cubanmiamiboy

Oh, how interesting...and I always thought that the Cuban full four acts Swan Lake staged by M. Skeaping had also had its share of import from what Alonso had been dancing at the moment at BT. So I guess the whole 1953 Havana Acts I and IV by Skeaping were a totally new territory for Alicia...? Maybe she took something for BRdMC...? How much choreographed was the Ballet Russes version...?

May God spread ethernal light upon your and your loved ones' hearts and souls. Happy Easter, friends..!!

Here's part of that very first season, 1948/1949. -Giselle-(Mary Skeaping/Adam) -Grand Pas de Quatre-(Dolin/Pugni) -Les Sylphides-(Fokine/Chopin/Glazunov/Benois) -Peter and the Wolf-(Adolph Bolm/Prokofiev) -Polovtsian Dances from Prince Igor-(Fokine/Borodin) -Apollo-(Balanchine/Stravinsky) -Petroushka-(Fokine/Stravinsky) -Aurora's Wedding-(Alonso after Petipa/Tchaikovsky) -Coppelia-(Leon Fokine/Delibes) -La Mort du Cygne-(Fokine/Saint-Saens) -L'espectre de la Rose-(Fokine/Von Weber) Full lenghts premieres. Giselle-(Mary Skeaping, 1948) Coppelia-(Leon Fokine, 1948) La Fille mal Gardee-(Nijinska after Gorski/Hertel, 1952) Nutcracker-(Mary Skeaping/Charles Dickson/Fernando Alonso after Petipa/Ivanov, 1953) Swan Lake-(Four Acts, Mary Skeaping/Charles Dickson/Fernando Alonso after Petipa/ivanov, 1953) Sleeping Beauty-(Alonso after Petipa, 1974)

So BT didn't advance to the full four acts staging as forward as 1967...? Is that correct...?

Ah, I recently saw a wonderful rendition of the complete score played by the New World Symphony...such beautiful music..!

And in case it's not clear, the fact that you speak for an under-represented view here makes me that much more interested in what you have to say.

Well...he came over here a few months ago to graciously offer his partnership in the retirement Giselle of his older peer, Cuban old guarder Dagmar Moradillos. I reviewed it here

Beautifully put. Thanks for the understanding. I might be a minority on this board on this aspect, but surely not in the Miami ballet-loving scene.

No worries..here we go. It's purposefully cagey, I believe, due to what they are dancing. http://youtu.be/xbYlWrvMitY Why are they playing that coda-(and in general the whole piece)- soooo s-l-o-o-o-w...? That whole Pas needs to be faster, quicker, sharper!

So am I to assume that City Ballet keeps both Balanchine's white acts AND the complete full lenght...?

This is the kind of passionate discussions that tells about an audience loving and involved in a company that has vehicles for its dancers to shine in a more particular way. Don't ask me why do I think so, but I'm SURE it has somewhat something to do with the XIX century repertoire ABT has cultivated, and that's the type of thing that MCB is totally lacking and in a big time need right now, a little bit of a star system with a proper repertoire suited to it, and hence some excitement, an increasing absence that's starting to show...(at least in my eyes). I'll never forget the night of Alonso's gala with that DQ danced by three couples, the last act with Carreno and Osipova. One could FEEL the excitement in the air. People screamed, there was a diva doing crazy fouettes onstage and for a moment I really revived FOR THE ONE AND ONLY TIME SINCE I'M IN US my Havana days. Sorry to be an intruder here, for which I, sadly, would love to participate in this type of discussions too about my home company, but there's not too much I can talk about over here. I'll be back again this season to Slaugther in 10th Ave, and I guess I should be grateful that at least I have something to talk about, right...? So anyway... back to the new-yorkers and the Basils, Siegfrieds, Amintas, Conrads, Alis, Albrechts and Solors of ABT...

I give up...(for a little while though... ) But...ALL I WANTED WAS TO SEE DELGADO'S ODIIIIILEEEEEEE..!!

