cubanmiamiboy

What really bothers me the most about this production is that it somehow obscures pivotal intentions-(to use Jack's phrase)- of the original. Let's pass the fact that we are deprived of the Shakesperean "strange things happens in forests" idea-(a very old mantra applied to infinite works of art, including literature). The most bothering fact is that in the original there is a clear distinction,-( BOTH libretto AND dancing wise)- of the difference in between the two human couples vs. the magical characters. The humans go in the forest...they run around, get confused at the apparently magic forces that seem to be playing with them, and it is very clear that they can not see them, for which maybe they are invisible to the human eyes. This is essential in this ballet. Audience need to realize that humans are physically entering the reals of the fantastic forest world, and there they get all played by the creatures-(particularly Puck). In Lopez production, by everything being dumped underwater, the role of this humans running around looks pretty silly and senseless. Now there's no distinction...everybody is the same, for which there's no logical way to think of a human story taking place into the depths of the sea. I'm sure most of the audience unfamiliar with Shakespeare text or the ballet libretto-(let's be honest...many people don't bother to read the notes)-won't have a clue at to what's going on. Obscuring the little story of the two human couples is what this production did.

MCB isn't dancing Agon in baroque court dress -- or, for that matter, Les Sylphides in leotards ?

Please...don't give any ideas. ANYTHING is possible down here.

BTW...I was just biking on my way from the beach, and I stopped by the company studios. There they were rehearsing Midsummer. It is so nice just to pass by and peak at classes or rehearsals through those huge windows. There was a couple along with Lopez conducting the rehearsals...more or less her age, with huge books that they would look at from time to time. I couldn't tell who they were.

This production was very good for South Florida.

This BALLET was a very good pick for South Florida. Lopez' staging is, conceptually speaking, inferior than Balanchine's.

South Florida was thrilled to buy tickets and support MCB. MCB was able to sell 3 large venues within 60 miles of each other. Maybe even Naples, 90 miles from Miami. Sorry I did not follow it that closely. The point is, the South Florida audience is finally supporting ballet with enthusiasm and interest. While we may all have our personal likes and dislikes, the facts are this production works for South Florida. Ms Lopez is doing her job well.

Yes, yes and yes. But changing the action to a less than clear underwater theme has nothing to do with all of the above. The ballet, placed in its correct forest scheme, would had been as opulent, visually wise and attractive, dancing wise, AND with the plus of being less confusing, libretto wise.

So should we never make any changes in original productions? Is there no room for alternate interpretation?

If we could ask Balanchine about this particular event, maybe there would be a surprise answer for many of us. Who knows. If the alternate performance looks like the POB's new Nutcracker-(a ridiculously shame of an spectacle)-, then definitely NO.

All good, and probably very "edgy" and "exciting" for Ring lovers-(who have probably seen countless of traditional "lazy" performances)-to now feel bored and ready to declare the drunken Walkiries the 8th marvel of the world. Nice. But how about the rest of the audience...? The outcasts of the opera intelligentsia..? They probably don't count, right.

Shakespeare didn't place Midsummer in the ocean. Balanchine didn't place Midsummer in the ocean. Lourdes Lopez did. We are seeing her vision. I wanted to see Balanchine's. That' s all.

"Elizabethan forest period...?" why not "an Athenian forest period?" or a bit of both for that matter. Balanchine riffs on both (as does Shakespeare) as well as riffing on nineteenth-century ballet conventions. So there is no "period" about it in both senses of the word period--historical period or period as a way to say 'that's the end of the matter.' God knows theatrical productions of Shakespeare's play have gone far more radically in the direction of transforming sets/costumes/contexts etc.

I'm not unsympathetic to your concerns as I happen also to like the forest convention and thinks it's true to Shakespeare and Balanchine's original conception etc. , but as design re-imaginings go this Miami City Ballet production sounds pretty respectful and pretty charming. Does it work? Some people think yes and others no and others in-between. But that could easily have been true of a production that simply reproduced NYCB's sets/costumes. Piety is no guarantee of theatrical life and sometimes stifles it.

Amusingly (to me) and on the more literal side, there actually are such creatures as "sea butterflies."

Ok. An even clearer distillation of my point. There was no need to change Balanchine's ballet other than ego feeding purposes : "Oh, I reworked B's work". Why...?! His production is a GOOD one. It didn't need to be reworked. I have never heard any complaints from anybody here-(and many of you long time NYCB balletomannes)-, about it, just as there was no need for the Paris Opera Ballet to ditch Nureyev version of the Nutcracker to stage the sad spectacle that is Tcherniakov' production-(and I know I'm going maybe a little too far with the comparison, but it just popped in my mind). I'm sure Lourdes' "vision" would be of interest of many of you here who have seen and enjoyed countless performances of the original staging, but this wasn't my case. This was my first encounter with the ballet. I had read Villella's and Farrell's books, where they reminisce on the production and I was looking forward, ever since Eddie talked about staging it years ago, to enjoy it in its original conception. I know...I know that the ballet is pretty much there, with a mere change of setting...but for being the first exposure of us South Floridians to it, I feel we were somehow played into something that is not necessarily what Balanchine envisioned, crafted and offered.

