but was somewhat better in Apollo. Tom Gold was great (and Junk Dances got the best response from the crowd). Who Cares was well performed but it was just strange to see it without the whole company. Still, I loved seeing the dancers outside (the venue has great sightlines, no matter where you sit) and in such an intimate-seeming performance (because of how few people attended).

We are staying in Florence, Italy for about 3 weeks and just had the experience of seeing members of NYCB perform for one night, in an open air venue (in the Boboli gardens outside the Pitti Palace) in Florence. Phillip Neal, Yvonne Borree, Rachel Rutherford, Abi Stafford, Megan Fairchild, Jared Angle, and Tom Gold performed Apollo, Tchaikovsky PDD, the PDD from Diamonds, Twya Tharp's Junk Dances and Who Cares. I have to say it was a bit odd to see only a small portion of the company perform Who Cares and to see some altered choreography in Apollo (including a finale without the stairway). Nevertheless, it was great to see the dancers here in Europe. I thought Abi Stafford (in Tchaikovsky) and Tom Gold danced especially well and even Philip Neal did a better job (in Diamonds) than I thought he did in the spring at the State Theatre. Unfortunately, the venue was only about 25% full (as opposed to a fully sold out Momix performance last week). In my halting Italian, I managed to converse with some neighboring viewers who explained that Florentines simply are not that fond of ballet. In any case, I thoroughly enjoyed the evening and hope that the performance may have changed the mind of some Italians about going to see ballet.

When a critic is writing about a season, and several dancers have been cast prominently and to his/her eyes, dancing inadequately over the course of it, it is his/her responsibility to point this out. A true critic is not a home company cheerleader. Darci Kistler has been dancing beyond her prime, and, as a result, will continue to be subjected to this criticism until she either retires or is cast in repertoire in which her diminishing technique is not exposed. No one is asking for a home cheerleader, or to avoid criticism, just a tone that is appropriate, respectful and not insulting. A true critic can make his/her point without being condescending and nasty.

Wow, were those attacks on Darci, Nilas and Yvonne Borree really necessary? And they were attacks, not appropriately toned critiques. To spend 3 lengthy paragraphs savaging them (mainly Darci and Nilas), writing that they are examples of "declining standards". Certainly Darci is a great enough ballerina that she has earned more respect than that - the level of animosity is really too much.

I don't believe anyone is objecting to Macauley's opinions, biases or personal "taste". I think the problem has been the snide tone to many of his recent reviews or his panning someone harshly, without giving any reason why. I also believe the discussion going on here about MacAuley's writing is a legitimate one and it is being conducted civilly. I don't think anyone airing a grievance in this forum believes critics shouldn't have (or express) opinions or bias. However, there is a world of difference between a neutrally-toned critical comment - such as the one Roslyn Sulcas makes today about Mathilde Froustey - and belittling a dancer. For example, yesterday's personal remarks about Irina's face, which Macauley states while dancing, is "marred by her forever negotiating different angles of her chin", steps over the line into personal attack. The snidely toned criticism of Georgina Parkinson is equally mean and written in a way that I believe many (especially the dancer, herself) would find offensive. Critics should have opinions but they should be written in a way that is civil and constructive; there is no reason to attack or humiliate the artists who try their best to give us (their audience) pleasure. And there is no reason to censor what has been a civil and legitimate discussion on this board about what seems to be a disturbingly mean tone to Macauley's recent reviews.

Especially since she was with the Royal! After all, she should know about these important bits of Royal Ballet Swan Lake wisdom and passed them on to the current dancers at ABT! Yes, but like Ferri, she decided to come to ABT! He seems to have his knife (and pen) sharpened for any dancers who left the RB and prefer other, non Brit companies.

Absolutely! One should explain one's opinions and do so in a clear and graceful way. Macauley should be trying to enlighten his reading audience rather than get off personal barbs at the dancers. Snide, sarcastic remarks (see those on Georgina Parkinson and Irina Dvorovenko today) or harsh judgments without qualifiers (like "dull" for Veronika) are personal attacks and show a deep disrespect for artists who are certainly doing the best to honor their craft and give their all to the audience. The remarks make the reviewer seem bitter, arrogant and too jaded and too biased to do his job well.

Maybe, but I'm not sure. The problem for me is not so much the content as the the tone. Snippy barbs, sarcasm and rudely expressed opinions turn me off - they sound like personal attacks, not criticism. I actually agree with some of Macauley's opinions but, for example, today when I read the unnecessarily snide remarks about Georgina Parkinson or Irina Dvorovenko (or talk about "hammy ritual") I simply put the paper down, having lost all respect for the writer.

