cubanmiamiboy

Jhonsey speaks at some point about transitioning. As we don't know to which extent this goes, I will be liberal and guess that he was talking about having surgery . For a man to have a cost covered elective castration and penectomy, he must bring a diagnosis of "gender dysphoria" given by two different psychiatrists to the surgeon. And gender dysphoria certainly involves identity crisis. As per dangerous self inflicted weight loss in order to blend into the rigid ballet physical standards, well... that's more than well documented out there.

I find really interesting that, in the era of bulimia/anorexia exposure , nobody seems to frown upon the drastic weight loss statement. 20 pounds drop for such a small male frame seems a bit extreme to me. But I guess we ought to be applauding instead. Oh well...to each its own I guess. Ballet....extreme goals....extreme weight loss....identity crisis....plastic surgery. Hey Gelsey..

Did anybody found a bit stressful how the little harlequins have to quickly gather all the money from the floor into the rug to clear the stage for the dancing to come...? Did anybody found a bit stressful how the little harlequins have to quickly gather all the money from the floor into the rug to clear the stage for the dancing to come...?

Doug..you are THE ultimate source when discussions about notations and variations are in place.🤗. But I would assume that the main sources for the accountability of M. Petipa's extent of her dancing the Lilac prologue variation are those of E.Gerdt and Mme. Egorova's accounts. My wild guess is that she stopped performing it at some point and that it resurfaced when Egorova danced the role. About Lopukhov being its author that is quite a mistery. Maybe that is the second variation you talk about exist in the collection.

All in all, I strongly believe this is a ballet that won't have a strong impact for generations to come, both for audiences and for dancers. Reconstruction of the Imperial Petipa legacy is the "it" thing right now, and I agree it is a wonderful thing. We're getting to know full scores...opulent costume designs that had all but disappeared after the Soviets...and even better, combinations of steps and whole dancing pas and sequences that have been carefully re crafted to give us a wider idea of the work of the French master. But...I also believe modern audiences response to the surviving pre-reconstructions classics has much to do with the dramatic weight that they all somehow carry. Many moons later we still debate over characterizations of Giselle, Odette, Raymonda and Swannilda-(even being Coppelia a light ballet). Even the most dramatically weakest of them all-(Raymonda and Corsaire)- have quite a bit or story for us to ruminate and discuss. There's really nothing in Harlequinade. Only some combinations of allegro steps-(wonderful ones)- opulent costumes and a bubbly score, which can never be seated next to Tchaikovsky, Delibes or even Glazunov. I am happy I made it for this premiere, but I wouldn't arrange to travel in the future to see a whole run of it again.

Pierrette should loan her second act dress to Aurora for her wedding...😎

Raymonda

They also share a great deal of full head of hair!

I think the ballet success at the time is intertwined with how its very first consumers-(the Imperial family)- amused themselves in such sort of things like masquerades, balls and the like. This ballet feels very "aristocratic"-(something we won't ever come close to feel identified with)-and probably very comical in a turn of the century way. Our modern comedy today is much darker and elaborated. When all this elements of identification are no more, what we are left with is a curiosity, which might contain nice dancing sections. But not much else.

And to be honest, even as adorable as the Waltz of the Hours is with those girls in pink, I much prefer to see it in a more elaborated, for-adults choreography-(as with the Bolshoi recon)

Oh...and on another matters, I get into the orchestra section very early, and right then and there are Villella and his wife seated quietly. So I pulled up a beautiful pic of him as Harlequin with McBride, and when passing by I put it right next to him and call his attention. I go.."here, Eddie...this is THE REAL DEAL!" He started laughing and Linda grabbed my phone and goes.."awwww" looking at the pic. I took the moment to thank him for having left such a great and strong ballet legacy in Miami-(he seemed moved by this). He did shake my hand and muttered a very honest "thank you". Then I left. By then people were literally jumping on him already-(and on Baryshnikov, who happened to be seated right at the other side of Villella).

So this is the deal. Harlequinade is yet another attempt at reclaiming a ballet world many of us thought to be lost. Much back and forth has been said about the pros and cons of said reconstructions or recreations...the sense or not at attempting them, or the success or lack of it of the end result. Harlequinade belongs in a more difficult cluster for Imperial productions to be revived, and it is the simple fact of being a very light comedy. Cutting it short...the libretto is probably the weakest of all Petipa ballets that are currently on repertoire. Even the most criticized ones on this board, Raymonda and Corsaire, look way meatier than Harlequinade. And comedies...? Well, we have La Fille Mal Gardee-(which had its triumphant return to the mid twenty century thanks to the beautiful Ashton choreography)- and then Coppelia, which is a whole different animal due to its memorable music...and then probably Balanchine. Yes...the production is sumptuous....the costumes to die for, and most of all we see lots of allegro footwork and combinations that are not usually the bread and butter of the Soviet treatment of the warhorses at the turn of the century. Among the dances, the ones that I remember the most are of course the second act pdd with those sautees on pointe for Columbine's variation and the batteries for Harlequin. The waltz number for the Larks was also very pretty. The kids section I am a bit partial. I found it too long. Last night's cast was stronger than tonight's. Boylston nailed the choreography and steps way more secure than Lane who, tragically, took a nasty fall onstage, which was somewhat concealed for it happened right behind an umbrella that a kid holds open center stage. Hers wasn't the only fall. A girl in black also fell forward during a group routine, and then when trying to get up she was dragged, I believed as a part of the choreography, by her partner holding to her skirt, to which she fell once again. It was quite messy. Cirio's lifts looked really labored and stressful. Generally speaking, performance tonight was underwhelming compared to last night's. Lane/Cirio-Abrera/Hallberg weren't really a match for Boylston/Whiteside-Murphy. Oh...and Murphy was WONDERFUL last night. She really lighten the role. Ana Kisselgoff was seated next to me and she looked bored.

