DeborahB

We are not a fan board, and if what appears here is too harsh for individual members, then they are encouraged to skip threads that, from experience, are likely to offend them.

I would go further and point out that this board has a feature that allows anyone to IGNORE posts. Go to your Control Panel (the link is toward the right side near the top of the screen). When you get there, see the Menu along the left side, and towards the foot, under Options, you'll see Manage Ignored Users. You can enter the user name of anyone who regularly offends you. Presto! Not an issue!

Of course, that cuts down on the respectful and lively give-and-take that makes BalletTalk, under the best circumstances, so stimulating.

On a personal note, I will be missing the excellent program altogether because of the presence of one or more dancers whom I consider "must avoid".

I never called "Balanchinette "disgusting", but the comments. I stand by that.

In the meantime, I'll take a break from this website for a while. The comments are often too negative and I find that depressing.

Vienna Waltzes received a decent performance. The biggest surprise was Yvonne Borree in the waltz that I'd last seen Miranda Weese and Damian do. While she was no Miranda, I was shocked at how well she was dancing -- I was bracing myself for the trembly arms but they were nowhere to be found! And she actually jumped pretty well and even did a decent double pirouette. I kept checking my glasses to be sure it was her (I've never seen her dance over the last 5 or so years where she wasn't all but overcome by the shakes). Benjamin Millepied seems like a good influence on her -- he looked happy to be jumping around on stage last night, too. The most disappointing thing about Vienna Waltzes last night was Darci Kistler (ick) -- she has zero flexibility in her back and every gesture seemed too exaggerated and mannered -- when she lifts the tail of her gown up it has to be higher than every other woman, to the extent that that the dress is bunched up around her calves! Yuck. I last saw Kyra Nichols do this, and what a difference. As always, the final waltz is just breathtaking, with all those beautiful dresses and all the handsome men in tails! (Chuck Askegard, as always, was the consummate partner. I felt he was wasted on Darci). I'm hoping that someone else other than Darci will be dancing the "woman alone" role this season....

I was also there last night (and will be there tomorrow for the same program). I won't comment on much of this (as I think it's been covered enough). One thing -- Jared Angle is a much better dancer than Chuck A, even if he's a little shorter). One thing that I do find appallling - the Darci bashing in this post. Okay, she's not as good as she was when she was a kid. However, she's deserves (and has earned) respect; those of us who have watched her since she was 16 tend to make allowances (at least I do). Saying "ick" about Darci? Disgusting! The cast is listed in advance -- I suggest NOT going to her performances if you are going to

be so very disrespeciful. And just for the record -- Darci shows her love of dance during her performance. We can't say that about some others.

As for the comments about Yvonne -- also over-the-top (and not in a good way). Don't go if she's cast! (so you won't have to look for the negative. There is a reason for her shakes by the way, but she perserves -- good for her!).

Deborah, I think you read too much into what I was saying. I was just expressing personal sadness that I couldn't take advantage of this great offer.

-amanda

Sorry, Amanda! I'm sure you are right. Even though I love this site, I feel that there's way too much negativity on it (about the NYCB specifically).

I would volunteer (gladly) to get you a ticket (I have my own business so I make my hours). If you are interested, please email me

on my personal email address: DeborahPub@aol.com

Cheers,

Deborah Broide

I take Amanda's side on this. Without debating the ( anonymous! ) donor's gift, this apparent effort to democratize the orchestra section goes only part of the way toward that goal. I don't know whose idea it was to open these tickets for sale on Monday -- the donor's or the company's. It works well for some self-employed people, retirees, and some college students but few working people. Those who can blithely announce that they're taking an hour off to buy tickets would tend to be those in upper management who, even in this stressed economy, would probably buy their better located tickets* at full price.

*Without being cynical, I am assuming that these seats will not be in the most coveted orchestra locations.

Yes, this is very cynical. They are $25 orchestra seats for goodness

sakes (whether or not they are "the best').

I simply don't get why we can't applaud this donor (I sure do) instead of criticize the way the tickets

are being distributed.

People line up all day for "Shakespeare in the Public" (The Public Theatre. We are major donors to this incredible company) -- albeit for "free" tickets -- and there are very few complaints.

Why look a gift horse in the mouth? The tickets are $25! If someone can't take time off from work (which I get) then that's the way it is. But some people can , and will find a way to do it.

If only it were on Sundays at 10am, so those of who work conventional hours could go...

-amanda

Sure, it would be grand it these seats could be purchased on the weekend (since it's more convenient for many), however,

why put a negative spin on something (i.e. $25 seats) that is so incredibly generous? Jeez!

We should all be very grateful that that a donor (anonymous too, unlike the discussion about the Koch donation) was kind enough (and opened his or her wallet to do so) to fund these seats.

