Mariinsky: NYCC

[YID]

BTW, if anyone's attending the Friday Balanchine, I'd love to say hi and put some faces to screennames. Is there a spot in the lobby where people usually gather? I'm flying home Saturday morning, so that will be my only chance to say hi.

--Andre

I am going, so, if anyone NAMES the place for "meet & great", I'd be delighted

[nysusan]

BTW, if anyone's attending the Friday Balanchine, I'd love to say hi and put some faces to screennames. Is there a spot in the lobby where people usually gather? I'm flying home Saturday morning, so that will be my only chance to say hi.

--Andre

Hi Andre, and welcome to NY! I'll be there tonight and would love to say hello. I think that pretty much all of the ballet goers I know are planning to be there tonight ,too. There isn't any one central meeting place at City Center, but sometimes some of us meet in the outer lobby (by the ticket windows). Why don't we all meet there during the first intermission? It will be nice to see you again.

Susan

PS - I think the shade of Kondaurova's hair varies depending on how she has it styled. She's always easy for me to pick out not only because of the way she dances but also because she's always the tallest woman on the stage (except in the presence of Lopatkina, and who could possibly confuse them!).

Novikova has very dark hair, like Tereshkina but she's smaller and has a very "sweet" face, Tereshkina generally has a more authoritative look & I actually thought she looked quite fierce in In the Middle.

[Leigh Witchel]

Yeah - I'm there too (on duty for Danceview Times) I have a feeling this performance will be a *major* scene - and that's completely discounting what happens onstage!

[Catherine]

Just for the record, Kondaurova is a natural redhead. She rinses the color lighter/darker but it's always some shade of red. When she premiered the Glass Heart here (March 6) and danced in numerous Swan Lakes, her hair was darker red (hairspray/wetter hair = darker look). No one in the company wears wigs for Forsythe.

SanderO, you asked what the Kirov used to be. While I don't know that the New York immigrants you met were necessarily uhm, cultivated enough to comment, they may be, if they were avid balletomanes and lived here in St. Petersburg, which was Leningrad, at any point before 1990, esp in the 70s or during the Vinogradov era. But the comments they made do ring true to a great extent, mostly for ballerinas like Somova and Vishneva who are intent on capitalizing on the showmanship aspect of the Kirov, but do not by any means epitomize or exemplify Vaganova technique. What do I mean by that. Vishneva dances in nearly every leading ballet theater in the world -- guest artist at ABT, at the Bolshoi, touring her own show, Beauty in Motion, and before that, Kings of the Dance, the list goes on. I recently posted on Criticaldance the results of yesterday's press conference with Gergiev in which he commented that, if Vishneva was only performing one time per year at the Mariinsky Theatre, she was not technically a prima of the Mariinsky. A prima perhaps, but not of THIS theatre if she doésnt perform here. I know many people who agree with the assertion as well that she is not really a Russian ballerina in terms of plastique or expression. Her on stage persona is very much American, if you will, very dramatic, very Broadway-esque. This attracts crowds, but it isn't the Russian "way". Somova, is another but much poorer (or much stronger, however you like it) example, for her uber high extensions and lack of artistry, lack of restraint. The ballerinas of the Kirov in the past were known for portraying more artistry, more discipline, more strength, more tasteful dramatism. It wasn't about high legs and flashy jumps. It wasn't about how many foreign tours you could go on with other companies, it wasn't about making more money. It was about the history, the tradition, the style. The corps de ballet of the Kirov remains the best in the world. (Gergiev agrees with me on that :-)). But the upper layers of the Kirov have few traditional ballerinas left. Lopatkina is considered, by locals, to be the great traditionalist in this theatre. Tereshkina, technically, is following in her footsteps although the two are dramatically very very different. Some other old school Kirov types who aren't yet off the roster: Tarasova, Zhelonkina (who just performed here Wednesday night in La Sylphide). Obratsova is also very traditionally Kirov-esque. They are easy to pick out but it is hard to pinpoint the quality. It is sort of a technical perfection plus a well researched dramatic approach that never goes overboard, and is never done for kicks, is never done to the extreme. It's the confidence the viewer has that there will be no mishaps or no missteps, that the 32 fouettes will be polished and even, not bouncing, that she will finish them, not wimp out. It's the feeling the spectators come away with at the end of "Giselle", perhaps a tear or two if done correctly. It is hard to put this into words if you didn't see the Kirov in the 70s or 80s --or if you have grown up on a steady diet of American ballet only -- but suffice it to say that "democracy" isn't always good for classical traditions. Anywhere. I guess that is one way of putting it.

[Adam]

I'll be there, too. Are we talking about the "Will Call" window on the West side of the lobby, or the "Current Sale" window on the East side of the Lobby? I think if we get five more to show up, they do a private performance of the piece of our choice, don't they?

BTW, I've never seen the Mariinsky before, but does anybody know many people who say ANYTHING is better now than it was before? :-)

[nysusan]

I'll be there, too. Are we talking about the "Will Call" window on the West side of the lobby, or the "Current Sale" window on the East side of the Lobby? I think if we get five more to show up, they do a private performance of the piece of our choice, don't they?

