Dancerboy90210

Well put! I think Misty's promotional track can be used as a lens to understand the decline of ABT!

I wish that ABT would announce promotions to Principal in the manner that POB does for it's Etoiles...immediately following a performance. I wished that for Stella after last month's GISELLE; didn't happen. Maybe Kevin will surprise us on Wed afternoon for Misty? Then do the same next week for Stella after her CINDERELLA? Hey, one can dream!

Warm up that microphone, Kevin...testing one-two-three!

I really thought Kevin was going to come on stage after Stella's Giselle and promote her on the spot. This style of promoting is so good for morale in the company, not to mention I'm sure the audience would go crazy. Think of the excitement it could generate and ABT really needs some excitement lately. Also, everyone takes pictures and videos during bows. Letting a dancers on stage promotion go viral could give the company a lot of positive "viral" publicity at NO cost to them!

I think some arguments about her "body type" border on racism. Sometimes the very same people who denounce Copeland's muscles were silent on Wendy Whelan's when she was still performing. If ever there was a body that causes one to suck in one's breath upon first (or second or third or fourth, etc.) encounter, it was Whelan's. I found it excruciating to watch her perform, even while I recognized her genius. I think that we all have body type preferences in ballet, and that's fine, but I do think we need to be fair about them.

I don't think you can compare Wendy Whelan and Misty Copeland. Whelan was not dancing major full length classics. I think Copeland is very talented, but i don't feel she is right for a principal position at ABT. Ballet is subjective so we can disagree. I think Copeland has something to offer, just not within the ABT repertory. Call me old fashion, but I feel someones promotional track should be based on their work, without the distractions of social media etc. To me, Copeland doesn't offer principal ready or principal potential performances. My point about fouettes, isn't that she can't have weaknesses. Obviously every dancer has their strengths and weaknesses. I wouldn't want to see Alessandra Ferri as Kitri. Part of this is KM casting his female principals in ballets they might not be suited for. We see this with Hee Seo as well. But, Copeland seems to spend an awful lot of time promoting her books, her story, etc. She is at a point in her career where she needs to really "work" (be in the studio, getting coached, etc.) I am suggesting that all her distractions might be harming her progression as a dancer and as an artist. Typically when dancers have a challenging step, they rehearse it over and over. Sometimes they even make adjustments. Copeland doesn't seem to have that level of commitment. Its unfair to the other dancers that are putting in the work, Lane, Abrera, etc. But in the end, I guess life is unfair.... I would hope that KM, the board and administrative staff would have standards and position ABT as a world-class product that sells itself. All their mismanagement and inability to control and manage talent (cancelations, losing promising dancers to other companies, inability to develop dancers, etc.) has jeopardized that company's ability to market itself as a world class product that sells itself. When I go to the ballet, I want to see Juliet, Giselle, Odette, Kitri, etc. I want to see the dancer's characterization. IMO, knowing all this background information about a dancer takes away from their ability to see a character come alive. I'm always watching Misty Copeland, not watching Juliet, etc. It takes away the magic of the art form. I feel many of Copeland's fans praise her for what she has overcome and what she has accomplished to get to where she is. She deserves praise for her story. However, when she is performing I want to praise her for what she is actively producing on stage. To date, her "producing" on stage hasn't been worthy (IMO) of a promotion at all. And this is not a statement on her race, because I would say this about any dancer, regardless of color, religion, etc that was in Copeland's position. I remember when Copeland first joined the company and thinking she was SO talented. I used to always watch her when she danced in the corps. I don't see the same dancer anymore. Not sure if she is consciously or subconsciously changing, but her dancing and artistic develop have suffered and in some ways gone backwards.

I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that Misty Copeland will be made principal at the end of this season. The box office and her PR team have made that a fait accompli, in my opinion. And fine, I understand that issues other than pure talent and skill need to be considered and accounted for.

