mimsyb

Well, Ms. Vishneva is a tad older now and may find it necessary to choose her roles more carefully. Given this year's ABT rep perhaps there's less to choose from for her. And who can blame her for saying nyet to the abominable version of "Sleeping Beauty" that is ABT's ?

I wasn't criticizing Ms. Osipova's (or any other dancer) for wanting to make money. More power to them. I merely meant that if Osipova doesn't perform as often with ABT, there are other choices. For me personally, if she's listed on one of my subscriptions, fine. It's not that I don't enjoy her performance. But not seeing her gives me the opportunity to see what some other dancer is capable of. And that also gives me pleasure. I adored Fonteyn, but also relished seeing Nerina, Beriosova, Grey. Sometimes seeing other dancers opens our eyes and minds to new possibilities. In fact, this year I exchanged one of my Osipova "Don Q" performances (I had both) for another dancer's casting in that ballet, just so I could see a "second opinion" of the role. That for me is part of the joy of watching ballet. And like a few other posters, I would be extremely happy if the Royal were to revive a few of the works Ashton did for Fonteyn. And then bring them here. ABT probably would never revive some of them, but the Royal can. That reason alone is a good one for her being at the Royal. So maybe it's just a better fit for her. What's not to like in London?

Agreed. Also, Semionova is another reason to not book tickets for Osipova. She's lovely. And versatile.

Well, it could mean that the Royal might give her "La Fille Mal Gardee", and then perhaps it might be able to transfer to the Met for a Summer run here. One can hope. ABT has a few others who could also do the role on Osipova's "night off"

Angelica, while I can certainly agree about your preference of seeing Part in penche' arabesque vs "Firebird", still the totality of a ballet is for me the most pleasing and satisfying aspect of going to "ballet". As an ex dancer and now a choreographer, I look at how a ballet is put together. What makes it interesting? Would a costume of a different color work better? What about the use (or not) of scenery? Did the choreography suit the music or the music suit the theme? Was there any coherent structure to the work? Was it just about the main dancer? And the dancer's ego? Was it just about that arabesque penche'? Does the choreography reveal anything I don't already know and appreciate about a given dancer? How does this particular ballet (be it "Don Q" or "Manon") suit or not suit a particular dancer. And does the dancer relate in any way to whatever else is happening on stage? Or is it just about them? Few dancers would attempt to just dance solos all their career. (unless you're Isadora!) They become a part of a whole when they step into a role. They become the character with the help and assistance of costume, scenery, music and everyone and everything around them. They are good, not so good, great or breathtaking because of whatever else is going on around them. Some of the most beautiful penches' have been destroyed by a poor partner. Imagine if the corps dancers in"Don Q" never related to Osipova dancing Kitri. If they never snapped their fingers at her or raised their arms in celebration at her triumphs in winning Basilio! Osipova could be out there dancing incredibly well, but if the rest of the ballet (the dancers, etc) was not a part of what's happening, she looks foolish. In order to excel and be great, one must "become the ballet". Be in the ballet. This is also true with a more abstract ballet. One can't just "dance" "Symphony in C". Trust me, I've danced this ballet and there is nothing more exciting than being a part of the totality of this work . The final spiral fall of the lead dancer in the 2nd Movement is a glorious moment, not only for the ballerina dancing it, but for the corps dancing in support of that final moment. To see just the ballerina do this movement wouldn't have the same impact it has without other dancers there to complete the picture. Any truly great dancer relies on and respects every aspect of the ballet they are performing. It is in the end about the work. The whole work. and for me, it's simply more interesting to see that "whole work"

Angelica, I am confused by what you write. Are you saying you would prefer to see "the dancers", no matter the ballet? But isn't the point of going to the ballet to see "ballet"? Otherwise we could stay out on the Plaza and see "the dancers" walk in the stage entrance. Or better yet, go to "Indie" for a glass of wine. You'll frequently see many of the dancers there. Ballet is a performance art that involves not just music and moves to music, but there's the decor, the costumes, sometimes a story, etc. etc. Oft times a very good dancer is totally mis-cast in a given ballet and thus the entire performance comes to naught. Other times an understudy or second cast dancer goes on as a replacement and knocks our socks off! Do we really enjoy a dancer, even though he or she is reading the phone book? Should we adore some dancers even though we could care less about what else is happening on stage? For me , the totality of a work speaks for itself and on it's own terms. While I would agree that many ballets are poorly presented or get short shrift in the production values department, even these can rarely be saved by any one dancer. I've seen many great dancers in lesser productions and wished I hadn't. And seen many ballets little known to me with lesser known dancers in the cast and come away pleased and surprised. The work should always come first, then the casting...be it a star or not. Another reason to sit in a seat that reveals as much about a work as possible.