"Elizabethan forest period...?" why not "an Athenian forest period?" or a bit of both for that matter. Balanchine riffs on both (as does Shakespeare) as well as riffing on nineteenth-century ballet conventions. So there is no "period" about it in both senses of the word period--historical period or period as a way to say 'that's the end of the matter.' God knows theatrical productions of Shakespeare's play have gone far more radically in the direction of transforming sets/costumes/contexts etc.

I'm not unsympathetic to your concerns as I happen also to like the forest convention and thinks it's true to Shakespeare and Balanchine's original conception etc. , but as design re-imaginings go this Miami City Ballet production sounds pretty respectful and pretty charming. Does it work? Some people think yes and others no and others in-between. But that could easily have been true of a production that simply reproduced NYCB's sets/costumes. Piety is no guarantee of theatrical life and sometimes stifles it.

Amusingly (to me) and on the more literal side, there actually are such creatures as "sea butterflies"

Edited: Deleted. To harsh. Working on a gentler version

I always expect NY'rs to boo me-( )-when I keep saying that the most satisfying version I've ever seen is ABT's in terms of really getting the original scenario worked by Petipa and Tchaikovsky. Well...once more...ABT is my favorite...if only for that-(The Swamp Thing has to go though...)

I will attend next weekend in Broward as well.

I will also, Vicky. I will take my French friend with me, who's not a balletomanne but a highly opinionated connosseur of music, literature and opera. The first thing he told me when I told him about the killing of the original scenario was.."Why does people always seem to be so obsessed with their need to 'change' a work of art if it has been proved that said work is already a established, loved and successful one...?!?!" I told her about Lopez' "vision", to which he replied... "I'm going but.. what on hell does the ocean depth has to do with a midsummer's night !?!?..It is always dark, cold and damp down there..!!..THIS IS ABOUT AN ELIZABETHEAN FOREST..PERIOD!!"

OH well...

BTW, Birdsall...nothing wrong to point out at how out of shape Carlos Guerra has been looking for a while now. We've discussed until exhausting limits the look of certain ballerinas in relationship with their weight-(Whelan, Mezentseva and most recently Kathryn Morgan) . Guerra definitely stands out from the rest of the guys, and as I said...it has been for a while.

Many ballerinas also fail to take into consideration the relationship between their hyper extended penchees and their tutus,, particularly the modern ones, which are huge and bouncy. Tutus in the past were shorter, stiffer and more rouffled made, looking very much like a rose. Nowadays they are like bouncy pancakes, and there's a very unsatisfying feeling at seeing a ballerina in a Petipa ballet pencheeing as a contorsionist with her tutu falling all over her head. It looks just horrible.

I love watching Nathalia dance. She had a lead role in the very first MCB performance I saw, and she has been one of my favorites ever since. She always glows and seems so happy when she dances. I thought she was very charming in her role as Butterfly as well.

Yes...she was very good as the Butterfly. Arja, Rebello and Cerdeiro are a great Brazilian trio at MCB. BTW...I was sitting right next to the Delgado sisters, and spoke to them during intermission. They were delightful and all smiles and giggles. I asked them some particular questions, and they graciously answered them, but ...can't post them here as they are not official news.

As a kid, while studying in a music conservatory, I was introduced to Mendelssohn's beautiful score, and was told that a ballet existed in US based on Shakespeare's text. I used to imagine the forest and all the magic that happened there...in the forest. Dancing is the base of this whole thing, yes, but you take out the forest and an essential part of the equation is gone. Midsummer's Night dream is that..a story that happens in a forest, and of THAT we were depraved of down here. I guess one can even see the whole thing in leotards, but I still firmly believe that setting and costumes in this case are as important as the dancing. This is not Agon or Symphony in Three movements.

She is 96 already...

I want the experience pure, unadulterated, and STRONG - and I want it available to others who may also be susceptible to enjoying it as I do.

Winding down my rant, now - any other purists here?

I am. And yes, it might be fun for some of us to try a new version of Giselle for once, now that we have spent 30 years watching a traditional staging. It could be ok for me NOW to just getting to see Odette in B's Swan Lake, for which I have already seen a gazilion Odiles and great series of Black Swan fouettes. But I am not happy that, being my first exposure to MSND, I get to be offered a confused, liberal staging. And along with me, probably hundreds of us Miamians.

Edited to add: I wonder what would had been Balanchine's reaction to the changes...

But is it as much fun?

