Tonight was high energy, reflection, and comic relief.
The evening opened with Clear featuring Xiomara Reyes and Herman Cornejo. We saw them in the pas last night, and they were wonderful. Wonderful again tonight. The two soloists were Hammoudi and Blaine Hoven. Blaine was impressive as could be. Lines, strength, guts, turns, and extraordinary flexibility. He's got it all. But his face remained the same concentrated expression throughout. He performed like it was an exam that he was determined to ace. Maybe it was.
Julie Kent was lovely and seamless in The Leaves Are Fading. Marcelo Gomes ensured that she was weightless as well. While I may pass up Julie in bravera roles, I can't think of anyone I'd rather see slowly unfurl a classical line. She is just stunningly beautiful in that respect and the two of them were tender, thoughtful lovers. Stella Abrera, partnered by Isaac Stappas, was perfume and delicacy personified. She dances the lead with Radetsky next Wednesday, and I look forward to seeing what the two of them conjure up in the way of romance and reflection.Michele Wiles and Alexandre Hammoudi repeated their pas de deux from the Gala.
Fancy Free closed the program. The men in tonight's cast (Salstein, Hallberg, and Carreno) were a stronger ensemble than last night, but the women (Murphy and Herrera) weren't as animated and sassy as Kent and Abrera were last night. Salstein was terrific in this and provoked Carreno into one of the best FF performances of his I've seen. Hallberg was super, but for a little trouble jumping over the stools and punctuating with a double tour. The stools might have been too close to the bar for those long legs of his.
Full Version: ABT City Center - Week One
Stella and Sasha should have no problem conjuring up romance and reflection since they were married last year!
Sometimes a real-life romance adds intensity to a couple's performance and sometimes it doesn't, as though the dancers are protecting something private.
QUOTE (Haglund @ Oct 25 2007, 12:15 AM) 
Tonight was high energy, reflection, and comic relief.
The evening opened with Clear featuring Xiomara Reyes and Herman Cornejo. We saw them in the pas last night, and they were wonderful. Wonderful again tonight. The two soloists were Hammoudi and Blaine Hoven. Blaine was impressive as could be. Lines, strength, guts, turns, and extraordinary flexibility. He's got it all. But his face remained the same concentrated expression throughout. He performed like it was an exam that he was determined to ace. Maybe it was.
Julie Kent was lovely and seamless in The Leaves Are Fading. Marcelo Gomes ensured that she was weightless as well. While I may pass up Julie in bravera roles, I can't think of anyone I'd rather see slowly unfurl a classical line. She is just stunningly beautiful in that respect and the two of them were tender, thoughtful lovers.
The evening opened with Clear featuring Xiomara Reyes and Herman Cornejo. We saw them in the pas last night, and they were wonderful. Wonderful again tonight. The two soloists were Hammoudi and Blaine Hoven. Blaine was impressive as could be. Lines, strength, guts, turns, and extraordinary flexibility. He's got it all. But his face remained the same concentrated expression throughout. He performed like it was an exam that he was determined to ace. Maybe it was.
Julie Kent was lovely and seamless in The Leaves Are Fading. Marcelo Gomes ensured that she was weightless as well. While I may pass up Julie in bravera roles, I can't think of anyone I'd rather see slowly unfurl a classical line. She is just stunningly beautiful in that respect and the two of them were tender, thoughtful lovers.
Cornejo was indeed wonderful - truly poetry in motion. I am increasingly amazed at the finesse of his dancing, how his strength, great jumps and (almost) perfect turns and balances never look forced but display both grace and complete control. Blaine Hoven is a recent discovery for me - I first noticed how good he was about 3 weeks ago when he and Hammoudi performed their duet from Clear at a Guggenheim's Works and Process evening. I agree, however, that his face seemed a little too concentrated last night; in addition, I would enjoy seeing him elongate his arms and neck, to lengthen his line. But those things are possibly the next level for him and something to look forward to. Overall, though, a wonderful performance of the piece.
I also thought Julie was amazing in Leaves - I used to consider her something of a cold dancer but in the last 3 or 4 years her artistry and expressiveness have vastly increased . Even her technique seems stronger. But I didn't think she and Marcelo had enough chemistry last night ( I was actually somewhat disappointed in Marcelo's performance). Having recently re-watched the second PDD of Leaves performed by Amanda McKerrow and John Gardner (on ABT's Variety and Virtuosity DVD) I believe their partnering far exceeded Julie's and Marcelo' (of course, though, Amanda and John are married). Since Amanda and John set the piece, I can't help wishing they could have imparted a bit more of their seamless partnering skills to Julie and Marcelo. But this still didn't detract from the beauty of the piece, which I thought was performed beautifully by everyone.
QUOTE (Amour @ Oct 25 2007, 05:52 PM)
I didn't think she and Marcelo had enough chemistry last night . . .
Thursday, Oct. 25
Different ballet, different night, but they certainly connected tonight in more familiar roles -- Meadow. I had thought I'd seen this ballet before but couldn't remember it. When the curtain went up, I realized I'd seen only the (forgettable) pas. I had the feeling that Lubovitch had the last movement in his head first, then built a ballet and pdd around it. He shouldn't have bothered. The final movement has original, mesmerizing corps work, dancers appearing and disappearing, a rather ghostlike (but not scary) quality.
The evening opened with Clear -- a ballet that's starting to grow on me. The ensemble of men was as strong as on opening night. Jose Carreno lacked the supppleness of spine that was so amply displayed by the younger dancers, but his charisma, much diminished on Tuesday, was back full force. He had no problem commanding the stage tonight. Paloma, who seems to be able to enjoy herself more when she's not wearing tulle, excelled in Clear, and with Jose brought the pas which closes the work to a lump-in-throat conclusion.
The evening closed with an absolute triumph by Michele Wiles in Ballo. She was radiant from her first entrance, seeming to tell the audience, "Watch! This is gonna be good!" She beamed as the music drew the steps from her. Somehow, she found time to play with phrasing. There was a moment during the adage with Max Beloserkovsky when she is standing on pointe, front attitude, and while supporting her, he does a soutenu turn. Max was off balance and stepped directly into Michele's semiextended leg. She smiled, still holding her balance, coming down only when the music said to.
Max seemed to be having trouble with clean finishes tonight, but I was glad to see him chomp hungrily at this ballet.
The soloists were Melissa Thomas, Kristi Boone, Hee Seo (in lieu of Simone Messmer -- no correction slip) and Leann Underwood.
Just one note: I don't understand the willingness of artistic management to let dancers go out with large, conspicuous tattoos exposed. It's so distracting. Watching the bare chested guys in Clear, the eye catches the tats and works to make sense of them, missing the dancing that's going on. This is the second time in a few days (different company) when I've been confronted by this. Can't the company insist that any skin that's exposed be natural?
Or am I just an old fogey?