How I actually feel about and interpret her promotion when it happens, though, will be completely dependent upon who else gets promoted along with her. Does either Stella or Sarah get promoted as well? (I have a really hard time imagining Kevin actually doing that, but setting that aside.) If so, then I'll consider it a fair deal, the sort of concession that needs to be made for the viability of the art as a business.

If Copeland gets promoted and Stella and Sarah stay behind, I say we pool our money together and start a new company. ABC (American Ballet Company) and hire Stella and Sarah as principals! (in a perfect world) With Copeland, Bolyston, and Seo shaping up to be KM's newest leading ballerinas, I think its clear that artistically the company is suffering. I'll be interested to see how Copeland does in Swan Lake. She isn't the strongest dancer, so it'll be interesting to see how she powers through the Black Swan PDD. In dress rehearsal at the Washington Ballet, she couldn't get through her 32 fouettes. She always, even in the performances, travels to the right like crazy during her fouettes. In DC she ran out of room and then started doing turns from 5th. The Met, IMO, represents the Olympics of ballet. While I understand everyone is human and capable of mistakes, dancers should be able to handle the technical challenges of the roles they are performing. Who wants to watch a dancer struggle to get through a ballet? They'd be so focused on not messing up that you'd probably lose any artistic interpretation. I've seen Copeland dance too many soloist roles where she falls off pointe, out of turns, or in Queen of the Dyrad's falling out of Italian Fouettes. (Hee Seo was just as inconsistent as Queen of the Dyrads, so maybe KM doesn't really mind). Its upsetting because every time I see Stella dance, she is so professional. She isn't the strongest dancer, but she holds her own! She clearly comes out rehearsed and looks as if she has practiced the more challenging elements of her variations over and over. You can tell she remains calm and focused and has everything drilled into her body and mind. In a clip of her dancing in Australia Odette/Odile, Copeland started her fouettes in the far left corner (really old) and basically did them on the diagonal! How can KM really make her a principal?

Hmmm ... I think I must respectfully disagree here. It seems to me that Martins rarely, if ever, commissions new work from choreographers who haven't already established themselves as a brand, with the obvious exceptions of company members such as Christopher Wheeldon, Justin Peck, and Melissa Barak. (Note that Troy Schumacher had been working on his own for a few years before Martins began commissioning work from him.) Martins is to be lauded for his insistence on new work and for fostering The New York Choreographic Institute, but I'd consider him pretty cautious when it comes to awarding commissions -- he's not the kind of AD who's going to color outside the lines, so to speak. PNB's Peter Boal is bolder in this regard, and it will be interesting to see what Lourdes Lopez does in Miami post-Morphoses.

Peter Martin's commitment to new work is not simply by commissioning work. All the choreographers you name, Wheeldon, Peck and Barak, came through the SAB schooling system and/or through NYCB. While Martin's might've delayed commissioning their work and he is by no means a perfect AD, the system (NYCB/SAB) he leads has cultivated these choreographers. Lets not forget about Edward Liang too. I don't think any of their work is on par with Balanchine, but I don't think that is merely a coincidence that these choreographers come from his establishment. ABT has recently presented Marcelo Gomes choreography, but as much as I respect him as a dancer, I don't think choreography is his strong point. Also, I personally feel he got his chance to choreograph based on his star power that comes from being a principal. I highly doubt KM would ever commission a corps member to create a new ballet for the company.

The recent choreography by the Mariinsky's Maxim Petrov showed me he is really one to watch. He created the very Broadway musical style ballet "Ballet No.6 " for their Young Choreographers Night. Then last week, he choreographed a very Louis XV type style piece called "Les Divertissements Du Roi" for Igor Kolb that was in their livestream . Both were marvelous. Ratmansky, Wheeldon & Peck are not the only good new choreographers on the planet. Even NYCB typically reaches out to choreographers like Bigonzetti or Prejocal. ABT needs to open its eyes. And, of course, get rid of Kevin.

