vipa Posted September 24, 2021 Share Posted September 24, 2021 On 3/4/2021 at 11:14 AM, cobweb said: And yet, I still found her radiant enough that I was irresistibly drawn to see her in the role again. I too was drawn to her radiance as Aurora, and because the role was right for her in so many ways, I hoped she would grow stronger in the technical aspects. As others have said, she was warm, lovely and brought a special beauty to many other roles. On the other hand she was sometimes cast in roles, Odette/Odile for example, that were way, way beyond her technical limitations. A mistake on management's part IMO. I wish her well as a choreographer, and hope some of her works having staying power. Link to comment
GB1216 Posted January 17, 2022 Share Posted January 17, 2022 Lauren did an interview with fjord review discussing her departure from nycb. Very interesting as it seems that she didn’t have a great experience with the new administration. Also discusses her SL a bit that it was PM that wanted her in it. I’m kind of surprised she’s coming out now with this information - what’s the point since she’s moving on in a new direction? Link to comment
Helene Posted January 17, 2022 Share Posted January 17, 2022 Whenever any dancer leaves a company, people want to know why, but when a younger dancer leaves a major company to become a choreographer when they could have many years of dancing left, people are a lot more curious; Harss' interview was a chance to answer questions. As for why she might be forthcoming now about any of her experiences, whether or not it's one of her reasons, because she can. That's what Villella, Kent, Tallchief, d'Amboise and other dancers have done in their memoirs, when they didn't say it to the NYT at the time. Link to comment
FPF Posted January 17, 2022 Share Posted January 17, 2022 What really surprised me in that interview, and what I suspect was the major reason she decided to leave, was that she said that the leadership had indicated that they weren't interested in her choreographing another ballet for NYCB. Her NYCB ballets were well-received and she's gotten commissions from other companies that were also well-received, so it seems odd that they weren't interested in supporting her future work, especially considering all the lip service paid to supporting female choreographers. Link to comment
abatt Posted January 17, 2022 Share Posted January 17, 2022 Certain people who were getting commissions under Martins are not getting commissions anymore, such as Lovette and Troy Schumacher. They are increasingly going to choreographers who are established in modern dance circles but who have no foundation in ballet. I had heard that Martins had control over the lead casting in his SL even after his departure, and I guess Lauren now confirms that info. Link to comment
Helene Posted January 17, 2022 Share Posted January 17, 2022 Choreographers or their surrogates often have influence, if not direct approval say, over the casting in their ballets through contract period of their ballets, regardless of their relationship with the company. I haven't seen any official news about the contractual terms of Martins ballets that he made for NYCB, and if there's any difference between before he became BMiC/BM, while he was, or after he'd left. Link to comment
BalanchineFan Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 Lauren Lovette is just so interesting. I enjoyed the interview. I'm not sure I've ever heard a ballerina say she wanted to choreograph equally with dancing. That seems unusual to me. Even that she ever thought of choreography. Perhaps it's my own prejudice or ignorance showing. My image is of young women in ballet being much too tired and obsessed with dancing to think about choreography. I also tend to think of them as unaware of the possibility of choreography, https://fjordreview.com/lauren-lovette-moving-forward/ I also think it's an interesting comment on mental health, or confidence. It would be difficult to rehearse a new role and not know that you'd be cast until 2 weeks prior. That is typical NYCB procedure, but as a performer I would have to talk myself through that one. At a certain point I think it's best to decide that you don't care about the outcome. You're rehearsing because you love the role, the music, choreography, the opportunity (whatever it is for you). You're rehearsing for yourself, for your own pleasure and growth and to see for yourself what you can do with it. Then let the chips fall where they may. It sounds like something for Megan Fairchild's book, Ballerina Mindset. Have any of you ever been through a similar situation? How did you deal with it? Link to comment
