justafan

Well, the new season is almost upon us. Website casting goes up next week. I hope Mr. Martins is as adventurous in casting Midsummer as he was with last season's Danish Lake.

BUT, has anyone received subscription tickets yet? I've heard that they switched to a new printer...

I got them in today's mail! For some reason, it seems like a very short break to me this year. (Might have more to do with me than NYCB.)

Yes, Farrell Fan, that's exactly what I was thinking. The TV magazine format is a good one for this sort of piece on the arts. You can show snippets of performances, edit out boring parts of interviews, etc. And since Stahl is on the NYCB board, I've always thought it is something she might do.

Morley Safter, who seems to be quite the opera buff, does this sort of thing often. I'm not much of an opera-goer but I always find those pieces interesting and opera becomes more accessible to me as a result of them. I'm sure subscribers to the Met don't learn much from his interviews/stories on Renee Fleming, James Levine, Cecilia Bartoli and the like, but they probably enjoy them.

I didn't see the Stahl interview of Martins and Farrell and certainly wouldn't want a repeat of something like that , of course. But there is something to be said for controversy.

Well, I would agree that Whelan could have helped him. But I think she did as well as could be expected.

Being interviewed for television is quite a skill -- it's much harder than it looks. That's why most people who are often trotted out for interviews get professional coaching. (Not that I'm suggesting she needed that. I think she did fine, really.) There is not enough time on TV for considered response -- you have to have a clear message in mind before the interview and figure out how to insert it in answer to whatever question comes up.

Still, I think Rose could have handled things better by asking very general questions, refraining from answering them himself, and then just asking for elaboration. (I think he sometimes answers his own questions because he is thinks they sound stupid as soon as he comes out of his mouth. Oddly, he's not as bad when he knows the subject.)

In any case, I dont' think Whelan's appearance on the show could ever hope to tell readers of this board much -- particularly in 15 minutes. I always hope these opportunities can spark some interest in ballet in general. What we really need is for Lesley Stahl to interview her or Martins for 60 minutes (although maybe not. 60 minutes isn't exactly required viewing for the under 40 set.)

Any time Rose has had someone from the dance world on his show, I've been disappointed. Not because he doesn't know anything at all about ballet/dance -- he freely admits that and I don't think lack of knowledge is such a bad thing when you're trying to gain some information. But his interviewing style gets in the way when he knows so little. He interrupts frequently and has a horrible habit of answering his own questions. So not only does he ask poor questions from a position of ignorance, he sometimes tries to answer them himself!

Wendy was lovely. And frankly, I agree that there is a lot more -- a whole lot more -- to her career than Wheeldon and Soto. They are important but that's not her entire oeuvre. Other key subjects are Balanchine, Robbins, New York City Ballet, her learning to dance the classics, etc. I would have liked to hear her views on the state of ballet in 2006, trends, etc.

Nevertheless, it's great that he had her on. Rose has carved out this position as the interviewer for the cognescenti. Ballet could use more exposure in this realm if it is to regain some share of mind, even if the interview falls flat.

I'm sure this interview was a direct result of the New York Times magazine piece and possibly a public relations push on the part of NYCB to celebrate Whelan's 20th anniversary. They've got other dancers to promote. I hope they pick someone each year and really give them a PR push -- Nichols, Kistler, Woetzel, Bouder and even Peter Martins are all good subjects for this type of venue.

Lovely young girl. And I think Oberon said it all -- NYCB is a true company, not just a collection of stars.

I have to respectfully disagree a bit about Barocco. Although I thought the leads performed their parts with precision, the performance seemed a bit lackluster to me. This was confirmed a few minutes later with the electric performance of Fearful Symmetries. Although I will admit I've always counted this ballet as my favorite from Martins (since when does an NYCB ballet have to do anything but help you visualize the music?), it was clear that it was very well rehearsed. I don't think Barocco was given the same treatment.

In general, I tend to disagree with the Martins-bashers. But I think last night's performance did make the point to me that some ballets get more careful treatment than others. Maybe it's unavoidable that Martins will give his own ballets -- particularly one that is as demanding as Fearful Symmetries -- preferential treatment. In any case, this performance was one of the best I've seen -- and I've seen this ballet many times. Standouts included Somogyi (how great it is to see her in such fantastic shape), Bouder of course, de Luz, and Ubricht.

Symphony in C, however, was a different story from the first Balanchine of the evening. It was definitely rehearsed. As mentioned, Whelan's performance was gorgeous and reached out and touched the heart. Fairchild brought a great big smile to my face and seems to be growing into her role as a principal quite well. And as mentioned, it was great to see Abi Stafford who turned in a lovely performance. The corps also deserves accolades. Not only did they demonstrate obvious joy in dancing to a great classic -- and not the Nutcracker -- but they were really on their game. Overall, a very nice night.