Are these on YouTube? Great point, KM can bring some new and interesting works, that don't conflict with NYCB and yet still pays homage to this "Russian" heritage that ABT seems to believe it has (kidding). But it is shameful that Peter Martins seems to be the only ballet leader that is active seeking out new choreographers. His discoveries then get picked up by companies all over the world. If Peter Martins were to ever step down and his replacement were to be less focused on developing choreographic talent, American ballet companies would be in serious trouble!

How much credibility will ABT lose if it promotes Copeland to principal? Her promotion, in my mind, will not signal a renewal, but rather a real low point for the company. If a company known for it's storytelling ability and 19th-century rep promotes someone who is a hack actress and lacks basic, classical ballet technique, then what does that say about ABT's future?

For me, the renewal of the company will largely be determined by who it chooses to promote in the next couple years. If Copeland is promoted, it will signal the beginning of the end for me. There have always been principals who are not my favorites (Irina comes to mind), but I've always thought that they deserve the rank.

Did you see this article?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/misty-copelands-possible-promotion-at-american-ballet-theatre-is-talk-of-dance-world-1434924908?mod=e2fb

Misty Copeland's possible promotion at ABT is the talk of the dance world? LOL... what dance world? I couldn't help but think this article was guided by her PR agency. Smart on their part, right after Romeo and Juliet and right before Swan Lake. I guess they're worried that KM might "forget" about her if/when he announces promotions. IMO, one's work should speak for itself. A dancers time is better spent working on their craft and not on self promotion. Its such a turn off for me. And if Misty gets promoted and Stella doesn't, I will have such a hard time ever buying tickets to an ABT performance ever again.

I completely (but respectfully) disagree. I think ABT should rely more on Ratmansky.

I like Ratmansky's work. I just don't think ABT should put all their eggs in one basket. I don't find that as a smart way forward. I do agree that the dancers look well coached and rehearsed in his work. But on the flip side, any new work is going to get extra rehearsal time compared to a returning work. But, you can see that Ratmansky has a special connection with some of the dancers and is capable of discovering up and coming dancers and highlighting them. Didn't he "discover" Osipova? However, I think Ratmansky has made it quite clear that he has no interest in an AD position. Personally, I don't think Kevin would've hired him if he saw him as a threat to his job. I just don't want KM to default to having Ratmansky remake one of their classics each Met season until the entire rep is filled with his work. I think it goes back to my theme of diversity.

While I know some of the aspirations for additions to the ABT repertory might be far fetched, I would say that the less classical works would obviously be better suited for their fall season. I disagree that more contemporary works harm a dancers technique. Many major ballet dancers have actively sought out both contemporary choreographers and contemporary work. I actually think that the cross training (classical to contemporary and vice versa) has a positive effect on the development of a dancer. In 2015 and in the era of globalization, YouTube and Facebook, one can not really be a 100% classical dancer. Now I also know that there is a big difference between a more commercialized contemporary work and a solid "good" contemporary work. Years ago, didn't ABT do Kylian and some more works? I think ABT has a difficult time finding its voice in more contemporary or neoclassical works with NYCB one theater over.

I would agree that I like the energy of the Met and how the company rallies to "put on a show!". However if it harms the long term health of the company, maybe it needs some attention. What if, ABT moved some of their full lengths, which are less economical, from the Met season to the Fall Koch season? The fall season would have to be extended. Don't know if this is practical, but maybe they could start with their big sellers at the Met in May and finish out the Spring/Summer season at the Koch. Could the Met really attract a touring ballet company in late June and early July? Sure the economics of renting the theater limit who and when it can be occupied. It would take Paris Opera, Bolshoi etc, to sell well. Also, could the Met attract such a company on an annual bases? NYC has other theaters that could present ballet simultaneously and in direct competition to ABT's season, City Center, Koch Theater (which does present competitors), etc., but ABT's season has still survived. I've heard the Met and most of Lincoln Center undergoes extensive maintenance in the late summer. If thats true, maybe the time frame for theater maintenance could be pushed up allowing for an earlier start to the Met Opera season. A touring company (opera or ballet) could also come in the early Fall, accommodating the opera's seasons.

