Spring 2015: Romeo and Juliet

[MRR]

I agree with everything MarzipanShepherdess said about Seo, although I didn't see last night's performance. On Wednesday I didn't come away thinking that I had just witnessed an earth-shattering performance or a dancer in the league of Obraztsova or Vishneva, but I found Seo's Juliet lyrical and dramatically convincing, except in the last scene. Her performance on Monday was lesser in many respects, but even that wasn't terrible. I was disappointed to miss Osipova, as I haven't seen her Juliet, but given that I have reservations to her dancing I wasn't overly disappointed about the switch or the performance.

Beyond the physical fatigue, I couldn't imagine having to go out last night when the switch was announced the day of and people in the theater were still expecting Vishneva. Add to that the tepid response from the audience and people leaving at the intermissions....these were difficult circumstances for anybody to perform in.

[Helene]

On a more global note, I'm having trouble following what the company's detractors want. I read comments that more opportunities for in-house dancers are desired. And yet, some of the biggest sellers are the guest stars, especially the Russian guest stars. You can't train the in-house dancers for these multi-acts but then turn around and say, "Oh, there's no room for you to dance these on the schedule as we have to make room for the Russian guest stars who can fill the Met. But we need you to be ready on the outside chance one of these divas cancels and we have to throw you on!" That would be as bad as the situation it would be attempting to fix.

I disagree: there are dancers who would be demoralized, and there would be dancers who would want to be ready for their Lou Gehrig moment.

Peter Boal brought in three apprentices to learn roles in PNB's all-Forsythe program this past March when only one had any reasonable chance of performing (and did) for the opportunity to be in the studio with Forsythe and his stagers, and he does this regularly. He also brings in talented dancers on the rise whom he thinks might be ready for revivals a few years down the road. For younger or less-experienced dancers at ABT, it could work the same way, philosophically. For experienced dancers, learning a new role opens more opportunities for guesting and to be ready to step in at ABT.

There are resource and logistical issues for training dancers to be ready. They don't seem to be able to coach their performing dancers all that well. In fact, along with having contract flexibility, not having to pay benefits, and their box office appeal, an advantage to guest artists is that they come pre-coached and with experience in the roles, if not the production, a turn-key solution and the reason why many businesses rely on contractors.

"Sleeping Beauty" got excellent coaching and direction because Ratmansky and his wife are hands-on with their productions and give very detailed corrections, and he knows what he wants. The rest of the rep: generally not so much.

[nanushka]

Setting aside the question of whether Sarah Lane could have danced Juliet to Marcelo's Romeo (which I'll admit is an open question), how different things would be now if Osipova's Juliet had been given to Lane a week and a half ago instead of to Hee Seo. Lane has studied the role with Ferri; she'd have had a full week to rehearse with Marcelo; Seo would have still had two Juliets this week (since she was then scheduled for Monday and Tuesday); and Lane would have been ready to step in again last night with a partner she'd already been rehearsing with. And then we'd have had another home-grown dancer with onstage experience in an important role, and less audience fatigue with an overworked principal.

Again, I acknowledge there may have been a partnering issue there. But these are the sorts of changes (even if this specific one wouldn't quite have worked) that could allow a company like ABT to weather its inevitable problems of injuries and cancellations, while balancing the costs, benefits, and needs of both guest artists and home-team dancers in an ultimately more sustainable way.

It's quite amusing to hear ABT now say that they sell performances, not performers -- when we learned from that quickly yanked YouTube video of a prominent company spokesperson that that's not at all the way they work.

[Waelsung]

If they sell performances, not performers, why does the price for same seat tickets vary from one performance of the same ballet to another?

[ABT Fan]

Setting aside the question of whether Sarah Lane could have danced Juliet to Marcelo's Romeo (which I'll admit is an open question), how different things would be now if Osipova's Juliet had been given to Lane a week and a half ago instead of to Hee Seo. Lane has studied the role with Ferri; she'd have had a full week to rehearse with Marcelo; Seo would have still had two Juliets this week (since she was then scheduled for Monday and Tuesday); and Lane would have been ready to step in again last night with a partner she'd already been rehearsing with. And then we'd have had another home-grown dancer with onstage experience in an important role, and less audience fatigue with an overworked principal.