BTW, I've never seen the Mariinsky before, but does anybody know many people who say ANYTHING is better now than it was before? :-)

How about In the Middle, Somewhat Elevated? Seriously, the lobby's small enough - we'll find each other

PS - anything that came before is always better than what we're seeing right now because we only remember the triumphs and the longer ago it was, the less we recall any niggling little flaws. But in the case of the Kirov I know what Catherine's talking about. Don't get me wrong, I love Vishneva but there is a difference not only in technique but most notably in the way she lets the dramatic impulse lead the dance, rather than integrating it into the choreography. I think Catherine hit it on the head as a difference in the mode of expression, as well as the obvious difference of an emphasis on athletisicm & showmanship vs subtlety, clarity and artistry. While Lopatkina may not be an old style dancer in terms of her extensions, a look at the difference between the way she and Vishneva interpret the same roles is illuminating.

[Cygnet]

Just for the record, Kondaurova is a natural redhead. She rinses the color lighter/darker but it's always some shade of red. When she premiered the Glass Heart here (March 6) and danced in numerous Swan Lakes, her hair was darker red (hairspray/wetter hair = darker look). No one in the company wears wigs for Forsythe.

SanderO, you asked what the Kirov used to be. While I don't know that the New York immigrants you met were necessarily uhm, cultivated enough to comment, they may be, if they were avid balletomanes and lived here in St. Petersburg, which was Leningrad, at any point before 1990, esp in the 70s or during the Vinogradov era. But the comments they made do ring true to a great extent, mostly for ballerinas like Somova and Vishneva who are intent on capitalizing on the showmanship aspect of the Kirov, but do not by any means epitomize or exemplify Vaganova technique. What do I mean by that. Vishneva dances in nearly every leading ballet theater in the world -- guest artist at ABT, at the Bolshoi, touring her own show, Beauty in Motion, and before that, Kings of the Dance, the list goes on. I recently posted on Criticaldance the results of yesterday's press conference with Gergiev in which he commented that, if Vishneva was only performing one time per year at the Mariinsky Theatre, she was not technically a prima of the Mariinsky. A prima perhaps, but not of THIS theatre if she doésnt perform here. I know many people who agree with the assertion as well that she is not really a Russian ballerina in terms of plastique or expression. Her on stage persona is very much American, if you will, very dramatic, very Broadway-esque. This attracts crowds, but it isn't the Russian "way". Somova, is another but much poorer (or much stronger, however you like it) example, for her uber high extensions and lack of artistry, lack of restraint. The ballerinas of the Kirov in the past were known for portraying more artistry, more discipline, more strength, more tasteful dramatism. It wasn't about high legs and flashy jumps. It wasn't about how many foreign tours you could go on with other companies, it wasn't about making more money. It was about the history, the tradition, the style. The corps de ballet of the Kirov remains the best in the world. (Gergiev agrees with me on that :-)). But the upper layers of the Kirov have few traditional ballerinas left. Lopatkina is considered, by locals, to be the great traditionalist in this theatre. Tereshkina, technically, is following in her footsteps although the two are dramatically very very different. It is hard to put this into words if you didn't see the Kirov in the 70s or 80s but suffice it to say that "democracy" isn't always good for classical traditions. I guess that is one way of putting it.

Well said, Catherine!

I'd like to add Pavlenko along with Tereshkina and Lopatkina, to your points.

Since Ayupova's recent retirement, IMO they are the new triumvirate of tradition

re female Principal Dancers in the Maryinsky Ballet. I'm especially elated with

all of the great news about Kondaurova's success during this New York

engagement: She should definitely be considered for the next PD

promotion cycle, and sooner rather than later.

[nysusan]

Ah, Pavlenko - my favorite. I'm so happy to hear the good news about her personal life, but I do hope she hurries back to the stage. Does anyone know if the Alexander Segeev we've been seeing on this tour is her husband? (feel free to delete this question if considered gossip)

[Catherine]

Yes, Sasha Sergeev is her husband. I did ask her about her plans to return to the stage -- she is planning it. Although if memory serves me right, most ballerinas in the theatre have a year of maternity leave (at least). So I would doubt we'd see her before fall 2010 at the earliest. I wanted to underscore Cygne's point too, and yours nysusan: Pavlenko is one of my top two favorites. I didn't include her on the list not because I do not adore her, but bc Petersburg fans have a very strange relationship to her that, to this day, I cannot figure out. She is an AMAZING dancer and, moreover, a very strong human being, who lives her life with integrity and adds so much beauty to the stage. I wish her only happiness. (I just had to say that for the record!)

Cygnet -- YES about Kondaurova. She's been a favorite of mine since I interviewed her in 2005. I will never forget her comment in the interview when I asked about Vaganova school. "Honestly it wasn't that difficult for me." I look at her body on stage and think yes, that's exactly what it is: she is a born ballerina, the body, the loose limbs, and the impeccably gorgeous classically beautiful face (and that red hair!). The ease of her movements and her easy adaptability to different styles (modern vs classical) and ability to shine in both -- that's natural talent. Why she isn't PD yet, is beyond me, but she's always been overshadowed (casting wise) by others in the company. Not sure why.

[Natalia]

.... Kondaurova. .... Why she isn't PD yet, is beyond me, but she's always been overshadowed (casting wise) by others in the company. Not sure why.

Catherine, it is simply due to jealousy regarding what I had mentioned earlier. For example, I happened to be sitting behind two long-time local balletomanes (babushki) during the premiere of Chemyakin's 'Princess Pirlipat' at the '03 festival. They were mocking EK's name in the printed playbill. That was sad because she did a great job even back then. That dude -- "patron" or whatever -- should have stayed out of the picture.