I don't watch ABT on anything like a regular basis, and so don't feel I can make judgements about their current situation, but I had questions about a couple of your comments.

This is an interesting observation -- I know that some companies don't hire too many people that are part of the competition culture, while others are much more interested in that kind of virtuosity. Can you speak a bit more specifically about how you see this influence?

These comments seem to contradict each other -- there's nothing "American" about Marco Spada, Pharaoh's Daughter, etc.

The competition culture seems to perpetuate itself in a crop of dancers that are physically gifted and have all the "bells and whistles" in their training but can't act or carry a ballet. They can't create characters (Seo, Copeland, Stearns, and sometimes Bolyston). They seem to lack an artistic intelligence or sophistication that is needed to create world class performances and develop characters, etc. I feel that if you were to ask some of these dancers; Who is Juliet? or Who is Giselle? they would give very basic responses. Sometimes it feels like (especially Copeland) that they have 5 "go to feelings", happy, sad, nervous, etc. They don't seem to understand and create in depth interpretations of who and what they are dancing. While I understand part of this is coaching, etc, some of this is just "having it or not"... I don't feel that this can be taught. To some extent it has to be spontaneous and in the moment. I know she had years to develop artistically, but if anyone has ever listened to Alessandra Ferri talk about a particular ballet or character she gives incredibly well thought out and developed characterizations. You can tell she has given it extensive thought, yet some is played off her partner and in the moment. She takes a slightly personal stance on who she interprets the character to be. This always came through in her dancing. This type of development and mentorship gets pushed to the back burner as dancers today seem more into high legs, multiple pirouettes, obtaining physical technical perfection, etc. Not that I don't mind seeing multiple pirouettes, etc, but if it comes at the expense of the characterization or "artistry" in a performance, it becomes almost trashy and uninteresting.

Look at how Murphy and Tamara Rojo, both known for their turning abilities, are able to turn it on and off in line with the characters they are portraying. Even when Murphy adds triple step overs in her 2nd act Odette variation, it still projects suffering and vulnerability that is in line with the character. I remember seeing Michelle Wiles and being turned off because when she attempted almost the identical turning sequence, it looked like she was coming out of character to achieve the same result. I think this comes from a competition culture that emphasizes, IMO, the wrong elements of ballet or at least at the wrong time in a dancers training. IMO, aspiring dancers should be in the studio, be exposed to multiple styles and get performing opportunities doing real ballets, Balanchine. Petipa, etc., not doing the same variation for an entire year. When you train in this environment, you spend so much time working on a variation that it almost becomes robotic... you lose the spontaneity. You lose the dancers ability to be in the moment. Dancers should spend this time training in regular classes and their performing opportunities should mirror a professional experience. Technical mastery should come from class work, I don't buy that students gain technical skills from working on variations for competitions. Students performing oppourtunities should come from dancing real ballets, both classical and contemporary. Look how the SAB workshop presents ballets in the NYCB Repertory. Thats how it should be, IMO. Also, Lets face it ABT probably puts together their ballets in a matter of weeks. Working on the same stuff for years or months, doesn't mirror professional reality. Also working on actual ballets as opposed to just a variation helps a dancer learn to create a character or learn a particular style, etc. Maybe this is why some dancers seem to suffer when they try to put the pieces together... variation to pas de deux, etc. Companies have a limited ability to nurture and "train" dancers, schools are a much better environment for that.

On a side note, I feel that the "beauty" of ballet has been lost in the competition era too. I remember watching a ballet class years ago and the teacher was telling his students "Do you feel beautiful?" and "Dance as if you have the most expensive jewelry in the world on". Competition minded kids seem to focus on the more sport like aspects of ballet... the athleticism and "flashly" stuff. An example of this that always bothers me is watching young dancers bow. Maybe I'm crazy, but watch the way Bolyston bows vs. Vishneva. (I know they are years apart in experience, etc, but still). Bolyston always looks rushed, not graceful and/or slightly uncomfortable. Classical ballets present a element of "regalness" and royalty is NEVER rushed and always sure of themselves! It things like this that set a world-class ballerina apart. Maybe its also who is coaching her.