Even with the bleak economy, I'm guessing that many NYCB fans will find a way to be in line at 10am (even if they work convential hours).

Sorry if this seems harsh but I'm a "glass is half-full" kind of person -- I always look for the positive in people/things/situations etc.

I haven't added my thoughts until now, but I've enjoyed reading all of the "Nuts" comments.

I did go to two performances, including yesterday's matinee (Wendy-- my favorite ballerina of the last 20 years -- was the SP Fairy; Philip Neal was her excellent and attentive cavalier, with Sterling as DD).

I should say that I'm not a big fan of "The Nutcracker" (never was) for various reasons. My big beef this season was how badly behaved the children in the audience were, but worse still were their parents (who think it's fine to whisper/talk to their kids during the performance. At $125 a pop, I don't

appreciate these rude parents). When my boys were young I took them to "The Nutcracker" several years in a row (my oldest is now 25 and in med. school in NYC, and my youngest is 17 and about to go to college in the fall. Both have fond memories of seeing this ballet), and they

were quiet (I made sure of it).

Thankfully, the real rep. starts Tuesday (I usually go 3 times a week). Hooray! (Ashley Bouder will be out for a while btw, but probably not for the entire season.

I seem to recall that we're not supposed to report things like this on the board so forgive me if I've overstepped).

One other small thing, I felt the criticism of Yvonne Borree was too harsh (and rather mean). It is true that she has her problems, but she used to be a very good dancer (I watched her from the corps on). And she was always lovely to look at on the stage. In fact, there are many dancers (women and men) who probably should retire from NYCB now

(and surely they will eventually), but there's always something to admire about their performance (even if it means looking back to how they

once danced).

As for Abi -- she's still very young. She may or may not have "star quality" some day, but I love watching her technique (and she has a lovely smile as well). Sterling Hyltin, by the way, was fantastic as DD yesterday! And Sara Mearns was a stunning DD when I saw her recently (gorgeous woman too).

Happy New Year!!

just to add my two cents......I had a wonderful time at the Gala. The dancers were fresh, beautiful, and full of energy. I even enjoy the crazy mix of pieces in these galas, if only to get the opportunity to see a lot of dancers in one show. It seemed to me that everyone around me was having a great time and enjoying the show as well. I agree with others in that my favorites were The Unanswered Question (Taylor-Ulbricht) and Who Cares? (Ringer & Krohn in the finale) except for the singer I also liked the excerpt from Jazz (Kowroski-Marcovici) with the Jazz band onstage.

Re: Koch's mega-gift to NYCB. I think the dancers have an attitude of gratitude and that's the way I feel about it too, especially in these bad economic times. I don't understand why anyone would attack him as I've read -- it's his money to do as he wants and how great he gave some to the ballet. I know we don't like the name change of the theater but I guess I don't mind as much as some of you do. I grew up in a family of athletes and I am now used to all the name changes of the sports venues around the US. I asked someone why people would complain so much and he said to me that if someone gave him such a grant for his organization he would be willing to change his own name to get it!!

Obviously, I'm nobody with any expertise on the subject and I can learn from some of the comments here. But just let it be known that some people were just plain happy to be there!

A wonderful post, Flo! And I'm with you 100%. My husband and I had a wonderful time, too. I was just happy to see the NYCB again (I did go to Saratoga for a weekend to see them too. That was also fun!). The program may not have been perfect, but "Who Cares?" (pun intended).

Koch does have to do it, or something like it, if his social ambitions and his wife’s, which have been well documented, are to be fulfilled.

quote]Nor is there any special reason to applaud Koch personally, IMO. He’s not an innovator or a self made man, and Koch Industries is not a particularly admirable corporate entity even by the sometimes dubious standards of big companies in the oil and related businesses.)

Well-documented? If so, by whom? This sounds like gossip to me.

Nor do I think it's right (at least for me) to judge Mr. Koch's attributes as a businessman, nor whether his company is an "admirable corporate entity."

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I continue to be surprised that this sort of gift is met with such cynicism (and yes, snarkiness).

I do applaud Mr. Koch for his astounding generosity.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Wow! I am very surprised at the snarky, and mean-spirited (sorry, but that's how it comes across) comments about David Koch's incredibly generous gift. It's 100 million dollars! Sure, he's rich (well, loaded really) but he didn't have to do it! And this longtime (32 years) NYCB fan is extremely grateful for his magnanimity . And yes, I stood (and had a clear vision of the Koch's from our seats. We splurge on gala seats because it's our small contribution to "my" beloved company) and toasted him with pleasure. In my book the man is a mentsch -- pure and simple.

As for the program -- it was, as others have described, lacking. Oh but the dancers! Having attended almost everything at City Center this fall -- and enjoying almost all if it (especially Morphoses and San Francisco Ballet), I was thrilled to see the NYCB in fine form (with a few exceptions). The holiday season has officially begun -- NYCB is back at Lincoln Center ( And frankly, I don't care what the theater is called: New York State, David Koch, George Balanchine and Lincoln Kirstein -- it's just a name).