For her bated-breath fans, Veronika Part is listed for tomorrow night's Leaves (headed by X. Reyes and Saveliev) in the same role Michele Wiles danced at the gala. Perhaps she'll do others.
QUOTE (carbro @ Oct 25 2007, 11:41 PM)
Just one note: I don't understand the willingness of artistic management to let dancers go out with large, conspicuous tattoos exposed. It's so distracting. Watching the bare chested guys in Clear, the eye catches the tats and works to make sense of them, missing the dancing that's going on. This is the second time in a few days (different company) when I've been confronted by this. Can't the company insist that any skin that's exposed be natural?
Or am I just an old fogey?
Or am I just an old fogey?
well unless they decide not to cast dancers they think are right for the roles because they have tattoos, I'm not sure what you are suggesting. Maybe ABT should front the money for laser removal and not promote any dancers who get tattoos. That should remedy the situation. When confronted with the decision of tattoo or career, I'm sure most dancers would chose the latter.
Carreno, sans shirt, hot-footing it around, working up a sweat under the muscle-defining top lighting, is enough to stop one's breathing. He's not a contemporary dancer, and has escaped most of those thankless roles during his ABT career, but he made an honest effort Thursday night in Clear and did what he does best supremely and made the rest inconsequential by being the most handsome, sensual animal ever on the stage. Herrera was gorgeous, if under-employed, but to compete with what else was going on on that stage, quite simply, she would have had to take off her top. Thankfully, Kevin is not at that point -- yet.
Meadow was beautiful, and I found the two pas de deux with Gomes and Kent exquisite. Lubovitch is a master at merging group and solo moments and weaving the movement within the music to great emotional effect. Bryars conceived this composition when he was coping with conflicting emotions of loss of loved ones and the birth of a child. It is highly unusual, and I enjoyed the whole thing immensely.
Ballo was quite different from the Gala. Michele delivered a performance with panache and style and striking balances. She opted out of trying double piques before opening to the arabesque as Murphy had done, but we've seen singles before elsewhere. I found her performance had more different colors to it than Murphy, but at the same time, I didn't care for the intentional imitating of bad habits with the wrist and the famous nose-in-the-armpit port de bra. The corps was SUPERB - Hee Seo was magnificent with soaring jetes and a megawatt stage presence.
Meadow was beautiful, and I found the two pas de deux with Gomes and Kent exquisite. Lubovitch is a master at merging group and solo moments and weaving the movement within the music to great emotional effect. Bryars conceived this composition when he was coping with conflicting emotions of loss of loved ones and the birth of a child. It is highly unusual, and I enjoyed the whole thing immensely.
Ballo was quite different from the Gala. Michele delivered a performance with panache and style and striking balances. She opted out of trying double piques before opening to the arabesque as Murphy had done, but we've seen singles before elsewhere. I found her performance had more different colors to it than Murphy, but at the same time, I didn't care for the intentional imitating of bad habits with the wrist and the famous nose-in-the-armpit port de bra. The corps was SUPERB - Hee Seo was magnificent with soaring jetes and a megawatt stage presence.
>Michele delivered a performance with panache and style
>and striking balances. She opted out of trying double
>piques before opening to the arabesque as Murphy
>had done, but we've seen singles before elsewhere.
Good to hear that Wiles was dancing Ballo so well. I'll have to see this...
FYI, the pique turns opening into arabesque have always been singles. It's just so incredibly fast that it can look like a knife (arabesque leg) cutting into the blur of turning air. It's very difficult to execute beautifully primarily because of the speed involved and the precision of lines / balance required.
This pique turn is done three times in a row, followed by a tiny change in steps, then three more piques to arabesque in a row! The audience, and the dancer, are given but a second or two to catch their breath between the two sets.
On a taller girl, like Merrill Ashley, it was dangerous looking. On the smaller, Ashley Bouder, it's still a thrill because she can hold that arabesque for a second before proceeding to the next. One doesn't have to be familiar with the technique involved to understand that there is no room for any off-balance error.
>and striking balances. She opted out of trying double
>piques before opening to the arabesque as Murphy
>had done, but we've seen singles before elsewhere.
Good to hear that Wiles was dancing Ballo so well. I'll have to see this...
FYI, the pique turns opening into arabesque have always been singles. It's just so incredibly fast that it can look like a knife (arabesque leg) cutting into the blur of turning air. It's very difficult to execute beautifully primarily because of the speed involved and the precision of lines / balance required.
This pique turn is done three times in a row, followed by a tiny change in steps, then three more piques to arabesque in a row! The audience, and the dancer, are given but a second or two to catch their breath between the two sets.
On a taller girl, like Merrill Ashley, it was dangerous looking. On the smaller, Ashley Bouder, it's still a thrill because she can hold that arabesque for a second before proceeding to the next. One doesn't have to be familiar with the technique involved to understand that there is no room for any off-balance error.
On the tattoo issue - why pick on just the men? Vishneva has a large tattoo on her hip/upper thigh (commented on previously in other threads, I believe), which I first spotted when she did "Manon" (she doesn't wear tights in the last act).
Now that I know it's there, I can see it through the tights, too. Hey, no wonder Siegfried gets all confused - Odette and Odile have the same tattoo!
Now that I know it's there, I can see it through the tights, too. Hey, no wonder Siegfried gets all confused - Odette and Odile have the same tattoo!
The casting for the Friday premiere of Millepied's "From Here On Out" was in last night's program. Paloma and Marcelo have the leads with other couples as follows: Boylston & Stearns, Ricetto & Hammoudi, Reyes & Radetsky, Tanatanit & Hoven, and Messmer & Forster. The program notes include Nico Muhly's description of his musical composition and it truly sounds exciting even as black ink on white paper. I think the orchestra members may have been practicing it last night during intermission, and all seemed enthusiastic. The program indicates, however, that Ormsby Wilkins will be conducting. I think some media reports had indicated that Muhly would conduct. We shall see tonight. I think I may be more excited about the music than the choreography.
The Leaves cast will be sensational with Melissa Thomas, Veronika Part and Yurilo Kajiya. Ballo soloists will include Hee Seo. You just must see her in this.
Warning to all - last night there were a lot of noisy, unrully kids in the gallery. Add obnoxious.
The Leaves cast will be sensational with Melissa Thomas, Veronika Part and Yurilo Kajiya. Ballo soloists will include Hee Seo. You just must see her in this.
Warning to all - last night there were a lot of noisy, unrully kids in the gallery. Add obnoxious.
Is that any worse than the noisy, unruly adults that are the bane of my existence?
I really worry about what will happen during the Kirov season, as I recall how it was when the Bolshoi was at the Met. I expect I'll hear from a few people about this, but a Russian friend of mine confirmed my perception. I'd asked her about whether Russian audiences tend to be less, uh, attentive, because I was concerned that I might be unfair, and she said, "It's different for Russians. We don't go to the ballet to watch the ballet. We come to socialize AT the ballet."