Cristian -- what do you mean by "Petipa"? I'm talking about putting a black tutu and convincing the audience about Odile's "femme fatale" role...I'm talking about DQ PDD, I'm talking about the grandeur of the Shades, Swans and Willis entrance and the regality of the Grand Pas from Raymonda and Paquita, and yes, including all the "after" renditions. I'm talking about feeling confortable playing princes and princesses, queens and kings, or feeling grand and shameless as THE diva of the ballet, in the case of the ballerina. I'm talking more of the XIX century aesthetic rather than a choreographer's notated steps. I call all that "Petipa".

re: NYCB That could be the key. Perhaps what you see as an specialization I see it rather as a limitation, more when they publicly expose things like the Aurora's Wedding's failure, so it becomes a matter of "I can't" instead of "I don't want to". MCB has the "Ballet" last name on its presentation card. They ought to know how to do Sleeping Beauty. Paul Taylor Dance Group doesn't. NYCB does too. And they aren't a classical company. They are a neo-classical one. It is a different style. Good, but they still have to commit to full lenghts. Are they capable...? How do they dance them...? Do they have to do program-length works, or are you really asking for stylistically classical work, no matter the length of the ballet? I'm asking on how do they do Petipa. That's ballet first and uttermost for me, and then, other choreographers and works that I might enjoy.

That could be the key. Perhaps what you see as an specialization I see it rather as a limitation, more when they publicly expose things like the Aurora's Wedding's failure, so it becomes a matter of "I can't" instead of "I don't want to". MCB has the "Ballet" last name on its presentation card. They ought to know how to do Sleeping Beauty. Paul Taylor Dance Group doesn't. NYCB does too. And they aren't a classical company. They are a neo-classical one. It is a different style. Good, but they still have to commit to full lenghts. Are they capable...? How do they dance them...?

That could be the key. Perhaps what you see as an specialization I see it rather as a limitation, more when they publicly expose things like the Aurora's Wedding's failure, so it becomes a matter of "I can't" instead of "I don't want to". MCB has the "Ballet" last name on its presentation card. They ought to know how to do Sleeping Beauty. Paul Taylor Dance Group doesn't.

Finally we're in the same page. The fault is too notoriously big to be ignored, and now that MCB has the ambition to become grander and explore overseas, it is time to admit what's lacking and do something about it. And and I'm so glad you get to the point of the ballet masters/mistresses. Isn't it RIDICULOUS that some of the most iconic aging Cuban ballerinas are roaming around the city struggling to make a living while having in their hands the unique first hand link to Alonso's mid century BT/BRdMC ballets, stagings and choreographies...?

I still think we ought to look and focus more at the faults, once we all have agreed on MCB's strenghts. Wasn't it Barbara Fallis who said that "we ought to practise what we don't do well". Well. MCB do well Balanchine. Fact. But don't we all here remember the major disaster of the company when they did Aurora's wedding...? (Jack, bart..?). It was a sad picture. The same company that has proven great at rolling on the floor on Taylor couldn't make it to one act of the mother of all classical repertoire. What did they do about it...? They dropped it...(Or so that's what it looks like). They gave up after only one run of the ballet. Whay don't they try to get over it and win the battle, and prove that they have capable dancers that can do EVERYTHING...? Helene mentioned Raymonda's wedding act. Great idea..so it is Aurora's wedding and Coppelia's wedding and Paquita's wedding and all those weddings. Those four last acts are GREAT vehicles for a small company like MCB to show that they know their homework. And what about the romantic style...? Didn't we realize that the torsos of the dancers when they did Giselle, like in the Willis presentation dancing, was as supple and upward as when they did Coppelia..? No head tilt, no soft arm roundness, no inclination of the torsos. Those are the little things that dancers need to know when they dance different styles. MCB just hasn't had enought exposure to know about it. Why then insist on all that forgettable Tharp's "Nightspot", Wheeldon's "Liturgy", Scarlet's "Viscera" or Ratmanski's "Symphonic Dances"...? To be honest, i can't really remember that much of any of them, and i would really like to know if anybody can. I hope Lourdes could do something about it. And then...don't we agree that we're seeing LOTS of repetitions lately...? Why then don't we try to look forward by recognizing the unique value of going back.to the roots..? Just a thought.