A minefield! My point exactly, Simone!! I'm but 5'1" and to sit in the orchestra for me is a terrible choice. I even get the kiddie booster seat and I can't see. Some people's "big hair" are just too much! And I've tried the "scooching" trick in a box seat, only to have a Met usher reprimand me for moving a seat! Minefield indeed!! It's a crap shoot at the Met, for sure. I can't wait for ABT to move over to the State Theater come their Fall Season, where almost any seat in the house is a better deal than the Met. But of course that theater was actually designed for dance. I do think that most ballet watchers will usually prefer to "sit up" (even if a bit further back), as opposed to an orchestra seat, but sometimes the cache' of the orchestra wins out. I even see many of the critics sitting up now as compared with their usual "house critic seat". It's just better. Many nuances of choreography are obliterated or missed by sitting on a flatter plane. If one wants to see the sweat (and sometimes blood), then sitting down is the way to go. Me, I prefer some of the 'mystery' to be intact.

The Met clearly was not designed for dance, or ballet in particular. Orchestra seats have sight line issues, unless you are on one of the center aisles not too terribly far back. You lose the dancers feet frequently and also the patterns. If you enjoy being "close" to the dancers, then go with those Side Parterre or Grand Tier boxes. But yes, be sure you are in the front row, otherwise they are useless. But expect to miss much of the upstage action, depending on which side you sit on. For me, it's not pleasant to be watching a performer perform and then suddenly "lose" them whenever they go to a corner. If you like seeing into the "wings" rather than watching the performance, again those front boxes are OK I guess. If you're going to spend that money, however, you're always better off in Center Grand Tier. Yes, the tier is a bit further back than those side boxes, but you do get a full view of the stage. You see patterns and certainly the feet! It's just a much better choice. And if you really have $$$, go with Center Parterre Box (again, try for the front seats). And when you sit in the Grand Tier, you are on the level where the "action" is during the intermissions! The refreshment bars are there, as well as the wonderful balcony overlooking Lincoln Plaza. Good luck and welcome to "Summer with ABT"!

Yes, Barbara Fallis was one of the great teachers. She totally re-shaped the way I approached pointe work. And I DO try and pass that on to my students.

Nominations are the not the same as winning. But yes, I agree about noses being put out of place.

"Argo" was right up there at the top for me also. Totally engrossing and the fact that it was true made it even more so. Also loved "Lincoln" and "Les Miz". Alas, "Marigolds" isn't the type of movie to garner awards. Same might be said for "Beasts of the Southern Wild", but for me, it was a total winner! As for the gowns... what was with the "Girls" girl? All those straps hanging off her multiple tattooed shoulders. Oh my! Not attractive. Jennifer Garner looked stunning and happy!

Does this translate to mean he doesn't "love" NYCB? Is he not proud to have them in "his house"? What an odd statement to make. Also, I'm hoping that in going to the "State" (Koch) Theater ABT will finally deem it OK to participate in the Atrium discount ticket booth. They don't participate while they are at the Met. NYCB has always participated and I believe it's a valid resource for those who wish to see ballet at the last minute and can't afford sky high prices. We'll see.

Joseph Gorak did that incredible turn/extension! He is amazing. I was so floored by that, but I think the other two were Thomas Forster and Joseph Phillips.

Count me in the "like" camp for his Solar. He had a certain connectiveness to the role that I found appealing. I don't like him in everything, but then I don't necessarily need every dancer to be able to dance every role in the male rep. I too would like to see him dance with other dancers besides Osipova. Their pairing is at times so over the top. They cancel each other out. Someone mentioned they seemed to be competing all the time. I don't see him taking roles from Simkin either. They are so different. But I guess we'll have to wait and see. I worry more for Herman. And for others hoping to move up. But again, let's wait and see. And I wonder how Ratmansky will use him. Perhaps we'll see Vasiliev develop some new skills and abilities beyond his obvious technical prowess. And isn't that what growing as an artist is all about?

I am not so concerned about specific casting. From all the talk about "promoting from within", etc. it seems to me that the particular rep being presented this Fall will offer an excellent opportunity for ABT to do exactly that. It's always so wonderful when a corps or even soloist member can step up and show what they can do. Don't get me wrong, I love the ABT principles and relish their performances. But it's always a pleasure to see the youngsters get a chance. Even Julie Kent was in the corps at one time.

If I had directed the Closing Ceremony, I would have had the Lennon "Imagine" played during the extinguishing of "the flame". I guess it may have been too political a message, but to see all of those amazing World athletes come together in sport and friendship with those lyrics playing would have made it all meaningful in a strong way.