I really worry about what will happen during the Kirov season, as I recall how it was when the Bolshoi was at the Met. I expect I'll hear from a few people about this, but a Russian friend of mine confirmed my perception. I'd asked her about whether Russian audiences tend to be less, uh, attentive, because I was concerned that I might be unfair, and she said, "It's different for Russians. We don't go to the ballet to watch the ballet. We come to socialize AT the ballet."
I find tatts and ballet completely incompatible. Aside from the fact that I find them looking like graffiti on the human body, a tatt is like make up or a costume feature and these are all parts of styling a ballet.
If you take this to its logical conclusion imagine a cast of heavily tattooed dancers and through in some body piercings and it would completely detract from the ballet aesthetic.
Models and actors who get them, also have to use make up to cover them up and if dancers have them, so should they be compelled to, unless a tattoo is actually part of the "wardrobe/styling" choice of the AD. If you had a "drunken" sailor character it could be seen as appropriate, but character from Swan Lake?
It's hard to imagine how a person who works so hard to perfect their body would spoil it with some cheap looking "artwork". Maybe they don't see how it could be seen as a detraction? Who said all ballet dancers make sensible choices with their bodies?
If you take this to its logical conclusion imagine a cast of heavily tattooed dancers and through in some body piercings and it would completely detract from the ballet aesthetic.
Models and actors who get them, also have to use make up to cover them up and if dancers have them, so should they be compelled to, unless a tattoo is actually part of the "wardrobe/styling" choice of the AD. If you had a "drunken" sailor character it could be seen as appropriate, but character from Swan Lake?
It's hard to imagine how a person who works so hard to perfect their body would spoil it with some cheap looking "artwork". Maybe they don't see how it could be seen as a detraction? Who said all ballet dancers make sensible choices with their bodies?
QUOTE (SanderO @ Oct 26 2007, 12:50 PM)
I find tatts and ballet completely incompatible. Aside from the fact that I find them looking like graffiti on the human body, a tatt is like make up or a costume feature and these are all parts of styling a ballet.
If you hate tatts altogether, it seems quite logical you would have this reaction to tattoos on dancers.
That said, an obvious tattoo *is* an eye catching thing, and not something acceptable in classical ballet. Which is why most dancers either don't have them, or have them in places that are usually concealed
QUOTE
If you take this to its logical conclusion imagine a cast of heavily tattooed dancers and through in some body piercings and it would completely detract from the ballet aesthetic.
But no ballet dancers do this, so whats the point of even conjecturing?
I'm not sure what body piercings you think would be obvious through costuming--nipples on the men in the rare barechested piece?
Also, piercings are removable. I have a septum piercing. I do not wear it when I teach undergraduates. I know my dept would disapprove.
QUOTE
It's hard to imagine how a person who works so hard to perfect their body would spoil it with some cheap looking "artwork". Maybe they don't see how it could be seen as a detraction? Who said all ballet dancers make sensible choices with their bodies?
They might not even consider it "spoiling it" or "cheap looking 'artwork'". A lot of people, myself included, don't.
QUOTE (aurora @ Oct 26 2007, 01:10 PM)
If you hate tatts altogether, it seems quite logical you would have this reaction to tattoos on dancers.
That said, an obvious tattoo *is* an eye catching thing, and not something acceptable in clssical ballet. Which is why most dancers either don't have them, or have them in places that are usually concealed
But no ballet dancers do this, so whats the point of even conjecturing?
That said, an obvious tattoo *is* an eye catching thing, and not something acceptable in clssical ballet. Which is why most dancers either don't have them, or have them in places that are usually concealed
QUOTE
If you take this to its logical conclusion imagine a cast of heavily tattooed dancers and through in some body piercings and it would completely detract from the ballet aesthetic.
But no ballet dancers do this, so whats the point of even conjecturing?
No ballet dancers are heavily tattooed? No, the tattoos I was complaining about were quite large and visible from the rear mezzanine. With opera glasses (and likely from City Center's whole orchestra and Grand Tier), they were quite conspicuous.
So much conformity is demanded of dancers, particularly in the sub-principal ranks, that I totally understand the desire to assert their individuality. I suspect tattoos represent a mini-rebellion. Understanding the lure does not mean condoning the act.
And I'm sure the wearers do not consider the tats cheap.
Piercings don't bother me, because the jewelry can be removed in performance.
The first time I noticed a tattoo on a dancer it was Craig Hall's over at NYCB, and I did find it distracting. Actually, I hadn't noticed it but after reading posts about it on BT I looked for it at the next performance, and I guess that's what was distracting me! Since then it really doesn't bother me one bit as long as it's in a contemporary ballet. I think context is everything here. If Siegfried or Albrecht or (heaven forbid) Odette had a tattoo it would bother me a lot. Can you imagine Aurora or Prince Desire with a tattoo? YUK! But Manon while sloshing in the swamps or the men in Clear - no problem.
I've only seen 1 ABT performance so far (Wed) and have to admit to being a teeny bit undewhelmed. It was wonderful to see Cornejo, and to get a look at Hoven, Hammoudi & all the others in Clear, but somehow it seemed to be missing something. Ditto with "Leaves" - there was no chemistry between Kent & Gomes and the piece felt long. Wiles was the only one who really impressed me in this, which was surprising since I'm not a big fan (can't wait to see Part in it tonight). I enjoyed Fancy Free - it's almost impossible not to - but while the characterizations were great the dancing looked a little sloppy. I'm hoping for better tonight.
I've only seen 1 ABT performance so far (Wed) and have to admit to being a teeny bit undewhelmed. It was wonderful to see Cornejo, and to get a look at Hoven, Hammoudi & all the others in Clear, but somehow it seemed to be missing something. Ditto with "Leaves" - there was no chemistry between Kent & Gomes and the piece felt long. Wiles was the only one who really impressed me in this, which was surprising since I'm not a big fan (can't wait to see Part in it tonight). I enjoyed Fancy Free - it's almost impossible not to - but while the characterizations were great the dancing looked a little sloppy. I'm hoping for better tonight.
There's no accounting for people's taste. This is swriling off topic, but I tend to see that dancers develop their bodies through hard work and training of their muscles and joints to be able to execute movement to the full potential.
The aesthetics of any body modifications are completely personalized alterations... like a blue person. You might like blue and think it looks better, but that is not a natural human being - look. These types of personal expressions may be interesting or beautiful, but ballet is a rather dogmatic and tradition bound art form and I find it hard to imagine that the creators of ballet would not find body mods and "intrusion" and a "distraction".
I'm all for personal self expression, but that doesn't mean I, or anyone else has to like what people do with and to their bodies. I prefer art on canvas or similar, piercings disturb my sense of aesthetics, and that includes earrings, though having seen them 100 million times I am used to them.
I don't think my expectations for ballet dancers' appearance is uncommon. I would be, and am surprised that they would get easily visible body mods.