Let me also take this time to wish everyone at Ballet Talk a most Happy Thanksgiving!

For a real blast on Dutch usage, try Alte Hollands and you'll get some good laughs. As I work in New York History, I have to go after information which is in the "Old Dutch" which is about the same as trying to translate Shakespeare into Basic English. It's not easy. One time around 1909, as a part of the Henry Hudson Tercentenary, a New York businessman, whose family still spoke "New York Dutch", went to the Netherlands, and tried to get around using it. He would have starved if he hadn't switched to English. The townspeople tried to figure out what this funny gibberish was that he was spouting (It sounded Dutch, but it just...wasn't, you know?), and finally a very old man said, "Hey, I recognize that! That's the stuff we used to use in church when I was a little kid!"

The New York Dutch of about 1630 didn't often alphabetize, so I don't know how they dealt with it.

How wonderful! I love this sort of thing. Thanks for this information!

And because I know we're off topic -- let me add that I've now tried to match the new NYCB corps members with their photos (on the NYCB website)

so I can keep an eye out for them (I did notice a few of them already as apprentices).

People are always doing that, as if Dutch were exactly the same as German. In German, a "von" is often dropped. In Dutch, a "van" "van der" "ter", etc. is part of the name.

Not exactly. One side of my family is Dutch (from a small town about 45 minutes from Amsterdam. Lovely place too!).

In school, when they had to line up by last name, my grandmother was under "L" (in her case that was "Lith" although it was preceded by "van" -- always a small "v"). My cousin (my generation, but born and raised, part of the time, in the Netherlands), alphabetically, goes under "A" in Holland (for "Aa") but wound up being listed under "V" (for "van") or even "D" (for "der" -- both precede the "Aa" in her name) -- in America. And then there's the capitalization issue

-- both the "Van" and "Der" are capitalized here automatically although they should both be in small letters. We always get a kick out of how

the names get turned around here, and that includes the Dutch first names too (my son has a Dutch middle name and he gets a lot of comments on it, almost always including, "what a cool name").

In this day of newspaper cuts/layoffs (as in the recently defunct New York Sun), we are very lucky (as Leonid mentions early in this thread) to have so much ballet coverage in NYC. As I've written before, I do know Mr. Macaulay casually (I sit behind him at the NYCB), and we have a bit of a professional connection. And yes, I am a fan even when I disagree with him (all or partly). He brings an energy and passion to his reviews that is most welcome (and he did the same with his theatre reviews for the Financial Times). I also enjoy Roslyn Sulcas's review in the NYT's, as well as Tobi Tobias's in the Village Voice (and elsewhere) and Eric Taub's (Ballet.co.uk), among others.

I will be there, and, as always, look forward to the gala. Sure, it seems like a quirky program (too much Martins, not enough

Balanchine and Robbins), but why criticize it before the fact? Nor do I think it's disrespectful to Balanchine (or for that matter, Robbins).

Was it disrespectful to include Balanchine in the Robbins celebration last season? Not at all. There's always plenty of Balanchine at NYCB, as there should be.

Or perhaps my idea of "plenty" is different from others; I respect that. However, let's not overreact to one gala program. Haven't we all had enough "negatives" this year? (see: politics, the economy, the wars etc.). Not to sound too much like a cheerleader, but I'm celebrating the fact that NYCB is soon to be back at Lincoln Center where they belong. Hooray (she says, pom-poms waving:;)!

I will keep my comments to a minimum because I only attend a handful of ABT performances a year (as opposed to at least three a week

at NYCB for decades). I simply don't know the dancers well enough to make interesting comments. However, I was deeply disappointed in

yesterday's (matinee) "Ballo Della Regina." I saw it last year with Gillian Murphy and thought she did a fine job.

Yuriko Kajiya was not up to the part, and I'll leave it at that (Vipa said it best above).

"Flames of Paris" was thrilling -- and not just because of the incredible Danil Simkin. Sarah Lane, whose part was less showy but quite difficult, was also excellent.

I'm not a Tudor fan, so I'm not the right audience for "Jardin Aux Lilas" (although it was lovely, and I did like Veronika Part a lot).

"Company B" is a favorite Paul Taylor ballet, but I prefer the Paul Taylor interpretation. Still, the dancers seemed like they were having a grand time and that

enthusiasm was infectious.

I saw the boys on Today this am and I was really impressed!

I saw Billy Elliott in London a few weeks after it opened. I didn't expect to like it but I adored it!

So much, in fact, that I'm seeing it again here (NYC) next week. I can't wait to see Stephen Hanna

as the "older" Billy.