Yeah, another snoozer! Well, not exactly as it was VERY LOUD! I was sort of hoping the Brazilians would bring in Marcello to do a killer Samba, but alas, that was not to be. One can only hope in four years time........... Still no Sting or Stones! Obviously geared to the younger set. zzzzzzzzzzz

Thanks for the "early floor exercise" videos. The sport has clearly taken a different direction. I'm curious about the music for the first two exercises. It sounded like the piano was "live". Does anyone know. Was that the case? Also, you could actually hear the music, which doesn't always seem the case now. There are so many other things going on at the same time it's difficult to distinguish the music from the "noise". It's fun to look back.

Yeah, I know U2 is Irish, but even her Majesty shook hands with the Irish head of state this year. Plus, they're simply a great band!

IMO one of the lamest Opening Ceremonies in recent memory. Cluttered and un-focused, it lacked any real visual oomph. I'm wondering how the people in the stadium saw all the TV close ups. (the sleeping kids!) Maybe personal screens at every seat? It was memorable for some of it's supreme lapses. Where was Monty Python? Sting? U2? C. S. Lewis? Lewis Carroll? Royal Ballet? The "Phantom"? To name but a few. And did I miss this, but where were the Black Watch pipers? And the running commentary was simply banal. The entire evening seemed a bit "beige" to me. While I loved the idea of the Queen being a "Bond girl", would it have hurt her Majesty to crack even a small smile during the ceremony? Actually, it should have been Sean Connery jumping out of the helicopter with QE2!

Got my seats today for Fall ABT. While nothing in row "A" center Grand Tier was available for any performance (I'm wondering if these seats are held out for patrons, etc), I did get row "A" just off the aisle. Having sat there to see "Uncle Vanya" just this past weekend, I'm sure they will be fine. And I'm wondering if casting matters all that much with this particular rep that they're doing. All the ballets save "Moor's Pavanne" and possibly the new Ratmansky make much use of the corps anyway.

The argument could be made that indeed dancing Balanchine on NY's turf would be a great challenge. The Kirov took on "Symphony in C" last Summer to thrilling success. I for one never tire of seeing his choreography performed well. I merely was trying to make a point that I think the company would have shown better with other ballets. If POB came visiting on a more regular basis, then perhaps these little "oddities" would be fine. Maybe there's a reason these ballets are not better known in the US. They just aren't all that good. Wonderful dancers deserve wonderful choreography.

Slightly off topic, but I believe a' newbie' to ABT's corps, Duncan Lyle is also from BB. In a perfect world, we could retrieve Erica Cornejo from BB. One can only dream!

I agree with atm711 about the absolute frivolity of the pairing of these ballets. The vacancy of the choreography masquerading as something worthy of viewing was astonishing to me. I'm not sure a cast change would have made much difference. If POB was trying to present a museum of their work, then they succeeded. But these are highly trained artists with much to offer. To ask them to dance these ballets on their first NY visit in some time did no one any favors. I believe they do Balanchine and Robbins with better results. Were they afraid to present these choreographers on their own turf? Mind you, I'm not advocating every company dance Balanchine or Robbins. It's just I want to see dancers at this level challenged to do their best in good work. As it is, despite some showing of elegance in their port de bras and epaulment, much of the footwork was blurred and unsteady. The women have pretty feet, as do the men. None seemed to my eye to have any awareness of how to best present them. Many of the men landed rather flat footed from their jumps with a noticeable thud. (this on a stage built for noiseless landings). And more than a few of the lead women had trouble with a double piroette, coming off point before the finish of the revolution. Partnering at times seemed rather more studied than seamless, but this could be a reflection of the choreography. I agree with Macaulay that nothing was revealed about the dancers through these ballets. Dancing that is seen but not felt. The "emotions" of both "L'Arlesienne" and "Bolero" were patently false. "Suite en Blanc" was just a puzzlement of steps that came from nowhere and went nowhere. As I said before, I'm sure all will be made right with "Giselle". One can only hope. Meanwhile, I spent the last half of the evening wishing I was over at Bar Boulud with a nice plate of charcuterie and a cool glass of Sancerre. Have a nice Bastille Day everyone!!

Just back from POB. Was so looking forward to this, but I have to say, it was a bit of a disappointment. The choreography was so sub standard, predictable and trite. "L'arlesienne" was just silly. I couldn't wait for him to jump out that window! "Bolero" is "Le Beefcake Francais", even though the lead was taken by Marie-Agnes Gillot this time. (I may have appreciated it more with the all male cast). Still, it had no real sensuality, no drive (despite the pulsating score). Just another night at the old Studio 54! As for "Suite en Blanc", I can only say how grateful I am that "Symphony in C" exists . I'm sure the company will redeem itself with "Giselle", but this trio of dances told me little about the dancers and what they are capable of. No-one seemed to have any individuality or personality. Very occasionally I'd get a whiff of the perfume that is Paris and it's dancers, but all too often the scent was stale.