Helene Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 One thing I've noticed in my not-statistically significant observation is that there seem to be a lot of male choreographers in the soloist ranks. In a company like NYCB, countless dancers have described how when they were in the corps, they were working constantly, but when then became Soloists, they had to learn to keep themselves in shape and pace themselves, because they suddently had far less work. (This doesn't count the few dancers who blazed through the ranks and were dancing and/or learning Principal roles straight through.) That certainly left time for choreography. That wasn't exclusively the case: Helgi Tomasson choreographed for NYC, Yuri Possokhov choreographed for San Francisco Ballet, and Olivier Wevers choreographed for PNB, just as examples, all as Principal Dancers. At PNB, it feels like for most of the male Soloists who've come through the ranks, choreographing for Professional Division students and then for PNB on the main stage is a rite of passage, which Kyle Davis did along the way to becoming a Principal Dancer. Link to comment
BalanchineFan Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 (edited) 13 hours ago, Helene said: One thing I've noticed in my not-statistically significant observation is that there seem to be a lot of male choreographers in the soloist ranks. In a company like NYCB, countless dancers have described how when they were in the corps, they were working constantly, but when then became Soloists, they had to learn to keep themselves in shape and pace themselves, because they suddently had far less work. (This doesn't count the few dancers who blazed through the ranks and were dancing and/or learning Principal roles straight through.) That certainly left time for choreography. That wasn't exclusively the case: Helgi Tomasson choreographed for NYC, Yuri Possokhov choreographed for San Francisco Ballet, and Olivier Wevers choreographed for PNB, just as examples, all as Principal Dancers. At PNB, it feels like for most of the male Soloists who've come through the ranks, choreographing for Professional Division students and then for PNB on the main stage is a rite of passage, which Kyle Davis did along the way to becoming a Principal Dancer. Lourdez Lopez talked about this phenomenon to the NY Times. She said that the women in the corps of any ballet company are busier than the men. Women are all needed for Swan Lake, for Serenade (in Balanchine based companies) for Snow and Flowers (in Nutcracker) all pieces that use the men's corps much less. Men have time to choreograph, she said. Women don't. Edited January 19, 2022 by BalanchineFan Link to comment
canbelto Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 When new leadership comes in there's always an adjustment period for dancers. New people in charge, they want different things than old leadership. It kind of sounds like Lovette had a rougher time than most adjusting. Link to comment
BalanchineFan Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 2 hours ago, BalanchineFan said: Lourdez Lopez talked about this phenomenon to the NY Times. She said that the women in the corps of any ballet company are busier than the men. Women are all needed for Swan Lake, for Serenade (in Balanchine based companies) for Snow and Flowers (in Nutcracker) all pieces that use the men's corps much less. Men have time to choreograph, she said. Women don't. Here's the link to the NY Times article quoting many ballet luminaries on why there is a dearth of women choreographers in ballet. From 2016, it quotes Peter Martins and Lauren Lovette as well. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/26/arts/dance/ballet-luminaries-weigh-in-on-a-conspicuous-absence.html?searchResultPosition=5 Link to comment
GB1216 Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 I definitely think it’s an interesting topic around NYCB and homegrown choreographic talent. Obviously Justin peck is the shining example of how it can be done when the talent and support is there. On the flip side we now have Lauren Lovette who didn’t have the support. Tiler Peck is also choreographing more at Vail and now with Boston Ballet. I wonder how things will pan out internally for the future of dancers who also want to choreograph. Link to comment
Helene Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 I really love that Woetzel and Watts have created their "lab" at Vail, supporting not only new collaborations, but also allowing the invitees to choreograph. Link to comment
MarzipanShepherdess Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 (edited) Those who miss Lauren onstage will be glad to know that she's dancing in two pieces as part of Tiler Peck's "Artists at the Center" performances at City Center in March: https://www.nycitycenter.org/pdps/2021-2022/artists-at-the-center--tiler-peck/ Edited February 9, 2022 by MarzipanShepherdess Link to comment
Recommended Posts