When dancers are cast in leading roles due to "patronage" in high places AND have mediocre talent, then I too will jeer. However, in the case of EK, she absolutely deserved (deserves) her high standing and promotions, regardless of who-the-heck is her "patron" at any given time. The good news is that she *was* recently promoted from Choryphee to 2nd soloist. This happened in the next-to-last round of promos, so I did not expect another elevation in this latest batch. I would expect (hope) that she'll become 1st Soloist in the next round....and Principal a year or two after that.

I wish that we, the fans in the USA, could crown her The American People's Choice. Maybe we should all pool our resources and buy her the biggest freakin' bouquet of red roses imaginable. Drb could go up on the stage to present them to her, on our behalf!!!!!

[Andre Yew]

Hi Andre, and welcome to NY! I'll be there tonight and would love to say hello. I think that pretty much all of the ballet goers I know are planning to be there tonight ,too. There isn't any one central meeting place at City Center, but sometimes some of us meet in the outer lobby (by the ticket windows). Why don't we all meet there during the first intermission? It will be nice to see you again.

That sounds like a plan. It'll be good to see you again, and meet everyone else, too. I'll be wearing a gray suit, pink shirt, and a dark tie with white dots, perhaps looking a little lost.

--Andre

[SanderO]

Catherine,

Your post describes precisely the conversation I had with the two Russians. I am not sure of their history in St Petersburg, but you pretty much nailed how they described the difference between then and now.

I was very impressed with the two performances I saw, but have little frame of reference and virtually all my ballet attendance has been to American companies in NYC. These two made it seem that there was much concern that the Kirov is slipping away from what it was and this was not a good thing.

Ballet and Opera are like antiques in a sense. They can be preserved history performed in the present. But they also can be and often are re interpreted for any number of reasons for todays theaters and audiences and come out only with a resemblance to what they were like when they were first performed.

Since I wasn't alive in the 19th century I don't know what they were like, I can be fooled with some productions and not with others. I would like to have the ability to see both - the real deal antiques and the newer interpretations, but with a clear presentation by the company of what they are doing.

Just for the record, Kondaurova is a natural redhead. She rinses the color lighter/darker but it's always some shade of red. When she premiered the Glass Heart here (March 6) and danced in numerous Swan Lakes, her hair was darker red (hairspray/wetter hair = darker look). No one in the company wears wigs for Forsythe.

SanderO, you asked what the Kirov used to be. While I don't know that the New York immigrants you met were necessarily uhm, cultivated enough to comment, they may be, if they were avid balletomanes and lived here in St. Petersburg, which was Leningrad, at any point before 1990, esp in the 70s or during the Vinogradov era. But the comments they made do ring true to a great extent, mostly for ballerinas like Somova and Vishneva who are intent on capitalizing on the showmanship aspect of the Kirov, but do not by any means epitomize or exemplify Vaganova technique. What do I mean by that. Vishneva dances in nearly every leading ballet theater in the world -- guest artist at ABT, at the Bolshoi, touring her own show, Beauty in Motion, and before that, Kings of the Dance, the list goes on. I recently posted on Criticaldance the results of yesterday's press conference with Gergiev in which he commented that, if Vishneva was only performing one time per year at the Mariinsky Theatre, she was not technically a prima of the Mariinsky. A prima perhaps, but not of THIS theatre if she doésnt perform here. I know many people who agree with the assertion as well that she is not really a Russian ballerina in terms of plastique or expression. Her on stage persona is very much American, if you will, very dramatic, very Broadway-esque. This attracts crowds, but it isn't the Russian "way". Somova, is another but much poorer (or much stronger, however you like it) example, for her uber high extensions and lack of artistry, lack of restraint. The ballerinas of the Kirov in the past were known for portraying more artistry, more discipline, more strength, more tasteful dramatism. It wasn't about high legs and flashy jumps. It wasn't about how many foreign tours you could go on with other companies, it wasn't about making more money. It was about the history, the tradition, the style. The corps de ballet of the Kirov remains the best in the world. (Gergiev agrees with me on that :-)). But the upper layers of the Kirov have few traditional ballerinas left. Lopatkina is considered, by locals, to be the great traditionalist in this theatre. Tereshkina, technically, is following in her footsteps although the two are dramatically very very different. Some other old school Kirov types who aren't yet off the roster: Tarasova, Zhelonkina (who just performed here Wednesday night in La Sylphide). Obratsova is also very traditionally Kirov-esque. They are easy to pick out but it is hard to pinpoint the quality. It is sort of a technical perfection plus a well researched dramatic approach that never goes overboard, and is never done for kicks, is never done to the extreme. It's the confidence the viewer has that there will be no mishaps or no missteps, that the 32 fouettes will be polished and even, not bouncing, that she will finish them, not wimp out. It's the feeling the spectators come away with at the end of "Giselle", perhaps a tear or two if done correctly. It is hard to put this into words if you didn't see the Kirov in the 70s or 80s --or if you have grown up on a steady diet of American ballet only -- but suffice it to say that "democracy" isn't always good for classical traditions. Anywhere. I guess that is one way of putting it.

[Helene]

The All-Balanchine program tonight was a very mixed bill, some odd, some strange, and some wonderful.

For me, the performance of "Serenade" was like watching and listening to the ballet through a distorted mirror. The tempo was slow, and sometimes slowed down even further, as if the reel-to-reel tape was stretched in places. There was some odd phasing, both by the soloists and corps members, where the steps seemed to be done a beat early or late.