I am referring to what we see in a performance. If we can't see it, I could care less.
return to topic.
The aesthetics of any body modifications are completely personalized alterations... like a blue person. You might like blue and think it looks better, but that is not a natural human being - look. These types of personal expressions may be interesting or beautiful, but ballet is a rather dogmatic and tradition bound art form and I find it hard to imagine that the creators of ballet would not find body mods and "intrusion" and a "distraction".
I'm all for personal self expression, but that doesn't mean I, or anyone else has to like what people do with and to their bodies. I prefer art on canvas or similar, piercings disturb my sense of aesthetics, and that includes earrings, though having seen them 100 million times I am used to them.
I don't think my expectations for ballet dancers' appearance is uncommon. I would be, and am surprised that they would get easily visible body mods.
I am referring to what we see in a performance. If we can't see it, I could care less.
return to topic.
QUOTE (carbro @ Oct 26 2007, 01:15 PM)
No ballet dancers are heavily tattooed? No, the tattoos I was complaining about were quite large and visible from the rear mezzanine. With opera glasses (and likely from City Center's whole orchestra and Grand Tier), they were quite conspicuous.
So much conformity is demanded of dancers, particularly in the sub-principal ranks, that I totally understand the desire to assert their individuality. I suspect tattoos represent a mini-rebellion. Understanding the lure does not mean condoning the act.
So much conformity is demanded of dancers, particularly in the sub-principal ranks, that I totally understand the desire to assert their individuality. I suspect tattoos represent a mini-rebellion. Understanding the lure does not mean condoning the act.
hehe, I haven't seen the tatts you are talking about, but by heavily tattoed, I think I mean something rather different than you
I have friends with full sleeves, entire back pieces etc...That is the kind of thing that I was assuming SanderO was referring to by heavily tattooed.
I agree totally about the conformity expected of dancers. I just think that if they relegate them to areas that are usually not visible in classical pieces they should be tolerated.
I would have assumed that like piercings, dancers can do whatever they want to their bodies, but that they'd be required, at least in classical or neoclassical ballets, to cover them up with makeup (or remove visible studs).
I think it would be ironic if after all of the discussions around how the corps of Swan Lake must look uniform, that some dancers could have visible tatoos under their pink or white tights, but that other dancers would be disqualfied because their skin is too dark to fit into the whole.
I think it would be ironic if after all of the discussions around how the corps of Swan Lake must look uniform, that some dancers could have visible tatoos under their pink or white tights, but that other dancers would be disqualfied because their skin is too dark to fit into the whole.
QUOTE (Helene @ Oct 26 2007, 01:40 PM)
I would have assumed that like piercings, dancers can do whatever they want to their bodies, but that they'd be required, at least in classical or neoclassical ballets, to cover them up with makeup (or remove visible studs).
I think it would be ironic if after all of the discussions around how the corps of Swan Lake must look uniform, that some dancers could have visible tatoos under their pink or white tights, but that other dancers would be disqualfied because their skin is too dark to fit into the whole.
I think it would be ironic if after all of the discussions around how the corps of Swan Lake must look uniform, that some dancers could have visible tatoos under their pink or white tights, but that other dancers would be disqualfied because their skin is too dark to fit into the whole.
I think it would be more than ironic, I would think it downright wrong.
And what Helene just said is, btw, my feeling on tattoos in classical ballet as well.
They should not be visible in such works. As I ended up being the "defender of tattoos" above, I just wanted to make sure that was clear.
Bod mods off stage are fine. Who cares? It's your bod you can do what you want with it. They don't belong on bods in stage IMO, no exceptions.
How ironic that ballet dancers feel a need to distinguish their bods by mods when they usually have created through their own hard work exceptional bodies. And by ink, they make them look more like common Jane at the mall.
How ironic that ballet dancers feel a need to distinguish their bods by mods when they usually have created through their own hard work exceptional bodies. And by ink, they make them look more like common Jane at the mall.
QUOTE (carbro @ Oct 26 2007, 04:41 AM)
QUOTE (Amour @ Oct 25 2007, 05:52 PM)
I didn't think she and Marcelo had enough chemistry last night . . .
Thursday, Oct. 25
Different ballet, different night, but they certainly connected tonight in more familiar roles -- Meadow. I had thought I'd seen this ballet before but couldn't remember it. When the curtain went up, I realized I'd seen only the (forgettable) pas. I had the feeling that Lubovitch had the last movement in his head first, then built a ballet and pdd around it. He shouldn't have bothered. The final movement has original, mesmerizing corps work, dancers appearing and disappearing, a rather ghostlike (but not scary) quality.
The evening opened with Clear -- a ballet that's starting to grow on me. The ensemble of men was as strong as on opening night. Jose Carreno lacked the supppleness of spine that was so amply displayed by the younger dancers, but his charisma, much diminished on Tuesday, was back full force. He had no problem commanding the stage tonight. Paloma, who seems to be able to enjoy herself more when she's not wearing tulle, excelled in Clear, and with Jose brought the pas which closes the work to a lump-in-throat conclusion.
The evening closed with an absolute triumph by Michele Wiles in Ballo. She was radiant from her first entrance, seeming to tell the audience, "Watch! This is gonna be good!" She beamed as the music drew the steps from her. Somehow, she found time to play with phrasing. There was a moment during the adage with Max Beloserkovsky when she is standing on pointe, front attitude, and while supporting her, he does a soutenu turn. Max was off balance and stepped directly into Michele's semiextended leg. She smiled, still holding her balance, coming down only when the music said to.
Max seemed to be having trouble with clean finishes tonight, but I was glad to see him chomp hungrily at this ballet.
The soloists were Melissa Thomas, Kristi Boone, Hee Seo (in lieu of Simone Messmer -- no correction slip) and Leann Underwood.
Just one note: I don't understand the willingness of artistic management to let dancers go out with large, conspicuous tattoos exposed. It's so distracting. Watching the bare chested guys in Clear, the eye catches the tats and works to make sense of them, missing the dancing that's going on. This is the second time in a few days (different company) when I've been confronted by this. Can't the company insist that any skin that's exposed be natural?
Or am I just an old fogey?
What a pleasant surprise at the success of Michele in Ballo and Leaves...I never thought of her in allegro roles in the past(esp in Ballo) or in the Kirkland-Mckerrow mode but i guess i'm mistaken.I'm sorry to miss her at the CC season. Is ABT doing Ballo at the Met?
QUOTE (SanderO @ Oct 26 2007, 01:53 PM)
Bod mods off stage are fine. Who cares? It's your bod you can do what you want with it. They don't belong on bods in stage IMO, no exceptions.
what about a dancer in fancy free having a navy appropriate tattoo?
What about on stage in a modern work? what about in alternative dance types?
You really mean no exceptions? or are speaking within a framework of classical ballet?
A navy tattoo? What, on the girls or on the sailors? 