As far as my suggestions of new ballets, I think that ABT should maintain a diverse repertory. IMO, a dated reconstruction of Sleeping Beauty belongs in a Russian company, not an American company. Maybe I am not verbalizing it correctly. But Ratmansky's take seemed like a huge embrace of a Russian tradiation that didn't seem right for an American ballet company. Within the range of full length classical ballets, American ballet doesn't have much to offer. ABT is obviously going to be influenced by Russian, French, British, etc, ballet traditions but going as deep into Russian culture like Ratmansky did doesn't seem "American". I hope I am making sense. I feel that ABT can be American in that it can be diverse. Diverse in its dancers and its productions, as it seemed to be 10 years ago. Many more American principals, Latin American and Cuban stars, Russians, etc. And productions that didn't veer too much into one particular tradition. Maybe Rachel Moore's strategy was to veer deep into "Russia". (kidding).. I do have a lot of respect for Ratmansky and his work, but I think KM shouldn't rely on him for everything. I think KM has run out of ideas and he defaults to Ratmansky for new ballets to distract from the fact that he is out of ideas. But ABT will never be a repertory based company (like NYCB) or a one choreographer company. I think that would be the kiss of death for ABT. Especially without stars to make up for it.

I think exciting debuts can attract as much attention as major star's performances. The energy at Stella's Giselle debut was one that I've never quite seen before. I think ABT needs to work on creating high quality performances and productions that "sell themselves". This includes grooming their own crop of stars to headline them. (If they want to keep the "star" business strategy). Kevin's track record on cultivating stars has been bad to say the least.

I feel like ABT's product has really catered to fundraising and generating attention (Under Moore's executive leadership- while they seem connected, I have no direct evidence they are) and not creating a long term quality product. They should create a product that sells itself.

ABT's problems don't operate in a vacuum. The new generation of dancers dancing professionally right now grew up in the YAGP era of dance. To me, I feel like this drastically changed dance education, including what is emphasized, etc. Add to this, the effect of social media. A lot of up and coming dancers seem more focused on stardom and less on their "work" as dancers. Paloma, Julie and Xiomara all seemed to allude to this to interviews on their retirement. I mean, why does a soloist with the company have a publicist? One's work should speak for itself. But I think with all the distractions of social media and with competitions defining ballet for kids, I think ballet in America is off track at the moment. (I think more Balanchine based companies have avoided this trend because they seem to avoid competitions and have repertory that is less dependent on a star's mega-wattage.

Also, ballet in general is suffering from a very limited group of up and coming choreographers. People don't seem to understand that dancing and choreography are different talents. Ballet education, besides arguably SAB and some modern programs, don't work to develop and explore choreography. The financial necessitates make it very difficult for companies to test out new choreography and stagings. ABT seems to want Ratmansky to redo some of their classics and revitalize their increasingly stale repertory. With regards to Sleeping Beauty, why is an AMERICAN ballet company performing an incredibly dated reconstruction of a Russian ballet? That should be performed in Russia, if anything. ABT should focus on a Sleeping Beauty that might better represent its American roots? Although, some might say that ABT is turning into a Russian pick up company for guest stars. I don't think Ratmansky is the person to revitalize ABT. To me American ballet represent a diverse, almost mixing, of multiple styles. ABT of the late 90s and 2000s seemed to have an incredible diverse crop of dancers as well as more diverse productions. To me, this created a company that was American in that it represented a remarkably diverse range of offerings. I think Kevin's reliance on Ratmansky shows a leader that is out of ideas and clinging on to a job. I do enjoy Ratmansky's work, but I don't think it is destined to dominate the ABT's rep. Why can't the company bring in "Marco Spada", Pharoh's Daughter, a full length Paquita or Flames of Paris, what about some Pina Bausch, Wayne McGregor, or some McMillian or Ashton Mixed Bills? ABT seems to offer the same ballets on two year rotations. Maybe even some Aprino or Joffrey Ballets. The Joffrey Ballet doesn't really perform their work anymore and it is American.