That said, this is a corps that knows what 45 degrees is and what 90 degrees is. They know the difference between 45 and 50 degrees and 90 and 95 degrees, and they perform whatever they need to, whether from stillness or in motion, with little fluctuation among them. So close (from the grand tier -- I really lucked out) it was easier to see them working for it, especially on a still unfamiliar stage (for this ballet) at the end of a long run with continuously challenging programs, and with some of the corps in the first movement pushed into the wings for lack of space. I couldn't hear a sound in any of the dancers shoes. In fact, the only sound I heard was in "Ballet Imperial" when the entire company danced together and landed from a jump.

After all I've read about and seen of Somova on You Tube, I wasn't expecting a lyrical, musical dancer, but that's what she was as Waltz Girl. Unfortunately, she showed Valentina Kozlova's tendency to emote more and more the more confident she got; there was even a flirtation going on with Danila Korsuntsev. This was a shame, because until then she was simply radiant, and that is all the part needs. I think she is a very talented soloist who has been pushed beyond her expressive means. (Most major companies seem to want to create instant stars, prodigies out of the schools, but manufacturing them is rarely productive.) But "Serenade" shows that she's not uncoachable and can be quite lovely on the opposite spectrum from acrobatics. Did I mention she is gorgeous? I've never seen a photo of her that's done her face justice. With the Patrick Dempsey looking (but cuter), Korsuntsev, she could star in a Disney movie.

Korsuntsev had an awkward moment where he entered the end of the first movement early, and made a mini-ballet out of a long arm gesture to the side until he captured Somova on the big chord. He handled it with aplomb, and was a gallant partner. Alexander Sergeev had a rocky night partnering as the man who's led by the Dark Angel; he got Ekaterina Kondaurova's 's tulle skirt in a tangle, and the turning arabesque got jammed at one point. Bravo to Kondaurova for saving the balance. I thought she was very fine in the role, but I would have switched the casting and put her in the Russian Girl role, with Osmolkina as Dark Angel. Osmolkina was a bit light in the Russian, but what beats she has. Kondaurova could have done any of the roles.

Before "Rubies," there was an announcement that Diana Vishneva would be replaced by Olesia Novikova, to the groans of many in the audience. Novikova reminded me of Kay Mazzo in the role, and it couldn't have been easy replacing the adopted, home company star. I quite liked her performance; she had spark. Her partner was Andrian Fadeev. He's a very nice dancer, but had the tendency to emphasize the more posey movements, which a Balanchine-trained dancer would dance through without emphasis, leaving the resonance of the image behind.

The star of "Rubies" was Ekaterina Kondaurova as the Tall Girl. I was taken with her need to move and claim the space, to use extension as an element of phrasing, not as a general MO, and for a certain type of satisfaction she showed in dancing the role. Her face is like a cross between Karin von Aroldingen's and Maria Calegari's, and her facial expression showed a love of a challenge, especially when taking on the four corps men, who didn't stand a chance. I would love to see what she would do with the Bransle Gay in "Agon."

The only reason I have mixed feelings about "Ballet Imperial" is because there was far too much acting between Viktoria Tersehkina and Igor Kolb during the first movement in particular. The ballet doesn't need it. The pure attitude she showed with her walk around her subjects, making it clear who was imperial, would have been enough. When Tereshkina just danced, she took my breath away with her generous phrasing, musicality, and prodigious technique. Her partner, Igor Kolb, resembled a longshoreman more than a cavalier when he ran her in on his shoulder twice during the last movement, and he had some problems with his solos, but I watched him carefully as he partnered Tereshkina in the long pas de deux, and I think that was key to why I found it so successful and satisfying: he supported her with a little grip as possible -- gently on the wrist here, softly at the waist there -- and he let go as soon as he could, as if she melted away from his touch, which gave her a great deal of freedom. It was quite masterful of him, and for me the pas de deux was the highlight of the ballet, which made the issues in the third movement jarring.

I liked the corps in the ballet: there was a lot of energy, and even a few not-quite-perfect lines and a few legs raised at slightly different angles during the speedy weight shifts, but the energy and the dynamics they showed were worth it. There is a young dancer in the corps, Sergei Popov, who partnered Ryu Ji Yeon in "Approxiamate Sonata" last night and who stands out because of his his height, his physical beauty, and his uncanny 1980's Peter Martins haircut. He caught my eye, and I followed him in the group work and was very impressed by his deep knee bend, finished movement, and careful partnering.

For me, the second soloist is the role in which an up-and-coming young soloist comes in and through eating space, demands the next challenge and is compared to the lead, like Melinda Roy and Ashley Bouder, just to name two, did in the past. Ekaterina Osmolkina danced the role, and was lovely, but she didn't need any more than a small garden. Yana Selina as one of the two demis showed more spark; I would have liked to see her in the role. There were two male soloists as well. They were listed in the program as Vladimir Shklyarov and Maxim Zyuzin, but I could have sworn that Alexander Sergeev was back. Whoever the darker-haired, more muscular dancer was, I was very impressed by his line, his plush plies, and his springy jumps.

It was celebrity time at City Center, and, naturally, I recognized almost no one. If carbro hadn't pointed out people, I would have classified them in a general mass called "must be a dancer." The exception was when I was in my seat wondering what was going to happen with the empty six seats in row A, four well-heeled-looking people showed up and took their seats. One of the women kept saying loudly, "I wonder where Darci and Peter are?" and asking the men to move down so that "Darci and Peter can sit in the middle." This went over my head at least a half dozen times until the big "Doh" realization, and I suddenly got whom they were talking about. My first thought was, "No!!! Don't move!!!" because the rather tall man in front of me had assumed his good neighbor slouch position, and I could see perfectly, and Peter Martins -- who has a portrait in a closet somewhere, by the way, because he isn't looking any older -- is too tall, and he has a dancer's' posture. (Luckily, no one moved.)