Seriously, we're talking real tattoos here, and those don't change with the costumes. So that anchor for Fancy Free tonight might look a bit out of place in Leaves Are Fading tomorrow.
Seriously, we're talking real tattoos here, and those don't change with the costumes. So that anchor for Fancy Free tonight might look a bit out of place in Leaves Are Fading tomorrow.
I'm speaking of classical ballet. I noted above that a tattoo could be part of the costume/wardrobe/styling thing but it would have to "make sense"... if you get my drift.
How about this, then? It's an actual temporary tattoo that was made for distribution at a family day. Appropriate for a ballet company or a bad idea?
http://www.artik.com/Images/TATTOO/CORPORATE1.jpg
http://www.artik.com/Images/TATTOO/CORPORATE1.jpg
QUOTE (Adam @ Oct 26 2007, 02:23 PM)
A navy tattoo? What, on the girls or on the sailors? Seriously, we're talking real tattoos here, and those don't change with the costumes. So that anchor for Fancy Free tonight might look a bit out of place in Leaves Are Fading tomorrow.
Seriously, we're talking real tattoos here, and those don't change with the costumes. So that anchor for Fancy Free tonight might look a bit out of place in Leaves Are Fading tomorrow.Maybe it could work for Corsaire though....
(I was just unsure as to what SanderO meant when he said no exceptions--but he clarified below)
The Tattoo debate deserves its own topic.
I shall create one forthwith!
I shall create one forthwith!
QUOTE (Leigh Witchel @ Oct 26 2007, 03:27 PM)
The Tattoo debate deserves its own topic.
I shall create one forthwith!
I shall create one forthwith!
Thank you Leigh! I thought this forum was about the performances not about the merits or appropriateness of tattoos. I find it extremely surprising that of the 29 posts on this forum re: ABT at City Center so far, less than half have addressed the actual performances while the rest have been individuals voicing their personal opinions/aesthetic tastes about dancers' personal modes of individual expression. I think we've really gotten off track.
Friday, October 26th
I may simply be suffering from the paralysis of analysis, but I can't think of a lot to say about last night's premiere of the Millepied/Muhly From Here On Out.
Let's start with the music – a strong Glass base swirling with youthful impetuosity. Highly creative and energetic with a strong conclusion. Somewhat difficult to follow. Ballet score or background score for a movie? Hard to say. I won't be buying the CD, but I would perhaps buy a ticket to hear the NY Philharmonic play it once. Ormsby Wilkins' pick-up orchestra sounded super.
The choreography – well, these dancers of course were incredible. The choreography looked custom made for Paloma who relished every second that she was on stage. She was clearly hungry for this and looked phenomenal. There were some interesting sliding-to-a-stop on pointe moments. There was some pretzel pas, but much of it was accompanied with high speed horizontal movement. The choreography relied too much on PdD while begrudging time to group movement. Poor Marcelo. Not much to do other than lift Paloma, which of course he did marvelously.
The costumes – at first I laughed, thinking perhaps some BTers had donated their old ripped unitards to ABT. But eventually, they grew on me. The dark gray dark blue dark brownishplummygrayblue unitards with rectangle holes cut into them were interesting. I can't say that the costume concept added anything to the choreographic concept, but the dancers had to wear something.
Not sure what the title From Here On Out had to do with the choreography. But like the costumes, the piece had to have a title. My overall impression was that the music was better than the choreography and the dancers were better, far better, than both.
I may simply be suffering from the paralysis of analysis, but I can't think of a lot to say about last night's premiere of the Millepied/Muhly From Here On Out.
Let's start with the music – a strong Glass base swirling with youthful impetuosity. Highly creative and energetic with a strong conclusion. Somewhat difficult to follow. Ballet score or background score for a movie? Hard to say. I won't be buying the CD, but I would perhaps buy a ticket to hear the NY Philharmonic play it once. Ormsby Wilkins' pick-up orchestra sounded super.
The choreography – well, these dancers of course were incredible. The choreography looked custom made for Paloma who relished every second that she was on stage. She was clearly hungry for this and looked phenomenal. There were some interesting sliding-to-a-stop on pointe moments. There was some pretzel pas, but much of it was accompanied with high speed horizontal movement. The choreography relied too much on PdD while begrudging time to group movement. Poor Marcelo. Not much to do other than lift Paloma, which of course he did marvelously.
The costumes – at first I laughed, thinking perhaps some BTers had donated their old ripped unitards to ABT. But eventually, they grew on me. The dark gray dark blue dark brownishplummygrayblue unitards with rectangle holes cut into them were interesting. I can't say that the costume concept added anything to the choreographic concept, but the dancers had to wear something.
Not sure what the title From Here On Out had to do with the choreography. But like the costumes, the piece had to have a title. My overall impression was that the music was better than the choreography and the dancers were better, far better, than both.
[Moderator beanie on]
For everyone - if there's a problem with the discussion, PM a moderator - or Alexandra, Helene or me rather than putting your concerns into the discussion - it's faster in the long run. We'll try to do something about it.
So no more tattoos here, please and back to ABT!
[Moderator beanie off]
For everyone - if there's a problem with the discussion, PM a moderator - or Alexandra, Helene or me rather than putting your concerns into the discussion - it's faster in the long run. We'll try to do something about it.
So no more tattoos here, please and back to ABT!
[Moderator beanie off]
QUOTE (Haglund @ Oct 27 2007, 10:12 AM)
Friday, October 26th
I may simply be suffering from the paralysis of analysis, but I can't think of a lot to say about last night's premiere of the Millepied/Muhly From Here On Out...
I may simply be suffering from the paralysis of analysis, but I can't think of a lot to say about last night's premiere of the Millepied/Muhly From Here On Out...
But I do thank you for the lot you've had to say about this week's performances, especially your coverage of all those dancers whom we'd love to love, if only they'd get a chance to show their own uniqueness and virtuosity. So far this season they've had that chance, turning the pretty furniture that they play for much of the summer into dazzling, individual dancers.
From Here on Out certainly seems the work of an individual choreographer, Ben Millepied. Not many others favor such flowing jerkiness, nor would many not vary from this throughout a ballet. He uses a bright backdrop, that, especially for dancers farther back onstage, often produces silhouettes that remind of the Robbins Glass Pieces. I would not be surprised to learn that both the choreographer and composer, Nico Muhly, have seen the Robbins work. And also to learn that Mr. Muhly had heard Janacek's Sinfornietta. However, in his extensive program notes the composer says that when he met Mr. Millepied in Paris last year the choreographer was always listening to Bach. For their ABT project, "...we would incorporate his love of repeated chords into a set of variations on a base line."