I think the JKO school has been a failure. It seems to train "corps" dancers. Some alumni, such as Skylar Bryant and Cassandra Trenary, have shown great promise, but I feel different schooling might've sped up their development. The school accepts very physically gifted dancers, but many seem to lack that special "spark". They also don't seem to be producing artists, rather technically and physically gifted dancers. This goes back to my "competition" point, that competitions emphasize pirouettes, extension, physical gifts, etc. I feel that many of my favorite dancers, Osipova, Vishneva, Rojo, Gomes, Murphy, etc, don't have textbook perfect bodies. They are all quite talented, but they also a sophisticated intelligence and work ethic, in addition to a special "spark". These qualities are overlooked in the almost commercialization of ballet, through low quality competitions.

Other ABT concerns point to the obvious. Horrible coaching, limited rehearsal and performance time, and the pressure to sell tickets in a ridiculously large theater. I think the new executive director should focus on (might be a dream) but getting ABT to be a resident at Lincoln Center. I think they have enough connections to big donors that they can get everyone at least to the table to discuss it. This could help them replace their aging rehearsal facilities, reduce overhead costs during their season, and open up new funding. I don't see why they can gradually relocated to the Koch Theater. Its way more economical, they could reduce their reliance on stars, and even increase ticket prices. (less seats- less supply, demand stays constant) For the record, I do not support pricing people out, but I'm also for a financially healthier company. With Moore's departure, I hope the board appoints a new director that really calls Kevin out. And, if this was all Moore's doing then I I can't be happier that she is leaving. I wonder if Moore's replacement will take her CEO title or be an "executive director". Maybe they should get rid of the AD position, hire more ballet masters, and hire a CEO with a strong business and ballet background. They could hire another executive position with a lesser title to assume some of Moore's more administrative duties. Also, I like the idea of having the artistic staff and even the dancers take a bigger role in artistic decisions. They could have a small committee that makes artistic suggestions to the CEO. More point of views, to me, would make a much more interesting organization. Also, why doesn't ABT get into live broadcasting their performances? Doesn't the opera make a profit on their productions? This, in addition to more videos, would really help promote their dancers. The 90s had so many videos, what happened? I'm sure David Koch would love to have his name all over a live telecast, can't imagine that someone would give them some money to help jumpstart it.

I think Moore's replacement might either make or break ABT's future. If anyone from the board is reading this, PLEASE FIRE KEVIN!!! It would be the best news in American ballet in a while. KM has done remarkable things for ABT, but its time for him to move on. What worked in the 90s, won't work anymore. They need a new set of eyes.

And if no one listens to any of this and ABT continues to do more of the same, I request one thing. For the love of God, PLEASE PROMOTE STELLA! Give us another Giselle, a Romeo and Juliet, a Manon, maybe a Swan Lake, and Bayadere. Leaving her as a soloist is such an injustice. She should've been promoted way before Seo, Bolyston, and probably soon Copeland. She is lightyears ahead of them. Stella makes any night at the ballet worth it. She also deserves credit for sticking around. In the 90s and early 2000s, when the talent level at ABT was so unbelivablely high, they seemed to have lost so many talented dancers that were sick of waiting (Erica Cornejo, Matthew Golding, Maria Riccetto, etc.) Stella stayed around and has shown such class in light of all the chaos.

Sorry my rant is all over the place... but to sum up, ABT needs some major shaking up.