I didn't see it either. I went to the Macy's parade site and noted that they were not promoting the Angelina Ballerina float. I presumed that meant there was no ballet -- but I could be wrong. Did anyone see it and what happened this year?

I give Good Night and Good Luck a rave. Clooney really made some excellent directorial choices here -- from the exceptional casting to the use of the newsreel footage to the oblique statements about the state of the times and the media. (ie the smoking and incredible smoking ad.)

That's why I thought the Liberace piece was critical to the movie. Clearly it was included to show Murrow's deep misgivings about how he was conducting his career and building CBS news. The great wartime journalist was reduced to nattering on with Liberace, asking him about potential marriage plans -- which obviously Murrow understood was a sham. It was all depressingly beneath him and his idea of what television news could and should be. I didn't think it was a cheap shot at all.

It's wonderful to hear that Jennie Somygi is back dancing again. How was her performance?

Sabrina (1954 version)

Shop Around the Corner

Bull Durham

Sense and Sensibility (Emma Thompson version)

When Harry Met Sally

Dr. Zhivago

I'd be pretty shocked if she were going to another ballet company! She was a star at NYCB.

I'm really saddened to hear this as Ansanelli is a very special dancer. I'm really curious to know her reasons for leaving but whatever they are, I hope she returns to us at some point. She will be very much missed.

What a lovely interview -- I teared up reading it. Peter Boal truly is a fine, soulful man. Seattle is lucky to have him and we will miss him in New York. We can only hope he brings PNB on tour often and that he never breaks his ties to NYCB and SAB.

It was quite the rouser! At first, it felt odd to have Stars and Stripes open the program -- and the season -- but it was undeniably fun. Indeed, I felt the entire company was saying "we're so glad to be back! Now let's have a great time."

Stars and Stripes: Standouts were Sterling Hyltin, leading the first campaign with grace and Tom Gold, who as usual dazzled as he led the third regiment.

Ansanelli and Woetzel were just perfect to my eye. She has such pristine technique and combines it with such playfulness. And I can't imagine anyone better as El Capitain than Woetzel. He has such incredibly high leaps and turns and with his lovely ballon, he makes it look easy. You just want more!

As Charlieloki noted, Darci danced sublimely last night and Evans was in fine shape. I wonder how much of the Soto repertoire he'll inherit.

Union Jack was quite a treat -- although one wonders how they can dance so beautifully with what appear to be such heavy costumes. All of the prinicpals turned in very fine performances -- with Whelan, Kowrowski and Ansanelli it was sometimes it was hard to know where to look. The Pearly King is a very good role for Nilas, as he can really do some mugging.

Again, it was a great, joyous night that I felt was a kiss to the audience. Anyone who thinks that NYCB dances less than full out and without relish or attention to detail, should have had the treat of seeing them last night.

Well, Farrell Fan, the image of a miniature altar under a plastic dome really gave me quite a chuckle -- and quite a big wide smile. Suzanne is very lucky to have such a devoted fan.

I've bought Kistler, Whelan and now Bouder. I like to think I'm quite selective. They are all hanging on the wall of my 5-year-old daughter's bedroom. I also like to think that some day, she'll appreciate my foresight and discriminating taste.

Here in NY, we often get a pretty tired NYCB crew at the end of the winter season. After all, the 8 week winter season is preceded by 5 or 6 weeks of the Nutcracker. Add injuries -- or like this year a pretty nasty flu -- and those left standing sometimes look like they could drop.

Of course, this really shouldn't be an excuse. A few years ago, even the magnificent Wendy looked beat by the end of the season and the corps was just ragged. I told my companion, a chauvinistic Russian, to recognize that the corps was pretty tired on the last afternoon of the winter season. She huffed and said something along the lines of "these are professionals, this is supposed to be a world class company -- we wouldn't accept that as an excuse in Russia!"

Maybe the Kennedy Center should rethink where they place NYCB on the schedule? Even a few days rest might help.

To be fair, the incorrect spelling was limited to the headline on the front page teaser. That was written by a copy editor, who may or may not be familiar with the arts. Balanchine was spelled correctly in the article itself. So it was simply a "typo."

Can anyone identify the ballerinas in this weeks New York magazine fashion layout? It's very annoying that the ballerinas aren't identified. I could make educated guesses. But since it is such a nice, clear picture it would be great to know.

Well, his argument was pretty muddled and what's more, I disagree. The headline and the first few paragraphs seem to be talking about physical beauty. Many of the dancers at City Ballet are as facially beautiful as many of those in the past, such as Farrell, imho.

Then he diverges and talks of personality. He's on stronger ground there. To some degree, I would echo the sentiment of nycdog5734 is part and parcel of the times. (Tennis is a good analogy. Both dance and tennis are on the downside of a boom.) Yet, I can't help but consider how ABT dancers are so well known individually. How much of that is selection (cultivation?) and how much is that promotion? I know that individual promotion is against the code at NYCB but that worked best in the day when Balanchine was the undisputed star. In any case, I think dancers like Whelan, Kowrowski and Bouder have personality to spare -- certainly as much personality as anyone across the plaza. If the company wanted to promote them as individuals, they could do so easily.