I saw program #3 this afternoon. I just reread Alistair Macaulay's review of this program, and with the exception of Jorma Elo's "Double Evil" which

I liked better than he did (but didn't love), and "Ibsen's House" which I disliked more than he did, I share his assessment of this program.

This is the weakest of the three programs by far, and yet the dancers continued to shine.

Again, I must respectfully disagree, Natalia. There is-- or can be -- a very big difference between the choreography and the dancer.

In a perfect world they are both on the same level. However, as in the case of "Concerto Gross," the dancers were wonderful but the

choreography was not.

I'm afraid that I can't agree with Natalia. I thought both "The Fifth Season" and "Concerto Grosso" were very minor ballets; the latter was all jumps and footwork and not much else. That said, the dancers were terrific. The best thing about "Joyride," besides the dancers, were the costumes (minus the very gimmicky "electronic" screens on the front of each costume). I thought the SFB did a very good job with The 4 T's; however, it wasn't nearly as good as the

best that that NYCB has done, both in the recent past, and further back (I only go back 30 years). Pascal Molat was the one exception -- he was truly superb. I also attended Friday night and found this the more outstanding program. The men in SFB are in a class of their own: the best I have seen in one company in

a long time. The women, however, in my opinion -- and with a few exceptions (especially Yuan Yuan Tan who is most breathtaking) -- are not

as stunning (witness the clunky soloists in one section of yesterday's 4 T's). I am also looking forward to program #3.

I wasn't planning on seeing Billy Elliot again (having seen it in London when it first opened), but as soon as I found out (a while ago) that Stephen Hanna was going to be the "older" Billy, I got a ticket. Although he's not on until the very end of the second act, it's a wonderful number (Stephen's older Billy dances with the younger Billy). Hopefully Broadway audiences will be interested in seeing more ballet once they get a taste of a "real" ballet dancer (we'll miss Stephen at NYCB though!). How lucky that there is so much of it in NYC, and in so many other wonderful cities.

I've seen Nicolaj at the NYSTheatre a couple of times since his retirement (in the audience, not just doing "Watermill") which has been a treat.

However, I got all choked up again (as we all did at his farewell performance) watching this.

I know this makes me sound like a stick-in-the-mud but I wish ballet dancers (and everyone else!) would stop smoking.

Before they started the Lincoln Plaza reconstruction I would regularly see some NYCB dancers smoke outside (before they went down the stairs and into the theatre).

I've been told that some of them do it to keep their weight down, but I'd rather have more robust dancers than having them risk their health by smoking.

Printscess,

There are plenty of pro athletes that do not get paid much money at all (I have a bit of a professional frame of reference here ) - especially in the minor leagues etc. Also some dance companies (the biggest ones), from what I know, pay their dancers semi-decently.

I've always admired dancers who find the time/energy -- I'm not sure how they do it! -- to attend college or courses (like Jenifer Ringer of NYCB) to prepare for the future. It's a short shelf life for sure.

And look at what a great job Kristin Sloan has done (again NYCB. She's the new media director) in reinventing herself.

There's a "Dancers in Transition" program (national. Non-profit) that is there to help dancers transition. I do know that Matt Murphy partook in that program, as did Stephen Hanna (who will be the older Billy Elliot on Broadway).

It must be so hard for a dancer (especially a young dancer) when they are felled by an illness that essentially ends their career before it really started (or had a chance to take off).

It's bad enough that dancers have such a short shelf life (pro athletes too), but Mr. Murphy (whom I see at the NYCB a lot. He's friends with a bunch of the dancers) didn't even get his shot. I never saw "Tanny" (at 51 I'm a little too young. How great to say I'm too young for something!:;) but

I've seen her dance on films and DVD's and WOW! As awful (and it truly was) as it was when polio struck her, she was already a star (and

her legacy will live on). I just know that Mr. Murphy will do well in whatever he chooses to do next. I wish him all the best, as I know we all do.

Too funny, Leigh! Love it!

May I second Quiggin's point about how much Alastair Macaulay has done for dance coverage (not just ballet. He's in charge of the entire section)

since his arrival? That said, it's his editor that makes the decision about front page coverage (or how much coverage), but he (the editor is a man) thinks highly enough of Mr. Macaulay (and his

staff)

to allow an abundance of dance coverage in the NYT (finally!).

Like EAW, I too disqualify myself from defending him personally (although I don't know him well at all), but I do sit right behind him at the NYCB, and we exchange pleasantries (mostly about London theatre). I can tell you that he is always totally engrossed in each in every performance. I guess that is defending him a bit, but I often disagree with parts of his reviews too. However, I always look forward to reading his pieces -- that is a compliment in my book.

I have business in London so I'm there frequently. In my circles (publishing/media) Mr. Macauley was indeed very well respected as both a theatre and dance critic. That said, we all have reviewers we like, and reviewers we don't like.