Tonight's performance has to be one of the most incredible nights at the ballet that I've ever had. Stella was INCREDIBLE. Heartbreaking yet remarkably beautiful the entire night. I really thought Kevin was going to walk onstage and promote her on the spot. That would've been the only thing that could've made it more special. She is lightyears ahead of the new "crop" of principals, its such an injustice to not promote her.

The Guggenheim has just posted all three Works and Process Programs from Sunday and Monday to YouTube. Best of all: no commercials!

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJ08rQmWB63RWbFoFHRPv5zs1OdSTX7hL&utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=wp

I know this has been said so many times before, but the fact that Stella hasn't been able to dance a Giselle at the Met has to be one of the greatest injustices in modern ballet! While I've always thought she would be an excellent Giselle, the clip from Works and Process shows that she is light years ahead of the majority of the women getting the opportunity to add Giselle to their repertory. I imagine she would make a great Juliet as well. Such a shame that ABT hasn't allowed her to blossom. If she can dance that well at a works and process, I can only imagine how well she would do on the Met stage, with lights, live orchestra, and an entire corp de ballet around her.

Thanks for the link to the interview -- it sounds like they're bringing up some really interesting questions.

Just off the top of my head, I think ABT would be loathe to leave the Met -- it's a major aspect of their public image, and I imagine they would think it would look like a step down. I don't agree that it would be, but image is a big aspect of marketing.

I agree that they like the prestige of being at the Met. However, the Koch theater is no small regional theater. NYCB performs there, it also welcomes some incredible ballet companies, Paris Opera, SFB, Bolshoi, etc. I think ABT could easily perform there, especially if they added a few more shows. Seems like it would be better for the long term success of the company. By lowing the supply of available seats to each show, they could also probably get away with increasing ticket prices. (Not that I support pricing people out) They could also focus less on "mega stars" and develop their dancers... maybe even use their productions to draw audience members and not always stars. But I know they don't want to let go of the Met....

I came across this interview with ABT CFO William Taylor. He talks about their "star strategy" and dynamic pricing. I don't think the "star strategy" is exclusively Kevin's idea. Taylor talks about the difference in ticket sales for a "star" vs. a regular principal from the company. I think this might better explain ABT's reliance on stars, as a financial necessity. The idea of bringing in guests might be coming more from the executive side than the artistic side. Taylor talks specifically about Osipova and how ticket sales suffered when she did not perform in 2014. However, it is impossible to ignore how it affects morale and upward mobility within the company. Perhaps they should focus on creating more homegrown stars. David Hallberg, Julie Kent, Marcelo Gomes and Gillian Murphy show that it is possible. I think the company might want to try to start a fund for talented company members to receive coaching outside of the normal artistic staff. Maybe this would help develop "stars" within their existing roster. Just an idea....

Also, Taylor talks about how difficult it is to fill the Met vs. the Koch Theatre. Prestige aside, why can't ABT just relocate from the Met to the Koch theater? Its a better theater for dance anyways. Koch is a major ABT supporter. I understand they'd have to push their season back to accommodate NYCB, but I can't imagine starting later and finishing in late July having a drastic effect on ticket sales. Maybe I am wrong. Also they could add extra performances to off set the loss in total seats. I imagine it would be more cost effective as well. Maybe they could invest some of the savings into new ballets... maybe slightly more risky ballets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWd-4HuDvDg

Is it me or does the rep sound a little boring? More of the same? I guess the mixed rep might be interesting. I think this could've been a good season to really do something slightly different. The new Sleeping Beauty is nice, but maybe this season could respect the past, but look towards the future. That is the impression I get from all the retirements, especially when paired with the major retirements in the past 5 years. (Well in this case the past is leaving quickly and the future isn't appearing or appearing without the proper coaching)

Casting will probably be even more interesting. We will probably either see a lot of debuts or an insane number of guest artists. Kevin's programing in starting to become stale and we all know how bad he is at developing talent. It would've been nice to see a new full length ballet, maybe Paquita or Flames of Paris. Maybe, even a national/international broadcast of a performance, with a video releasing later. So many good ballets or dancers to pick from. Also, if they plan on having Ratmansky slowly redo all their classics, might that be putting all their eggs in one basket. While I prefer Ratmansky over McKenzie any day, I think it might be better to diversify their repertory. How many more years can ABT continue to do the same ballets over and over?