Not really....

That theater was "my" refuge during the hard bearing 90's...

Male beauty is being increasingly exploited in worlwide media. Nowadays there are as many magazine comercial adds portraying handsome guys as there are of women. Male beauty is celebrated, exposed, and as photoshopped as much as female. Ballet is no different.

To be honest...I didn't "get" the underwater feeling of this production. The story of the two couples is too "earthy" to be placed down the ocean. Yes..the whole thing has a fantastic approach, but there are still guidelines to be followed, as to who is who and what are they doing. In the original libretto there is a definite differentiation in between the fantastical creatures and the humans. In the Miamian production this is a failure.

C. M. B. I appreciate your comment on this topic, but I am not sure what your point is.

Tom,

Let's be honest. Yes, there are infinite concepts of beauty, but I'm pretty sure...(no, let me re phrase that)- I'm POSITIVE that we all have the same ideal of ballet male beauty, which not differs too much from those Greco-Roman sculptures that I referred to earlier. I said I was biased because I can't really think too much outside of such beauty box.

Meaning what maybe beautiful to one person may not be to another.

Still...haven't must of all grow with the classical Greco/Roman concept of male form repeated at infinitum in every sculpture section of about every big museum of the world..? For once I am biased...

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10206070266861316&substory_index=0&id=1401360055

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10153730847684191&id=647664190

I just came from the Arsht. For those who know the very malignant traffic situation in this city, I took the precaution of start driving across the causeway an hour and a half in advance. ULTRA is in full blown now and I knew it would cost me wonders to get downtown.

But down to important matters. The house was packed, as I've never seen it before in a ballet. Lourdes went onstage to thank the sponsors and donors, and Villella-(she has always done it, which I believe to be a very nice note from her). She then proceeded to explain the changes in settings, from the Elizabethian/Shakesperean forest to the underwater one she envisioned for this production. And then the ballet started.

I refrained myself to try and look for videos of the original production. I have never seen the ballet, and I wanted a fresh, first approach to it. So here are some of my thoughts:

First, I don't think the translation of setting worked. The story of the two pairs of lovers was unclear here. If the story is taking place underwater, how is that this humans-(Hermia/Lysander and Helena/Demetrius)-are even down there..? Via choreographic clues I could tell that Puck-(Shimon Ito)- was mischievously interacting with the two couples without even being seen, as one might expect from magical creatures of an enchanted forest, but by placing everyone underwater the plot doesn't really makes much sense, at least to me. Hyppolyta-(Jordan E.Long)- is seen grand jetteing across the stage hunting...and hunting underwater, which was also not too credible. Her companions were seahorses. The butterflies are kept as butterflies-(underwater!)-so go figure...

I also had a problem with a transparent screen that was placed during the entire act I in front of the dancers-(much like the one used in the opening of B's Nutcracker)-that gave a certain effect of changing patterns, but I was just wishing that it would be lifted at one point, which never did. The entire act was danced behind such screen, which was weird.

The costumes were very luxurious, particularly the tutus of act II.

The dancing had some nice moments, particularly during some segments of Titania's adagio with her cavalier-(Simone Messmer/Reyneris Reyes). Kleber Rebello's Oberon had some brilliant footwork moments. I loved him in this role, as well as Ito's Puck. They were the highlights of the ballet, with Messmer's Titania in second place.

I would be lying if I say I didn't felt a bit bored. It was nice to see such a super production, and I have now another Balanchine's ballet down in my "Seen" list, but I don't think I would be going again to see it. Maybe I would, but in NYCB with its original setting..to form a complete comparison to what I saw today.

I predict that this ballet won't be repeated too often, which makes me think...if they were able to spend so much money in a story ballet that is far from being a money maker-(the numbers are around)-I don't think that has been the issue for the company's absence of a winning ticket for the times to come as it is a potential, complete Swan Lake.

Nice to see fellow BT'r Buddy at the house tonight..!!

Trafficl will be HORRENDOUS. I will devote a whole hour to get out of South Beach and reach downtown. Tonight I might have to deviate a bit into the rough area west of the opera house. In a similar night, some years ago, my mom's car got stolen, so it is a real risk...

I will also be there on Friday. Would be great to meet any of you who also plan to attend. I will be in orchestra,and usually hang by the bar during intermezzos.

During my first formative years of ballet-going:

Les Sylphides

Pillar of Fire (saw it with Kaye and Laing)

Theme & Variations (with Alonso and Youskevitch)

Fancy Free (I saw the 2nd performance of the work with the original cast, and Bernstein in the pit)

Graduation Ball (with Riabouchinska and Lichine)

Is it any wonder that I was "hooked" way back then?

I substituted Graduation Ball-(in my original list)-with Les Sylphides. They were both ever present, but I realized that Sylphides made quite a bigger impact.