That constant layer of jerks and sways that seem to spring off classical steps, swoops of imbalance, may be Mr. Millepied responding to the pulse-based rhythm that dominates the early, fairly quiet part of the composition that concludes in a PdD for Paloma Herrera and Marcelo Gomes. Contrasted with Wheeldon, Millepied makes more of a ballerina's feet and pointes, so very apt since his ballerina has a couple of really good ones! Perhaps his choreography is less interesting for the male. This pas was not all that different from the duets for corps pairs that lead up to the PdD (subtle costume distinctions clarify which man goes with which woman, and on first look they do not seem fickle). The audience rewarded Paloma and Marcelo with a substantial ovation.
Immediately after, the music took percussive flight. The finale was quite energetic and drew a prolonged ovation for the lead couple as well as pairs Isabella Boylston/Cory Stearns, Maria Riccetto/Alexandre Hammoudi, Jacquelyn Reyes/Sascha Radetsky, Sarawanee Tanatanit/Blaine Hoven, Melanie Hamrick/Thomas Forster. The audience response was sustained, so that each pair was well-rewarded, as were the almost look-alike composer and choreographer. Overall, there was insufficient variety in movement, but that could have been the point, of course. There were a lot of young people looking very satisfied as the crowd filed out of City Center.
The program began with a repeat of Ballo Della Regina, that I've been enjoying since its premiere back in 1978. I wonder if the occasional loudness mentioned early might be related to Gillian Murphy's choice of toe shoes? Of course sound was also noticeable during unison corps landings. Perhaps we are just used to hearing this work on Mr. B's silent State Theater stage? I have never seen the male lead perfomed with the level of unhurried ease and amplitude, breathing the music, as danced by David Hallberg tonight.
The crown of the evening belonged to the center-piece, Antony Tudor's 1975 Leaves are Fading. Created over two decades after his "retirement", I suppose he must have been inspired back to creative life by Gelsey Kirkland. Very different to his complex psychological stories, almost as pure dance as Mr. B., and yet...
Again very duet-filled (unfortunate for the Millepied ballet that followed), giving so many young ABT dancers chance to climb summits of choreographic beauty; and then Xiomara Reyes danced her Kirkland diagonal toward Gennadi Saveliev. She approached him with a simple warm, young-love smile that gave goose-bumps. He was drawn in, of course not one of ABT's male virtuosi, but his pure Russian classicism served him very well, adding the virtue of dance purity to the glowing purity of Ms. Reyes's Juliet. Their pas radiated Romeo and Juliet. (Wouldn't it be cool if that Tudor ballet were to appear to honor his centenary? It even has the wrong music, so wouldn't really conflict with ABT's full-length version.) But of course Tudor, and so this duet has subtle moments where the couple stare together at some distant unknown, at first toward audience right (from their perspective), a favorite sightline of Chris Wheeldon, then other directions too. Are they having premonitions of fateful events in their to-be-shared future? (After all, as the dance's final image shows, this is a story being remembered.) In their final, very moving PdD, many years later, it looks the world like they've experienced such events. It is as if this "Juliet" and her "Romeo" had a priest who got his mail delivered, and thus they lived forever after, but they had a real life, not a fairy-tale one. Bravi to Amanda McKerrow, who had herself brought this work back to post-Kirkland life, and her husband John Gardner, for not freezing their rescension into a museum piece, but letting the dancers breathe their own souls into one of ABT's sacred treasures.
Drb, Did V Part danced last night?Who were the other dancers in Leaves... ? Thanks
QUOTE (bingham @ Oct 27 2007, 01:37 PM)
Drb, Did V Part danced last night?Who were the other dancers in Leaves... ? Thanks
Cast in order of appearance:
Jennifer Alexander (the rememberer)
Melissa Thomas
Carrie Jensen
Anne Milewski
Melanie Hamrick
Veronika Part (she danced the pas just before Reyes/Saveliev)
Jacquelyn Reyes
Maria Bystrova
Yuriko Kajiya (particularly outstanding)
Roman Zhurbin
Jeffrey Golladay
Arron Scott
Tobin Eason
Cory Stearns
Xiomara Reyes and Gennadi Saveliev
I hope I’m not turning into someone who can’t enjoy ABT dancing Balanchine (wouldn't that be a switch!) - but Ballo didn’t really cut it for me. It’s not my favorite Balanchine to begin with, but somehow the corps formations didn’t really crystallize and I felt the same way about Murphy’s performance as most other posters - it looked correct but joyless. The steps were well done but the impression was of difficulties surmounted, not like she was having fun. Hallberg was great, but it’s not his ballet. Too bad I won’t be seeing Wiles in this, but I’m looking forward to Kajiya & Cornejo.
I loved the Millipied, loved the music, the dancers and the dance. I’ll be seeing this again so I didn’t even try to analyze it but one thing that really struck me is that it looked like he used some of the tallest corps men in the company, making the men look much taller than the women they were partnering. Having just seen Morphoses I couldn’t help seeing some similarities in this work - it also was primarily composed of duets and small groups. He also used some pretzelly partnering moves but his dancers really moved across the stage and his dance vocabulary was much more varied - the pretzel poses were broken up by actual steps, leaps etc.
Leaves got a beautiful performance from this 2nd cast. Neither of the lead couples I’ve seen so far has come close to my memories of Kirkland and Kage, but I found the other dancers much more lyrical & expressive than the first cast. Kajiya was partnered with Scott and they were youthful joy personified. Thomas was lovely, she and Zhurbin looked great together and I can’t even begin to describe how fully Veronika Part inhabited her pdd with Corey Stearns. Not surpisingly, she and Stearns gave it a completely different interpretation from Wiles & Hammoudi. I recall quicksilver changes in attitude with Wiles, as if you were watching a conversation between lovers, seeing the relationship grow and change in character. Part's interpretation was much more passionate and at the end she was just holding onto Stearns for dear life, knowing she had to let go but clinging on desperately. I'm going to see this again and I hope I get to see this cast again!
I loved the Millipied, loved the music, the dancers and the dance. I’ll be seeing this again so I didn’t even try to analyze it but one thing that really struck me is that it looked like he used some of the tallest corps men in the company, making the men look much taller than the women they were partnering. Having just seen Morphoses I couldn’t help seeing some similarities in this work - it also was primarily composed of duets and small groups. He also used some pretzelly partnering moves but his dancers really moved across the stage and his dance vocabulary was much more varied - the pretzel poses were broken up by actual steps, leaps etc.
Leaves got a beautiful performance from this 2nd cast. Neither of the lead couples I’ve seen so far has come close to my memories of Kirkland and Kage, but I found the other dancers much more lyrical & expressive than the first cast. Kajiya was partnered with Scott and they were youthful joy personified. Thomas was lovely, she and Zhurbin looked great together and I can’t even begin to describe how fully Veronika Part inhabited her pdd with Corey Stearns. Not surpisingly, she and Stearns gave it a completely different interpretation from Wiles & Hammoudi. I recall quicksilver changes in attitude with Wiles, as if you were watching a conversation between lovers, seeing the relationship grow and change in character. Part's interpretation was much more passionate and at the end she was just holding onto Stearns for dear life, knowing she had to let go but clinging on desperately. I'm going to see this again and I hope I get to see this cast again!