There is nothing wrong with a critique delivered in an objective, gracious way. But I agree SanderO. Arch, sarcastic comments merely make the reviewer sound bitter and jaded - they are a reflection on what's missing in him (and how his jaded personality gets in the way of seeing a performance) not the production. I certainly think that the NYTimes could have found SOMEONE who knows dance well (after all, Macauley's background is as a dance historian, not a critic) but is more objective and could see things with a trained, yet objective eye. Personally, I'd rather read a review from someone with a fresh, enthusiastic viewpoint (who might have less experience) than a bitter, pre-programmed one. And if I have to read any more references to Brits (Fonteyn, Markova, and Harold Bloom in this article, alone) I'm going to [figuratively] scream.

I know this wasn't directed to me, but Misty, Sarah Lane, Renata Pavam and Yuriko Kajiya were the cygnettes Tuesday night. I actually think they all did well, especially Sarah and Misty.

Just got home from tonight's SL with Vishneva, Gomes and Saveliev. I thought this performance was much better than the one Vishneva did with ABT last year, although it was her Odile that sparkled and seduced (her Odette is still not poetic enough for me). Gomes was fine as the Prince but I didn't feel much chemistry between him and Vishneva (unlike in Manon). The pas de trois, with Abrera, Riccetto and Saveliev, was cleanly danced but nothing special. Really, except for the Black Swan PdD, I would characterize this performance as quite good but nothing extraordinary. And with this performance we bid adieu to Vishneva at ABT for the year.

Exactly. Unless you have someone like a Baryshnikov, who had no other comparable peers in his generation, ranking is NOT something I expect of someone writing about the arts. Any visual or performing art should be appreciated and understood but ultimately one's personal preference is subjective.(Some people love the pianist Lang Lang while others think he is much too showy and vulgar.) This isn't a competition, and preferences are simply that - preferences. Also, to make a statement about "best ballerina" on the same day as another tribute was written about another wonderful retiring ballerina was rude and shows poor judgement. Since this isn't the first time MacAuley has slighted Ferri; he omitted her in an early review of the "best Juliets" and lately condescendingly implied she neglected her technique in favor of excelling at drama (discussing her early Royal Ballet days). My guess is that this Brit simply hasn't forgiven Ferri for leaving the RB in favor of ABT (since that implied ABT was the better company) in the mid-80's. In any case, for a different perspective on how tributes can be written I'm including this link by an AP wire reporter: Ferri/Nichols tribute

Another (more satisfying) tribute to both Ferri and Nichols is here: Ferri/Nichols tribute by AP wire

Let's hope he keeps going to the Center even when Baryshnikov, himself, isn't the one performing.

Even today in the Nichols' tribute, MacAuley's passing reference to Richard Buckle (a British dance historian/biographer) and Margot Fonteyn, as opposed to someone like Bernard Taper (Balanchine's biographer) shows his bias/comfort level with British vs. American dance.

In one of his earliest reviews MacAuley (when he was lamenting the current state of NYCB) talked about when he first saw NYCB in the late 70's/early 80's (and how great they were then) and mentioned that he hadn't seen NYCB more than a few times since the 80's. The reason he so often mentions NYCB/ABT dancers from the 80's is that he saw those dancers but hasn't seen much in NY since then. He wrote about Merce Cunningham as though he were in current forefront of NY modern dance (I love Merce but he has been a mainstay of modern dance since the 50's and is hardly an example of what is new). To get familiar with the NY scene he should be regularly going to the Joyce, to DTW and the Kitchen to see what is really current and avant garde. The fact that he so often compares specific performances to those of Royal Ballet dancers (despite the fact the his NYTimes audience would likely not have seen these dancers) consistently shows he is much more comfortable and familiar with the British dance scene than NY one.

Too bad it was buried on page 5 while the article on Nichols' was twice the length and featured so prominently on page 1. Considering Ferri was an international ballet superstar (while Nichols was not), to have the adjacent Macauley article state that Nichols was the "greatest ballerina in the last 20 years" was disrepectful to Ferri and an indirect jab at her.

I have to say I was dismayed that Kyra Nichols' farewell was prominently featured on the first page of the NYTimes Arts page while Ferri's was buried on page 5. Certainly Gia Kourlous wrote a lovely piece on Ferri and R&J, (a much nicer tribute than I suspect MacAuley would have) but the discrepancy in length and placement was unfair. His statement that Nichols is the greatest ballerina in the last 20 years is a comment that many could take issue with, considering the large number of equally great ballerinas it ignores (from Nina Anaiashvilli to Altynai Asylmuratova to Ferri). It was also a rude and disrepectful jab at Ferri (an equally great ballerina who achieved the kind of international superstar dance status Nichols did not) who retired the next day after a long and wonderful career. While MacAuley paid tribute to Nichols, he didn't miss the opportunity to take a jab at the current state of City Ballet (by saying how the 80's generation of Calegari, Ashley, etc. were the greatest). For someone so new to the current NY dance scene, MacAuley's opinions on dancers has hardened awfully fast (the whole Martins family along with Veronika Part are on his hit list). To say I'm deeply disappointed in how this critic is turning out is an understatement.