It was great to meet so many Ballet Talkers during intermissions: rg -- thanks to carbro -- whom I also met in person for the first time, Michael, Adam, Andre Yew, nysusan, YID, oberon. And to see Leigh Witchel again. I apologize if I've forgotten anyone.

[Andre Yew]

It was really nice to see lots of BTers there, too. I'm just sorry we couldn't have spent more time together as everyone had so much to say.

The Balanchine program was pretty good, and very beautiful in that Kirovian way for many parts. The stuff that was best were things that suited them: Serenade and Ballet Imperial. They looked a little goofy and awkward in Rubies, as they were trying too hard to do many of the non-classical moves --- the hip swings, the flexed feet, etc. They didn't look all too comfortable with it --- I think I even prefer LAB's for the main roles!

Serenade was pretty slow, and some people were complaining about that, but it was really beautiful. The Dark Angel (Kondaurova) and Russian girl (Osmolkina) were amazing --- it was basically their show. Somova was the waltz girl, and she was OK if a bit airheaded: too bubbly and too many smiles, and basically too blond. If you can imagine Legally Blond as a ballet, you'd have her pinned. The corps was amazing, and the quality of the movement really brings something to Serenade.

Same comments for Ballet Imperial. We got Tereshkina as the main girl and Osmolkina was the soloist. Very beautiful corps work and arms and back. It was often breathtaking especially the adagio parts.

Kondaurova was the tall girl for Rubies, but we had a last minute sub for Vishneva with Novikova because Vishneva apparently tweaked her foot. This was not announced to the audience until after the intermission, though it was known before the show started. Lots of disappointment and some booing --- not the best way to treat your audience, I think. I didn't mind as I've never seen Novikova in a big role before. She did a fine job, even if it was a bit anonymous. Strong corps and technique, but it was kind of awkward all around. Kondaurova vamped quite a bit, which I liked, but other people didn't. I had never seen the tall girl have a relationship with the main girl until last night.

Lots of ballet celebrities there last night (Martins, Kistler, Hallberg, etc.). Half of NYCB must have been there --- I have to give props to the Kirov for bringing Balanchine to New York, and I think they showed them a thing or two about how it could be performed, even if it's totally different than American interpretations.

That stage is tiny: dancers were upstaging each other and ocassionally bumping into each other.

--Andre

[Catherine]

I wish that we, the fans in the USA, could crown her The American People's Choice. Maybe we should all pool our resources and buy her the biggest freakin' bouquet of red roses imaginable. Drb could go up on the stage to present them to her, on our behalf!!!!!

Now THAT is the finest idea I've heard in a long time! :-) I would chip in, just let me know how! :-)

SanderO - I have heard lots of people claim this, but I was thinking about this last night and I wanted to add something.

Despite all the naysayers, I still think the Kirov is the finest company in the world for their corps de ballet in any sense of the word. I also think their soloists (second, first, coryphees) are among the finest in the world. I think that *as a whole*, aside from Paris Opera and the Bolshoi, they probably have the most coherency in terms of being a strong company at many levels.

I first saw the Kirov in 1989 as a teenager. I was blown away. There were no dancers in the US at that time who danced the way they did. Amazingly clean technique. Amazing displays of dramatism. I grew up seeing San Francisco Ballet and ABT. As a point of comparison now, I cannot for the life of me understand the current press about SFB. The level of technique in their dancers is extremely *EXTREMELY* low compared to the Kirov. There is no uniformity. There are not even uniform body types. Some people say that is what makes America great. Personally, when I see Swan Lake, I don't want to see 32 short/tall, fat/thin Swans. I want a uniform look. That's what it's about. This is an art, and art is not an equal opportunity employer, it is about talent. And not everyone has talent. I use this as an example based on what is in the press about the company -- it has been touted as high level, the best or one of the best America has to offer. It got rave reviews for the Paris tour. But I was aghast when I saw them in February -- Balanchine's Divertimento, and Possokhov's "Firebird" with Morris' Drink to Me in between. Aside from two *RUSSIAN* dancers, (Gennady N. (whose last name I always butcher), trained at the Kirov mind you, and the newest addition, Maria Kotchetkova from the BOlshoi) there is no one I would pay to see dance in that company any more. I think general impressions and comparisons are worth alot when you're trying to figure out comments such as those that the Russian New Yorkers made. We have to take them with a grain of salt and then evaluate them based on facts and experience, and what we've seen.

You see the Kirov go on stage in any ballet and they can dance RINGS around any American company. Their Balanchine is different than NYCB but it is clean and precise and lyrical. They look GOOD in it. Just as they look GOOD in Petipa. Heck...they look good in almost anything bc they are chosen from thousands of aspiring young girls and they train at the prestigious Vaganova Academy where girls are eliminated repeatedly before they even graduate. The system is tight. The dancers they produce are awesome because of the system they all go through.

So have their standards lowered in recent decades? Are they not what they once were? Maybe. Maybe it's only at the upper levels. Maybe the era of Terekhova/Pankova/Lezhnina/Chistiakova/Asylmuratova was a high point in the company's history. But maybe time warps perspective. I have only current performances to compare to each other, or those I saw as a teenager/young girl growing up. I STILL think the Kirov is a great company. I still think they're better, for example, than any American company at present time (personal opinion). So if they have diminished in quality in the past 20 yrs, ...hard to say. But compared to what else is out there... I still think they are among the best in the world. You will see sparks of genius and amazing talent in this company that I'm not sure you will see other places. That's, I guess what I'm getting at. So, in defense of the Kirov, I raise my glass :-).