NYSusan, you should have been there this afternoon for Ballo. Berloserkovsky was replaced by Hallberg, and it was the Hallberg/Wiles show again. Michele was so much more relaxed today; infused her movement with an elegance that she may have forgotten she had Thursday night; and was filled with such joy in dancing with Hallberg. Everything was easy for Michele today. A magical second performance for her. Thank you, David.
Melissa Thomas was one of the soloists, and oh my, did she command a lot of audience attention and appreciation. The guys behind me were ooohing and aahing and frantically flipping through their programs in the dark trying to find her name. Add to that - she danced beautifully. Kristi Boone, another Ballo soloist, glided through her variations dancing more and more like Cynthia Gregory, who looked radiant sitting in the Grand Tier.
I, too, am eagerly looking forward to the Kajiya/Cornejo performance.
Meadow with Abrera and Hallberg was beyond stunning. I've seen every performance of this since they recently revived it, and the more I listen to the composition and watch the dancers, the more I love it. Abrera and Hallberg were heavenly. So perfectly in tune with each other. So perfect. The contrasting appearances of these two dancers creates drama in itself, and physically they are so appealing together. Now that I think of it, is there anyone who Hallberg doesn't make look miraculous? The dancers received a huge ovation from the audience, far bigger than what one normally hears for a middle program piece.
This afternoon's Fancy Free (Radetsky, Cornejo & Gomes) was the best so far. The three of them nearly came uncorked trying to out-act each other and break the composure of Kent and Herrera. Not quite like Tim Conway and Harvey Korman, but you get the idea. During the final gum paper throwing competition, Gomes's went over his shoulder behind him (intentionally).
A great afternoon. Now back to City Center for the evening.
Melissa Thomas was one of the soloists, and oh my, did she command a lot of audience attention and appreciation. The guys behind me were ooohing and aahing and frantically flipping through their programs in the dark trying to find her name. Add to that - she danced beautifully. Kristi Boone, another Ballo soloist, glided through her variations dancing more and more like Cynthia Gregory, who looked radiant sitting in the Grand Tier.
I, too, am eagerly looking forward to the Kajiya/Cornejo performance.
Meadow with Abrera and Hallberg was beyond stunning. I've seen every performance of this since they recently revived it, and the more I listen to the composition and watch the dancers, the more I love it. Abrera and Hallberg were heavenly. So perfectly in tune with each other. So perfect. The contrasting appearances of these two dancers creates drama in itself, and physically they are so appealing together. Now that I think of it, is there anyone who Hallberg doesn't make look miraculous? The dancers received a huge ovation from the audience, far bigger than what one normally hears for a middle program piece.
This afternoon's Fancy Free (Radetsky, Cornejo & Gomes) was the best so far. The three of them nearly came uncorked trying to out-act each other and break the composure of Kent and Herrera. Not quite like Tim Conway and Harvey Korman, but you get the idea. During the final gum paper throwing competition, Gomes's went over his shoulder behind him (intentionally).
A great afternoon. Now back to City Center for the evening.
QUOTE (Haglund @ Oct 27 2007, 06:14 PM)
I, too, am eagerly looking forward to the Kajiya/Cornejo performance.
I also have my ticket. What about S. Lane. I looks like she is out the NY season (all two weeks of it!). Anyone know when she is expected back. I do miss her presence.
Saturday night was another success for ABT with performances of 3 contemporary ballets: Clear, the debut of Jorma Elo's C to C, and Millepied's From Here On Out.
Paloma Herrera danced the female role in Clear tonight (Carreno was the male lead) and she was a true revelation. I have seen Clear several times, with Julie Kent and Xiomara as the female leads, and never understood the role the woman plays in this ballet or even why there is a female part. ( I generally focus on the male bravura and humorous movement gestures) Tonight, Paloma brought a very different sensibility to the female role than other ballerinas - much more dramatic and classical. Her performance was filled with lyricism, fluidity and romanticism and, in some isolated moments, I almost felt like I was watching her Nikya in Act One of Bayadere. Yet her interpretation made me understand that this woman is a sexual object being passed around (or passing herself around) from one man to another. The ballet's final image, where Paloma tenderly looks at Carreno, touches his face and then reaches up longingly to the sky, as the spotlight narrows around them, was absolutely stunning! They truly conveyed the sense of a couple whose relationship has had difficulties but has now overcome the challenges. Bravo to all.
The second ballet was the debut of the much heralded C to C, with Jorma Elo as choreographer, Phil Glass as the composer, Chuck Close as set designer and Ralph Rucci as costume designer. The ballet makes much of theatrics in terms of its lighting, set and costuming (the 6 dancers initially come out in full length, black samurai- type outfits and stand still, evenly spaced across the stage; then parts of the outfits are then taken off by one dancer who goes to the others and helps them out of part of the outfit). Thankfully, the thick costumes gradually come off (one could see the difficulties the dancers had moving their legs underneath the stiff fabric). Meanwhile the background set is first a huge close up photograph of Chuck Close, later replaced by one of Glass. The movement style is all about supple backs and arms, as the dancers manipulate their bodies rather like inchworms flexibly rolling through their backs and then jerk a bit in a quirky fashion. Kristi Boone really excelled at this and Misty Copeland, while not quite as flexible, also did a great job. But by using only 6 dancers and mainly seeing them in solos or separate PDD, I missed seeing shapes and patterns moving across a stage. Generally , I felt this work didn't really expand any movement idiom and depended too much on the above mentioned theatrical elements to sustain it. I have to say I found Elo's Glow-Stop much more inventive.
Last but not least was From Here on Out. Millepied's work has 12 dancers (tonight, Gillian and David Hallberg were the leads) who eventually dance as male-female pairs. His choreography here seems to echo some of Lar Lubovitch's early modern dance works with the dancers often moving forward in a rolling fashion (like waves) as they hold on to each other. At other moments, as in a trio where 2 women lead a man, I was reminded of moments in Balanchine's Apollo. Much (but not all) of this piece consists of PDD with the Gillian/Hallberg one being the longest. Like the other 2 pieces tonight, From Here on Out is high energy and requires dancers to really commit to the movement. Unfortunately, tonight the generally versatile Gillian showed energy but not much passion, so it was up to the other dancers to carry the piece, which they did admirably (especially Isabella Boylston). Nico Muhly's original score (which I had heard portions of at the Guggenheim Works and Process) was interesting, especially with the voicing of so many different orchestral instruments, and helped greatly bring the piece to life.