Again, I acknowledge there may have been a partnering issue there. But these are the sorts of changes (even if this specific one wouldn't quite have worked) that could allow a company like ABT to weather its inevitable problems of injuries and cancellations, while balancing the costs, benefits, and needs of both guest artists and home-team dancers in an ultimately more sustainable way.

It's quite amusing to hear ABT now say that they sell performances, not performers -- when we learned from that quickly yanked YouTube video of a prominent company spokesperson that that's not at all the way they work.

I agree with all of this. Though we really didn't need that YT video to know they sell performers. If they didn't, they wouldn't post casting (and advertise their star guest artists) months in advance. They'd follow the City Ballet model. They must think their audience is pretty stupid.

I'd love to know what their Plan C is/would be if Seo wasn't available for all of these replacements. Heaven forbid someone else gets injured/sick for SL or Cinderella, will it be more Seo? Regardless of her ability or likability, it's a very poor business model to always rely on the same person. It goes way beyond giving a homegrown dancer another chance because other homegrown dancers should be able/prepared to step in as well.

[onxmyxtoes]

I was another one that had a ticket and just skipped out. If I had further notice I would've exchanged that ticket for something else, but instead I had to eat the $125 spent.

My reasoning was that I had a crummy day and was expecting to be moved to pieces by Vishneva and Gomes. Although I would've been moved by Seo/Gomes, it wasn't enough to justify going out the Met again. Instead I had a glass of wine and went to sleep.

[rkoretzky]

Really? Was a night at the ballet so horrifying that you were willing to throw $125 down the drain? I wish I could afford so many ballet tickets that I could just blow them off.

There was nothing in that performance that was worth seeing?

I'm reading this thread with morbid fascination. The venom thrown at certain dancers is astonishing. The demands for comp tickets/refunds because your choice isn't dancing is chutzpah to the max.

Have you ever seen an understudy at an expensive Broadway show? Have you ever had a favorite opera singer cancel? It's disappointing but it isn't a federal crime.

I think those of you who feel so entitled have the right idea for next year: wait until day of to buy your tickets.

[nanushka]

The comparison to "an expensive Broadway show" is not very apt. Many of us save up money all year and carefully choose tickets to performances during this 8-week season based on the dancers we're hoping to see. We've seen these same productions many times before -- we're not tourists coming into town for a single performance of Cats. ABT uses differential pricing because they know people are buying tickets to see specific dancers; that's their business model; they've said it themselves.

So yes, when we've already seen two or three performances of the exact same production in the same week, sometimes it does make sense just to stay home and eat the $125 or leave early rather than sit through a performance that's billed as a star vehicle when the star's not actually there.

[rkoretzky]

I'm an ABT and NYCB subscriber too. I also choose my performances carefully. I brought friends new to ABT to see David Hallberg in SL last year. Well, we got James Whiteside. It wasn't the performance I had hoped for. But it was still worthwhile and the idea of demanding a refund because Hallberg was injured....well it didn't occur to me. Just one example. We've all had those experiences.

People outside Manhattan also follow the arts in the city and I dare say many of them also save money all year to travel, often great distances, to see performances of their choice. Their wish to see certain performers in "Cats" or anything else for that matter is no less valid than yours.

[California]

Gomes is not dancing Cinderella because he's going to be dancing in a Matthew Bourne ballet in London that week.

He is doing "Car Man" at Sadler's Wells. Earlier this spring, he was apparently in London rehearsing, judging from his Instagram and Twitter accounts. I hope they find a way to bring it to City Center some day. I'd love to see it:

http://www.sadlerswells.com/whats-on/2015/matthew-bournes-the-car-man/

[RUKen]

It's quite amusing to hear ABT now say that they sell performances, not performers -- when we learned from that quickly yanked YouTube video of a prominent company spokesperson that that's not at all the way they work.