MCB's corps for Giselle was a very decent one. No complains about it. I don't think the lack of corps would be an issue over here not to stage the classics. What I know for sure is that one doesn't really get to totally "know" a dancer-(and hence a company)-in full terms of technique, mime, and folk dancing until a warhorse is in full display. As technically difficult as the ballerina's dancing of T&V is, it is NOTHING to what she has to face by doing Swan Lake, DQ or Raymonda. An attempt to get away with the classics if not in full capacity can be a sad pic-(I've seen it recently). Still, you can do La Valse beautifully. The classics NEED to be done for a dancer to really say his/her curriculum is complete. To put it boldly. Is MCB afraid of not being up to the technical level to do them...? And if so...are promising young dancers like Delgado accepting that...?

Congrats, Mme. Deneuve..!

Perhaps in Congress , just as Ross-Lethinnen and Diaz-Balart..?

Should I mention that Villella never did pre-performance talking here in Miami...? Only in Broward. I wonder why.

You're right. I can't. My bad.

Congratulations to Lopez. the dilemma is sort of tricky. The chain of points you mention as reasons for a company not to present the classics is interesting. For many years Alonso's ballet has been touring world wide presenting very cheap productions in terms of props and costumes, some of them so old that they have fallen to pieces right onstage. Still, the success of the company is right there. The only way to consolidate the art form in the public memories and to make them part of a culture is just dancing them, dancing and dancing them. Props and costumes can be better or worse. Still, among all the material ugliness, there could probably be one memorable ballerina dancing Giselle, and that could probably be a magical night for a new ballet goer who will never forget her. I don't think a story like the Bolshoi's luxurious "Pharaoh's daughter" reconstruction is, on the other side, a succesful one. The ballet is NOT owned by the people. It became a curiosity, for which is hasn't been performed ever again. That's not what we need. We just need sensitive personnel that realizes that the only way to make a continuity in the lorm term is by not ceasing to present the works. I still get amazed when I hear all the news on "new sets and costumes" for this or that...I go like..."do they REALLY need them..?". We don't need that many new designs...what we need is to educate the audiences, dancers, and on the way, the rich donors will probably come along.

You are very right. The usual audience you would see at the CCBM had nothing to do with the parade I get to see at the Arsht Center the most of the times. Yes, there were not rich donors, there was no theater, and it was definitely a romantic project heading to failure, Still, I really remember with much pleasure performances of works that I will probably never ever see again-("Spectre", "Graduation Ball", "Grand Pas de Quatre", Herte's "Fille", Ivanov "Nutcracker PDD" and so on)-, and everytime I see an Odile-(Hayna was, BTW, the last one I saw , right at CCBM)-I can't understand the lack of the very basis of the art form in a a company that projects to become international. I know Odile and Raymonda, and Lissette and Nikiya, and you too, and everybody else in this board also, but...is it fair to deprive dancers and audiences of them...? Haven't every single major company in the world included them as a matter of NECESSITY, both to show the very four legs of the ballet table and to give the chance to dancers to show that they can do fouettes...? Don't you realize that a carreer like that of Kronenberg and Albertson is an extremely limited one, due to the absences..? I would hate to see Jeanette ending up like that-(or like Ileana)-, to be honest, while the rest of the world talks about the wonderful Kitris of Osipova and Valdes, the amazing Beauties of Cojocaru and the triumph across the sea of Novikova's Raymonda. SOMETHING has to change. The classics NEED to be part of a company, and they ought to be in the dancers and audiences view at all times, and I really believe that there are coaches out there that could do wonders with this dancers, without loosing their Balanchinean training. Wouldn't be better for them to become more than "Balanchine babies"...? Just a thought...