Rockwell's argument might have been about body type -- although he doesn't say so directly. And that might be more to the point. More than in the past, the company does seem to be hewing more closely to the very thin and flexible dancer of which Whelan is the avatar. (My brother, a subscriber to SFB, pointed this out to me the other night when accompanying me to the ballet. ) Whether or not that type is beautiful is in the eye of the beholder, of course.

I think this is great news! And I agree with Farrell Fan, this is a very positive development for Ballet Alert. And it bodes well for Rockwell's tenure at the Times.

Soundcheck is a fine program, and I suspect that Shaeffer's approach is similar to what Rockwell hopes to bring to the pages of the Times. Although much of the programming is devoted to classical music and its particular audience, it also aims to broaden that scope. So whether it is Renee Fleming singing jazz and discussing both her limitations and interests in that genre, or a discourse on percussion in its various forms, the program really brings intelligence, ingenuity and originality to its approach.

I'm going to try to clear my business calendar on Monday so I can tune in.

My two cents: Really, I think everyone should lighten up a bit. The fact that he decided to use the pages of the Times to respond to both this board and Alexandra and Leigh's letters demonstrated a high level of respect, in my opinion. (Yes, he could have spelled Leigh's name right, though.) He has given consideration to the sentiments expressed. I think it is a bit much to expect him to say "oh, I never considered that."

Rockwell's tenure will be judged by his reviews. I, for one, am quite interested in seeing how he does.

I think you and Alexandra have done a great job keeping the tone and level of discourse appropriate. But I do think you can lighten up a wee bit on the gossip issue. While totally unsubstantiated rumours probably have no place on this board, I think widely known information or questions about injuries etc. should be allowed to be posted. The trigger seems to be pulled a little too quick, in my opinion. And because I don't know any members of this board personally, I would hesitate to private message anyone about things.

On the other hand, I think the way you restrained flame wars is totally on target. I hope that continues. This board is blessedly free of flames -- quite an achievement -- while allowing people to express opinions.

I can't believe how saddened I was to read this thread. I had to chuckle to myself because it seems there is nothing to be sad about. Understandably, Alexandra wants some time for herself and she has seemed to have given careful consideration to how the board can continue. So, my reaction is really unreasonable.

But as a frequent visitor to the site, it's become part of my life. As a non-dancer and someone not involved in dance in any other capacity, this board has been my education and guide. The tenor and quality of discussion, as well as its wonderful organization, can't be an accident. I don't find it elsewhere, regardless of subject.

I just want to offer my gratitude and thanks. I hope Alexandra stays involved in some capacity. She has certainly given a gift to the arts with this board.

I have to ask: why does McKenzie persist in calling ABT the country's National Ballet company? Am I missing something here? Is there any factual basis to this claim? Every time ABT claims this, it puts my teeth on edge. But then I must ask, maybe I'm being unfair and I've missed something. So I'm honestly asking, is there some reason they get to claim this other than the use of American is in the title?

Robbins' I'm Old Fashioned

I know it is a bit treacly and designed to be nothing more than a crowd-pleaser. Many people hate it.

But I just love seeing Astaire and Rita Hayworth on a big screen. And I also love the ending where the dancers just turn to watch them in salute. It appeals to my more sentimental side, but I don't care. It appeals.

I was there last night, and pretty much agree with your assessment. The highlights of the evening were Scenes de Ballet, Die Fliedermaus and Marguerite and Armand. Leanne Benjamin was definitely the big surprise. She danced so powerfully,

I haven't seen much Ashton before, and really was surprised at how different these ballets looked. The lifts were strange to my eyes -- in some cases looked more like gymnastics than ballet. The walking on air steps/lifts were used frequently throughout the selection of ballets. Also, the continuous ballon steps (is that how you describe it?) provided quite a different falvor to the ballets. I'm curious as to whether this is all typical of Ashton. (I'm going to have to read up on it in DanceView Times.)

That's not to say I didn't admire these ballets -- just that they looked different to me. As Dufay mentioned, some of the selections, like Sleeping Beauty might have looked better in a full length offering.

Without a doubt, Marguerite and Armand was the highlight. It's easy to see why Sylve Guillem is such a star. She is a virtuoso dancer, but also an affective actress. Her performance was not subtle, but it didn't seem forced. And Murru is a great match for her.

The resounding applause and numerous curtain calls do beg the question of whether these ovations are typical elsewhere. Certainly, it didn't seem like a regular New York audience. I've only seen this unbridled enthusiasm at performances of the Kirov or Bolshoi. But this was the Royal Ballet, and the audience didn't seem to be filled with Russian emigres supporting their own. So why? And where did the audience come from.