I think that the box office employees work for the Metropolitan Opera House, not ABT. If I'm correct, then their words do not necessarily reflect ABT's thinking.

[sidwich]

Have you ever seen an understudy at an expensive Broadway show? Have you ever had a favorite opera singer cancel? It's disappointing but it isn't a federal crime.

I don't know about opera, but Broadway shows overwhelmingly have the policy that when an "above the title" performer is out for the show, tickets are refunded on demand. I've also heard of shows refunding tickets when certain "below the title" performers (say, someone who has won the Tony for a performance) is out, but that's not the common policy.

I've certainly seen some fantastic performances from understudies, but I do think that policy goes a long way towards ensuring goodwill from the audience, especially considering what ticket prices are now.

[canbelto]

Well actually a few days ago Kelli O'Hara and Ruthie Ann Miles canceled a few performances of The King and I and apparently large portions of the audience walked out the minute they found out about the replacement and demanded (and were given) a refund. This happened during the performance so I can't imagine what the understudies must have felt.

[onxmyxtoes]

Did no one go to Gorak's debut? I really wanted to see him, but had tickets to 4 RJs and was feeling over loaded.

[nanushka]

I'm an ABT and NYCB subscriber too. I also choose my performances carefully. I brought friends new to ABT to see David Hallberg in SL last year. Well, we got James Whiteside. It wasn't the performance I had hoped for. But it was still worthwhile and the idea of demanding a refund because Hallberg was injured....well it didn't occur to me. Just one example. We've all had those experiences.

People outside Manhattan also follow the arts in the city and I dare say many of them also save money all year to travel, often great distances, to see performances of their choice. Their wish to see certain performers in "Cats" or anything else for that matter is no less valid than yours.

My point was not to demean Cats or "people outside Manhattan." My point was more that tourists coming to town for a Broadway show are often coming to a single performance and for the show as a whole. People going to their third performance of a ballet in a single week are often coming to see one or two specific dancers in one or two specific roles, because they've already seen the rest. And the rest often consists of third-rate music performed by a third-rate orchestra with painted-backdrop sets and lots of boring bits. That's a quite different experience than what you get on Broadway for the most part. When the stars you've come to see (and paid *extra* money to see -- because the prices are jacked up) aren't there, I don't think it's unreasonable to cut your losses and call it a night.

[rkoretzky]

I don't know about opera, but Broadway shows overwhelmingly have the policy that when an "above the title" performer is out for the show, tickets are refunded on demand. I've also heard of shows refunding tickets when certain "below the title" performers (say, someone who has won the Tony for a performance) is out, but that's not the common policy.

I've certainly seen some fantastic performances from understudies, but I do think that policy goes a long way towards ensuring goodwill from the audience, especially considering what ticket prices are now.

You might be surprised to learn that I agree. Broadway theaters have become more accommodating about refunds for "above the title" stars. However most adhere to that very strictly. We saw the understudy in "Beautiful" in September. She was very good. She was not Jessie Mueller and we didn't have the experience of seeing Jessie's Tony winning performance. Jessie's name was not above the title, there were no refunds, I was disappointed, I got over it.

We did see Kelli Ohara and Ruthie Ann Miles and their performances were incredible. I would have been very sad to miss them. Would I walk out on performers? Never.

It's not the feeling that you want to see a particular artist that I'm questioning. It's the concept that you are ENTITLED to see someone, whether that person is sick, injured or whatever....and that you must be compensated if you do not.

[Mazurka]

rkoretzky, I think a more apt analogy would be having tickets to a favorite concert pianist, whose interpretation is transfixing,

and finding out you will be listening to a pianist whose interpretation does not move you.