I'm surprised no one picked this up yet. With everyone leaving, I wonder who will be left to perform?

Yesterday, I opened my inbox to see an email with the subject line "BIG NEWS!!!! from paloma." The American Ballet Theatre principal had sent out a note to several of her colleagues and contacts in the dance world announcing that the 2015 season at the Metropolitan Opera House would be her last. By that time, she will have danced with ABT for 24 years, including 20 as a principal, inspiring thousands of students, ballet lovers and fellow dancers along the way.

http://online.wsj.co...0435632626.html

According to the Wall-Street journal, ABT is officially leaving City Center and moving operations to the NY

American Ballet Theatre signed a three-year agreement to perform at the David H. Koch Theater, above, at Lincoln Center.

The game of musical chairs launched by New York City Opera last year when it left Lincoln Center is going at least one more round: America Ballet Theatre will announce Wednesday that it has signed a three-year deal to perform at the David H. Koch Theater, starting in October 2013 with a two-week season.

The change means that the company will terminate its fall seasons at New York City Center, on West 55th Street, which it began in 1997. It does not, however, affect ABT's eight-week spring season at the Metropolitan Opera House (also on the Lincoln Center campus), nor its run of "The Nutcracker" at the Brooklyn Academy of Music.

[Admin Note: quotes are limited to 250 characters of a long article, due to copyright, and to less for brief articles and material limited to subscribers.]

And who's version of Corsaire? Or rather who is staging it?

I can't find any information about staging on their web site:

"Join the dancers of The Washington Ballet for this swashbuckling adventure of pirates, pashas, and the slave girls who love them in this thrilling, new production of the 19th century classic by Marius Petipa. The story of lovers Conrad and Medora, the evil Seid Pasha, and company of corsairs enchants and excites. Don’t miss this adventuresome company premiere!"

http://www.washingtonballet.org/_webapp_2902533/Le_Corsaire

This write-up in the Washington Post doesn't say either: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0022802808.html

It's interesting that this will be at the Eisenhower Theatre at the Kennedy Center the same week (April 5-10, 2011) that NYCB will be doing three Balanchine programs at the Opera house. This might make a trip to DC worth the visit!

http://www.kennedy-center.org/calendar/ind...amp;event=BLBSG

It's Anna-Marie Holmes version. They did her Don Q this past season.

Has anyone else seen the performances yet? I was at openning night and last night and it is quite a beautiful production. Both Victoria and Yumelia were great as Cinderella. I thought the first act got a little boring, but the other acts made up for it. Suzanne Lopez was beautiful as the fairy-godmother and Calvin Kitten was also great as the Jester. The four male princes need some work. They were often out of sync and never quite got it together. I'll post a more detailed review later. Just wondering what people thought.

This is especially hard for Washington Ballet, since we also lost Mary Saludares, a member of the studio company, in February. John Goding was loved and shared a close bond with all of the dancers. I can only imagine what the dancers are going through right now.

Did you see it? What did you think? I saw it also on Friday night and didn't care for it. I guess it was meant for a younger audience, as in below the age of 10. It seemed all over the place.

Washington Ballet recently posted the 09-10 season on their website. The season starts with Don Quixote at the Kennedy Center. Other highlights include a new Great Gatsby and Genius3. Sounds like an exciting season!

I just got back from tonights performance and I was shocked at how amazing Stella was! I saw last night's performance with Gillian as Cinderella, I am a huge fan of Gillian, but Stella did a much better job. Its Stella's time to be made a principal, tonights performance reassured that. She would be an amazing Odette along with an excellent Giselle. The number of female principals seems to be decreasing and Stella would be the perfect addition!