[Catherine]

p.s. Note to Helene - both Shklyarov and Zuizin, strangely, have similar physiques: both have lots of leg muscles, and very spongey plies, and great archy feet; although Schklyarov arguably has more of the leg muscle, he simply has been dancing on stage more often in more roles. Of late Zuizin has been wearing his hair longer in the back; Shklyarov's is less long and is darker. Zuizin's hair is essentially dark blonde though. In case that helps clarify who you saw!

p.s. to Andre Yew -

Somova was the waltz girl, and she was OK if a bit airheaded: too bubbly and too many smiles, and basically too blond. If you can imagine Legally Blond as a ballet, you'd have her pinned.

LOL. Yes, I can imagine. I have imagined; and have seen. Well put! :-)

[Helene]

When I see "Swan Lake" I want to see 32 swans who can move and mirror a similar quality of movement, and I don't care what their composite of body types is. In fact, I wondered when the curtain came up on the corps in "Serenade" whether these were truly dancers from the Kirov, because there were so many body shapes among them, unlike the corps the Bolshoi brought to the US a few years ago for "Don Quixote."

[Andre Yew]

LOL. Yes, I can imagine. I have imagined; and have seen. Well put! :-)

Leigh came up with the blond analogy --- I'm just riffing on it.

I disagree with you about SFB, but perhaps that's because I just saw them do Eden/Eden, which suits their strengths and hides their weaknesses better than the classical rep. They have more stylistic unity than almost any other American company except maybe NYCB, but that's not saying much I suppose.

I also just saw ABT do Swan Lake in Los Angeles. It was pretty awful --- except for Hallberg, they were all on cruise control, and the corps were literally all over the place. Judging from the comments here, they must have some kind of Jekyll and Hyde syndrome when they're on tour. The Perm Ballet's performance the following week was so much better. At this point, I'm not sure any American company can do justice to the classical rep.

--Andre

[Leigh Witchel]

LOL. Yes, I can imagine. I have imagined; and have seen. Well put! :-)

Leigh came up with the blond analogy --- I'm just riffing on it.

I did? It's really scary when you don't remember your intermission jokes.

I'm working on my piece for Danceview Times (actually, I'm in the office trying to get all real life work out of the way before I can write that piece before I can go to London )

I can't say I was thrilled with the Kirov in Balanchine, but I'll explain further in the piece proper. There were times when their "accent" illuminated the choreography (Ballet Imperial in particular), but mostly not.

Some liked the tempos. It sounded to me like the orchestra was playing inside a vat of Marshmallow Fluff.

[Natalia]

I'm baaack in the Big Apple for the three final performances of this run of the Kirov at City Center. I'm in between the Saturday performances and wanted to offer some quick takes on today's matinee.

In general terms, it was a mixed performance, with the ballet that is my least favorite among the three -- Serenade -- being the most positive surprise. Rubies was fine, with the surprise-substitute for Tereshkina -- Olesya Novikova -- especially dazzling. My absolute-favorite Balanchine from the Kirov rep, Ballet Imperial, was disappointing on many counts (not one but two mediocre-yet-laughably-caricaturish female soloists) BUT was salvaged by the elegance, elevation and excitement of my new True Prince of the Kirov: Vladimir Schklyarov! As always, the corps de ballet did a laudable job and was not to blame for general failures.

General Complaint: She may dance well but... Am I alone in thinking that we're getting just a bit too much of the Kirov's Maria Ricetto Clone, Nadezhda Gonchar? Not only did we get her in the scheduled first two ballets ('Russian Girl' in Serenade; 'Tall Girl' in Rubies)...but she was the UNANNOUNCED Second-Lead ballerina in Ballet Imperial (in place of Novikova).

SERENADE took the cake thanks to the Two Katias -- divine angelic Ekaterina Osmolkina as the lead Valse Girl (the epitome of the perfect Kirov ballerina in the classic sense...princess-gorgeous face & elegant proportions), as well as OUR GAL "Big Red" Ekaterina Kondaurova as the Dark Angel. The corps was especially brilliant in this work -- they did the 'peeling off wave' line like modern wilis...surely Balanchine was thnking of Giselle with this move? Alexander Sergeev was a steady cavalier -- twirling Big Red's arabesque and causing applause! -- in the Elegie. In the Waltz, Yevgeni Ivanchenko looked as streamlined as I've seen him in ten years; good for him.

RUBIES sizzled thanks to Novikova, although I'm sorry to have missed Tereshkina in this. Her main-man was Anton Korsakov, as peppy as I've ever seen him perform...yes, we even saw his teeth flash a couple of times. It was a joy seeing him 'get into it.' Super-kudos to the four demi-solo men, who danced added so much energy to the work: Anton Pimonoc, Maxim Khrebtov, Vasily Scherbakov and one of my personal 'hearthrobs,' Alexei Nedviga. I would think that New Yorkers may think that the Kirov is a bit too prim-and-proper and not jazzy enough; I'm used to how the Kirov corps ladies do this, so it did not bother me as much as it would the NYCB faithful. Gonchar went through the motions as the Tall Girl; if she replaces Kondaurova tomorrow afternoon in this role, I'll commit Hari-Kari.