Well....the choreo calls for the boys to drag the girls by their dress while both are running backwards. The boy apparently was trying to follow somehow on the steps even though the girl was still on the floor, so she couldn't keep her balance-(due to the dragging)- when trying to get up and then fell back for the second time.

Yes! I just realized about it tonight, when they repeated the stunt. Tonight was even more violent.

Laurent...if you go back a bit on this thread, you will see why I came back to mention this fact. When the Mariinsky came to DC, this section was much discussed, for which some ballerinas obviously did not do the difficult entrechats on pointe, but rather changements. It was interesting to see that they have been quite following into the footsteps of their venerable originals.🤗

In a little note...I hope they somehow fixed the dummy of Harlequin for tonight. They ripped off one of his legs, and I don't think it was intentional...😂

Accounts on the mistery of Marie Petipa and her dancing in SB are as many as contradictory. For instance, Elizaveta Gerdt, the daughter of Pavel Gerdt, says that by the time she appeared as a child in the production with Petipa as Lilac, the variation had been dropped from the ballet because Marie just couldn't dance it, and by the time she herself danced the role, she had to ask Egorova to teach it to her, because she, as one of the last Tsarist Lilacs, had reinstitute the variation. If I remember correctly, Egorova then danced to a variation created by F. Lopukhov. Also, different accounts appear on the steps both Karsavina and Pavlova danced when it was their turn to debut in the role by 1904 which, if I remember correctly, none included the famous variation we know today. Meaning that apparently at some point in the performance history of the ballet this variation, having been danced exclusively by Marie, had been apparently dropped... but with the rest of the character scenes still retained by Petipa's daughter.

I understand what you mean, and I knew someone would notice-(I referred to the issue in a post above). This has to do with the way Alonso and her regisseurs want the ballet, which is essentially the way she remembers it, and the stiffness that you notice is exactly the opposite as the certain freedom of movement and interpretation you are used to see in modern ballerinas , particularly in performers like Osipova. The performances of CNB, particularly Giselle, are plagued by the most fierce ostracism you can imagine. Not one gesture can be added..not one different arm position can be attempted. Alicia wants a carbon copy of a 1948 performance, and that's how Giselle has come. Now... for some, this could pose an interesting, curious point of comparison.

I believe she totally "got" what this ballet is tonight and might represent in the future for both audiences and performers. If anything, be assured audiences in 10 years from now won't be having deep discussions on how to portray Columbine the same way we do today about Giselle, Odette/Odile, Raymonda or even Swannilda.

And that they bring something different. How about the company taking advantage of still having active works in repertoire from the old BT days that have been all but dropped anywhere else...? Triple bill of Dolin's "Grand Pas de Quatre", William Dollar's Le Combat and Lifar's "Aubade", for example..?

I just wanted to do a quick return to this issue. According to The Petipa Society, the troubles of doing changements vs entrechats on pointe on this section goes back to the very Petipa times. It looks like Legnani, the original Raymonda, did the most difficult option...the entrechats, whereas les accomplished technician Preobrajenskaya went for changements, and hers is the variation that was notated. Doug Foullington...correct me if I am wrong...? https://petipasociety.com/raymonda/

Giselle, 1968. 48 YO.

Swan Lake @ 13:30. (1962, 42 YO)

Here's what Alicia has to say in... Coppelia. 1961, 41 YO.

Some more thoughts. -Coppelia ought to be the most dancing-friendly ballet ever produced. It certainly epithomyzes like no other ballet the "musique dansante" concept. It is so full of beautiful melodies, one right after the other one. I haven't been able to take them out of my head. - Dr. Coppelius has a very moving vulnerable moment when he kneels in front of his beloved doll, wishing to bring the life on her. - Coppelia has a #metoo moment while in Dr Coppelius arms, sitting on his lap. But she puts him in place right away ! 😎 - Ashley Bouder embodies my ideal ballet physique for a ballerina. Muscular legs, strong ankles and straight pointes. No hyperflexed tibial curvatures a la Copeland-( which takes the beauty of the chainee turns away) or mushy curved pointes/insteps, so prone to get off pointe at any difficulty. Bouder reminds me of the great Cuban dancers of the 80's. Wonderful "a terre" strong-( not willowy)- ballerinas who never ceased to dazzle with their dancing instead of their poses. BRAVA! - Again... anybody on the "why" Prayer doesn't actually...pray in this version..?