[canbelto]

Ok well I think an issue is that ppl who bought 4 R&J tickets don't actually like R&J the ballet. They like Ferri as Juliet, or Vishneva as Juliet. Which might be a reflection on MacMillan's choreography, or ABT's star system. I do know that when the Royal Ballet does these MacMillan warhorses the runs pretty much sell out whoever is dancing. And I think that stems from a more genuine appreciation/reverence for the ballet itself rather than the ballet as a star vehicle.

[rkoretzky]

My point was not to demean Cats or "people outside Manhattan." My point was more that tourists coming to town for a Broadway show are often coming to a single performance and for the show as a whole. People going to their third performance of a ballet in a single week are often coming to see one or two specific dancers in one or two specific roles, because they've already seen the rest. And the rest often consists of third-rate music performed by a third-rate orchestra with painted-backdrop sets and lots of boring bits. That's a quite different experience than what you get on Broadway for the most part. When the stars you've come to see (and paid *extra* money to see -- because the prices are jacked up) aren't there, I don't think it's unreasonable to cut your losses and call it a night.

Of course it's not unreasonable to cut your losses and call it a night. It's your choice. I'm just surprised that someone would pay out that kind of money in advance. You're gambling that diva x will show up, aren't you? They don't seem to have a very good track record.

And lots of tourists come to town to see specific stars. They get the word out, even in the sticks.

Re the question about opera, to my knowledge and experience there are no refunds or adjustments no matter who was scheduled versus who appears.

[nanushka]

It's not the feeling that you want to see a particular artist that I'm questioning. It's the concept that you are ENTITLED to see someone, whether that person is sick, injured or whatever....and that you must be compensated if you do not.

But you were also questioning those of us who choose to stay home or leave early and apparently don't have the proper levels of respect for the art or for the value of money to stick it out. I think your original post was painted with a very broad brush when now you're making a much finer point. I for one did not demand my money back, but I still felt implicated in what you were criticizing there.

[nanushka]

I do know that when the Royal Ballet does these MacMillan warhorses the runs pretty much sell out whoever is dancing. And I think that stems from a more genuine appreciation/reverence for the ballet itself rather than the ballet as a star vehicle.

That may be one explanation. There may be others. But it's true that R&J can get mighty tiresome at times, on a 2nd or 3rd performance, when one doesn't have the big scenes to look forward to.

[onxmyxtoes]

But you were also questioning those of us who choose to stay home or leave early and apparently don't have the proper levels of respect for the art or for the value of money to stick it out. I think your original post was painted with a very broad brush when now you're making a much finer point. I for one did not demand my money back, but I still felt implicated in what you were criticizing there.

Just to add on... I think many subscribers, like myself, take full advantage of the liberal exchange policy. In all previous cases of cast changes that were not in my favor, I've been able to exchange. This was a same-day announcement and I had to make the difficult decision to eat the cost.

[nanushka]

Ok well I think an issue is that ppl who bought 4 R&J tickets don't actually like R&J the ballet. They like Ferri as Juliet, or Vishneva as Juliet. Which might be a reflection on MacMillan's choreography, or ABT's star system. I do know that when the Royal Ballet does these MacMillan warhorses the runs pretty much sell out whoever is dancing. And I think that stems from a more genuine appreciation/reverence for the ballet itself rather than the ballet as a star vehicle.

Not necessarily -- they just don't like R&J the ballet enough to see it 4 times just on its own merit! For the 3rd or 4th, if the star's not there, it doesn't cut it. That's not necessarily a lack of reverence for the ballet itself.

[vipa]

Well actually a few days ago Kelli O'Hara and Ruthie Ann Miles canceled a few performances of The King and I and apparently large portions of the audience walked out the minute they found out about the replacement and demanded (and were given) a refund. This happened during the performance so I can't imagine what the understudies must have felt.

At least with Broadway shows covers and understudies are listed in the program.

[rkoretzky]

rkoretzky, I think a more apt analogy would be having tickets to a favorite concert pianist, whose interpretation is transfixing,

and finding out you will be listening to a pianist whose interpretation does not move you.

Why? The idea is seeing an actor who will move you is equally valid to a pianist, singer, dancer.