BALLET IMPERIAL - I've seen the Kirov dance this 100-times better during the first couple of years since acquiring it. Even the corps was a tad ragged...must be the end-of-tour blues. As mentioned above, Vladimir Schklyarov could do not wrong for me or many, MANY other audience members who applauded him like crazy whenever possible. Sky-high entrechats! Spot-on turns! Incredible grands-jetes! Unreal natural charisma -- he is a Rock Star. Decent partnering of a renegade, wild ballerina...who almost caused him to go crashing into the wings at one point. Schklyarov is my A-#1 King of the Kirov these days. Alina Somova did her own loose-hipped thing, pulling off a few tricks and flubbing the rest. Worst of all, though, is her general look. Sorry, but I cannot like (let alone love) a ballerina with two-toned hair and Vampirella make-up that is ideal for a black-haired woman (dark brows and blood-red lips). It just adds to the general grotesqueness. Gonchar made it three-for-three mediocre turns this afternoon. Why the heck is the company promoting the Russian Ricetto? We're getting her at least twice tonight...but how much do ya wanna bet that she'll substitute 2nd Lead in Ballet Imperial again? The two demi girls were the still-energetic Yana Selina and a somewhat lackluster (tired-looking) Svetlana Ivanova. Maxim Zuizin and Alexander Sergeev were the demi-gents.

p.s. I have a new pet phrase: Whenever the playbill lies and we get Gonchar instead of anyone else, it's as if the company is telling us "GOTCHA!!!"...but instead says "GONCHAR!"

[Petite_Arabesque]

Natalia-You are NOT alone! I saw the Saturday matinee as well and although Gonchar dances cleanly, she just doesn't do it for me. I can't quite put my finger on it but there is just something very off-putting about her stage presence.

Serenade-I was a bit shocked at the variety of body types on stage. I'm not saying it is a bad thing but this being my first time seeing the Kirov, I was expecting a little more uniformity. Having said this, the costumes are NOT supportive enough. The "bouncing" of the more well-endowing ladies was, for me, very distracting. Surely there is SOMETHING that can be done about it. Osmolkina was lovely as the waltz girl, beautiful on stage but not overbearing or fake. "Big Red" Kondurova was very well suited to the dark angel part in my opinion. Her arms are beautiful!

Rubies-My favorite of the afternoon by far! Novikova (replacing Tereshkina, although the announcement was that she was replacing Vishneva which confused many around me haha as she was not slated to dance at all) was absolutely breathtaking. Smooth movements and an ease onstage which was nice to see, and was actually quite noticeable next to Gonchar who looked very severe and intimidating. Novikova has great facility and extension, but uses it quite tastefully IMO. Though the extensions were high they did not distort her whole body; I would love to see more of her. I do have a question though: are costumes for Rubies usually loud? Because the noise from the skirts was audible in the mid-mezzanine; it was a little strange and distracting. Other than that I thought this was a great piece. Bummed that I didn't get to see Tereshkina but Novikova was a welcome surprise.

Ballet Imperial-Somewhat weak, in my opinion, with the exception of Vladimir Schklyarov who really stole the show for me. His dancing is very clean and accurate but without losing his manliness. Somova was ok althoguh there were some funky things going on with her hands that bothered me the whole time. They were splayed and I was half-scared that she would claw someone's eyes out. The corps was pretty sad looking, and shockingly their arms were terrible at points. The best description would definitely be bedraggled.

I really think there should be a mandatory "How To Act at the Ballet" course for audience members. The people around me were terribly rude, worse than I can ever recall before. People took flash photos, not only during intermission and curtain calls (which is bad enough), but while the dancers were performing! How anyone can consider that appropriate behavior is beyond me. It was so bad that they had to make ANOTHER announcement about how photography is prohibited before the third act. As well, a couple behind me we snickering literally the ENTIRE performance. Why come to the ballet if you're just going to laugh at it?? There was nothing funny about what was happening on stage. In my opinion, almost nothing can ruin a perfectly good afternoon at the ballet like rude audience members.

[drb]

Saturday evening, April 19, 2008

Souls Dancing

TPC2

The Lopatkina/Zelensky pairing created immense anticipation, what with the two being seen as top competitors for a certain prestigious position! And Fate tossed so many strikes against them: her shoes terribly squeaky till late first act, and his through act two. Lots of squeaking by the corp, too. And incredibly ugly lipstick applied to Igor. Also, last night Viktoria Tereshkina had given an exhibition of perfect dancing by a perfect body. Admittedly she danced much of the time with the same monotone smile (but in the second movement's holy PdD she was moving); still, "just do the steps" when danced as she did was awesomely enough.

Uliana comes out with a defiant look, plenty of authority. Later, Igor has entered and she comes back on stage, approaching him. There is a look of deep affection on her face, and as she's reached him there is a something-else from within that seems to continue flowing toward him. They are gravely serious, yet also happy, and seem very close. The point (repeated) where she moves away, her back toward him, one feels her attention is still on him, something emanating from her back. In her solo that ends the first movement she looks very happy, signs of that opening night surprise. (This happiness she shows: I've read last month's in-depth interview* in Expert, where she goes deeply, philosophically, into happiness, and tells how she'd never known it till being taught by her little girl.) Zelensky still showed some of his old NYCB virtuosity, watching through the squeaks...

Then the holy second movement. And my favorite moment inTPC2: Lopatkina enters from stage rear left, moves toward rear middle, a grave, deeply sorrowful look, and then she approaches Zelensky through the parting corps. There were hardly bodies dancing, perhaps just two souls... and as she took her leave you knew she didn't want to, there was some force pulling her back and away, and her helplessness was... Well, this was not the emotionless ballerina one reads about, just maybe The Soul of Russia.

In the third movement, somehow all was made right. Uliana Lopatkina was an explosion of Radiance. Huge ovations, followed by many curtain calls.

Serenade again lost so much (to NY eyes) with the very slow music. But where Friday night Kondaurova's Dark Angel stole the show and applause, tonight she was the lead, called Walse in the program. As Helene said of Friday's performance, Ekaterina could dance any of the roles. Currently NYCB delivers an incomparable Russian/Angel pair in Bouder/Mearns, but suffers terribly by miscasting Waltz. If only Kondaurova were here! By now it looks like she can do everything. And does, each time I've seen her. She towered (not a height comment) over this production, and I cannot honestly recall her superior, since of course the incomparable Farrell.

Yet again Olesia Novikova was called in for Rubies rescue. Friday night she was up against Kondaurova, Ekaterina's monumental sequence of penchees, and grasp that this is a SEXY ballet. That sexy aspect was missing from Novikova. This time her partner was Sarafanov, and did he ever get it! Such a wonderful playfulness, and the choreography flowed as something purely natural for two playful youngsters going for nature's next level of play. From Olesia, some hints of McBride, from Leonid, joyous, unforced virtuosity. Still, perhaps also tempo, not what NYCB can do, IF they've been given rehearsal time and pro-Balanchine casting.

* http://www.expert.ru/printissues/northwest...view_lopatkina/

[cubanmiamiboy]

I do have a question though: are costumes for Rubies usually loud? Because the noise from the skirts was audible in the mid-mezzanine; it was a little strange and distracting.

Welcome to my boat Petite Arabesque. Now i know that i'm not insane. The lovely Karinska costumes ARE certainly loud. This is my first impression when i saw the ballet for the first time.

One thing...the loose jeweled waistline pieces of the tutus looked heavy, and were noisy during sautees and jetees

I really think there should be a mandatory "How To Act at the Ballet" course for audience members. The people around me were terribly rude, worse than I can ever recall before. People took flash photos, not only during intermission and curtain calls (which is bad enough), but while the dancers were performing! How anyone can consider that appropriate behavior is beyond me. It was so bad that they had to make ANOTHER announcement about how photography is prohibited before the third act. As well, a couple behind me we snickering literally the ENTIRE performance. Why come to the ballet if you're just going to laugh at it?? There was nothing funny about what was happening on stage. In my opinion, almost nothing can ruin a perfectly good afternoon at the ballet like rude audience members.

I used to have a fried in Havana who was the personification of intolerance. One night he was so fed up with the laughing of some ladies in front of him that he suddenly grabbed their long ponytail and pulled it down really hard while shshshs!! them, all that while showing the most horrible of his faces if they would dare to turn around. Well, they didn't, and silence reigned for the rest of the performance. He,he,

[Waelsung]

Saturday evening, April 19, 2008

An absolutely out-of-this-world Serenade, incredibly boring (despite Sarafanov) Rubies and technically imperfect and problems-ridden Imperial that gave me goose bumps. Was this the last time we saw Lopatkina and Zelensky on stage together? Their parting was heart breaking - I felt like it was me who lost her.

Kondaurova is the revelation of this tour, though. When Lopatkina retires she's going to be the best ballerina in the world.

Everything IMHO, of course:)

[nysusan]

I'm going to jump on the bandwagon with Natalia & Petite Arabesque – Shklyarov was the highlight of the afternoon for me, what a wonderful dancer. In addition to the virtuosity and soft cushy landings, he was so poetic! About halfway through Ballet Imperial I was wishing he'd been cast in last week's Chopiniana.

I saw Novikova in Rubies on Friday night & at the Sat matinee. Found her dancing very strong but she was too sweet for me, no sexiness or sass and no chemistry with either Fadeev or Korsakov. And of course no one on stage had the edge & syncopation, the Balanchinian articulation of the pelvis that gives Rubies its iconic look & feel. During the first intermission I joked that if she subbed in again I was going to scream – and then of course she did. Except instead of screaming I was delighted. She & Sarafanov have such great chemistry, they really played off each other and found the balance of flirtatiousness and competitiveness that this needs. And yes, drb – all of a sudden she was sweet & sexy, all at the same time. Bravo Olesia. And, by the way, Sarafanov was amazing. He is the only one of the 3 Rubies leading men I've seen so far who really gets it.

I've seen better performances of Ballet Imperial – after the incredible performance from Tereshkina & Kolb on the first night of the program these last 2 have been let downs, but it's still a privilege to see Lopatkina & Zelensky. As drb & Waelsung described, they are a wonder to behold – goosebump inducing even when they're not at their best.

I loved Osmolkina's waltz Girl and Konduarova's brilliant dark angel this afternoon, but the more I see the Kirov's Serenade the less I'm liking it. Too many little details out of place for me. Yet it has the flow and musical impulse it needs and this is one ballet I enjoy even when it isn't performed exactly the way I think it should be. Kondaurova's waltz girl in the evening perfomance was monumental - but to me this is an ensemble work & she was overpowing - the other 2 female soloists faded completely into the background. I'd LOVE to see her cast with Bouder/Mearns or Kowroski - can we start an email campaign? NYCB does bring in guest artists from time to time...anyway, one can dream!