Paloma Herrera danced the female role in Clear tonight (Carreno was the male lead) and she was a true revelation. I have seen Clear several times, with Julie Kent and Xiomara as the female leads, and never understood the role the woman plays in this ballet or even why there is a female part. ( I generally focus on the male bravura and humorous movement gestures) Tonight, Paloma brought a very different sensibility to the female role than other ballerinas - much more dramatic and classical. Her performance was filled with lyricism, fluidity and romanticism and, in some isolated moments, I almost felt like I was watching her Nikya in Act One of Bayadere. Yet her interpretation made me understand that this woman is a sexual object being passed around (or passing herself around) from one man to another. The ballet's final image, where Paloma tenderly looks at Carreno, touches his face and then reaches up longingly to the sky, as the spotlight narrows around them, was absolutely stunning! They truly conveyed the sense of a couple whose relationship has had difficulties but has now overcome the challenges. Bravo to all.
The second ballet was the debut of the much heralded C to C, with Jorma Elo as choreographer, Phil Glass as the composer, Chuck Close as set designer and Ralph Rucci as costume designer. The ballet makes much of theatrics in terms of its lighting, set and costuming (the 6 dancers initially come out in full length, black samurai- type outfits and stand still, evenly spaced across the stage; then parts of the outfits are then taken off by one dancer who goes to the others and helps them out of part of the outfit). Thankfully, the thick costumes gradually come off (one could see the difficulties the dancers had moving their legs underneath the stiff fabric). Meanwhile the background set is first a huge close up photograph of Chuck Close, later replaced by one of Glass. The movement style is all about supple backs and arms, as the dancers manipulate their bodies rather like inchworms flexibly rolling through their backs and then jerk a bit in a quirky fashion. Kristi Boone really excelled at this and Misty Copeland, while not quite as flexible, also did a great job. But by using only 6 dancers and mainly seeing them in solos or separate PDD, I missed seeing shapes and patterns moving across a stage. Generally , I felt this work didn't really expand any movement idiom and depended too much on the above mentioned theatrical elements to sustain it. I have to say I found Elo's Glow-Stop much more inventive.
Last but not least was From Here on Out. Millepied's work has 12 dancers (tonight, Gillian and David Hallberg were the leads) who eventually dance as male-female pairs. His choreography here seems to echo some of Lar Lubovitch's early modern dance works with the dancers often moving forward in a rolling fashion (like waves) as they hold on to each other. At other moments, as in a trio where 2 women lead a man, I was reminded of moments in Balanchine's Apollo. Much (but not all) of this piece consists of PDD with the Gillian/Hallberg one being the longest. Like the other 2 pieces tonight, From Here on Out is high energy and requires dancers to really commit to the movement. Unfortunately, tonight the generally versatile Gillian showed energy but not much passion, so it was up to the other dancers to carry the piece, which they did admirably (especially Isabella Boylston). Nico Muhly's original score (which I had heard portions of at the Guggenheim Works and Process) was interesting, especially with the voicing of so many different orchestral instruments, and helped greatly bring the piece to life.
Saturday evening, October 27th
If you loved the jerky movements in Glow-Stop, you'll love C to C. Jorma Elo picks up where he left off last year with a couple of new twists. First, the compliments – Philip Glass' Musical Portrait of Chuck Close was beautiful and merged from one concept to the next in interesting ways. Very smooth. Not boring. Repetitive frames, of course, but not monotonous. I would buy the CD. Bruce Levingston was the pianist (on stage), and he made this piece worth sitting through. Go see this if only to listen to Levingston.
C to C was very much an art exhibit. Close designed the scenery which – (I'm torn between describing this or not, because it was such a nice surprise. So, if you're going to see this piece and don't want the surprise spoiled, skip the rest of this paragraph) – opened with a massive backdrop of Close's glasses. The glasses changed a bit as the piece went on and evolved into a brilliant pink/orange mosaic like you see in much of his work. Then during the very last moments, a huge portrait of Philip Glass drops from the ceiling. Seeing Close's artwork on such a large scale was quite thrilling. Seeing him motor out onto the stage for applause at the end, equally thrilling.
The costumes were appealing. As was mentioned above, the dancers started out in some very stiff fabric (black skirts with wraps) but shortly thereafter, the women appeared in black leotards that were sheer but for where they shouldn't have been sheer. It looked like everything was cut out except for those certain areas. Bare legs. The men were shirtless and had black tights which, while not sheer were visibly less opaque in the legs than in the dance belt area. Too much information for you?
The choreography was exactly what you expect from Elo. Remember the jerky movement that Cornejo ended Glow-Stop with? Well, he reprises that moment early on. Some of the jerks we can understand, because Elo found his inspiration in an artist's struggle to regain his artistic faculties following a devastating aneurysm. Gomes was the featured dancer and of course was, as were all the dancers, 1000% committed to every excess, jerk and hand signal within the choreography.
In summary, we had beautiful Glass music for C to C, and then beautiful Glass-inspired music by Muhly that followed in From Here On Out. We had beautiful costumes with cut-outs in C to C, and then beautiful costumes with cut-outs that followed in From Here On Out. We had choreography that included women sliding on point shoes in C to C, and then we had choreography that included women sliding on point shoes in From Here On Out. We had a dance that relied more on pas de deux than group work in C to C, and we had dance that relied more on pas de deux than group work in From Here On Out that followed. So there you have it. A trend.
I liked From Here On Out less on second viewing. It was clearly made for Paloma, and Paloma's feet and legs, and flexibility. Gillian Murphy didn't compare favorably in last night's performance. She took the satin off of her GM's but still the lack of flexibilty in her feet was visibly apparent. Nor did she have the go-for-broke commitment that Paloma demonstrated the first night. And after earlier in the evening seeing Paloma and Carreno in Clear, the difference was more apparent. These two were phenomenal again last night. All of the guys were incredible. Radetsky, sporting a stunning six-pack, was fabulous. Blaine Hoven and Alexandre Hammoudi, as well. Hoven is so flexible in the back and hips that he tends to throw it away and can look a bit ballerina-ish, particularly when he flaps his wrists. He really has a lot to offer in the technique area. I'm not going to bring up the t-word, but yes they were noticeable on Radetsky and Hammoudi, and yes they detracted.
If you loved the jerky movements in Glow-Stop, you'll love C to C. Jorma Elo picks up where he left off last year with a couple of new twists. First, the compliments – Philip Glass' Musical Portrait of Chuck Close was beautiful and merged from one concept to the next in interesting ways. Very smooth. Not boring. Repetitive frames, of course, but not monotonous. I would buy the CD. Bruce Levingston was the pianist (on stage), and he made this piece worth sitting through. Go see this if only to listen to Levingston.
C to C was very much an art exhibit. Close designed the scenery which – (I'm torn between describing this or not, because it was such a nice surprise. So, if you're going to see this piece and don't want the surprise spoiled, skip the rest of this paragraph) – opened with a massive backdrop of Close's glasses. The glasses changed a bit as the piece went on and evolved into a brilliant pink/orange mosaic like you see in much of his work. Then during the very last moments, a huge portrait of Philip Glass drops from the ceiling. Seeing Close's artwork on such a large scale was quite thrilling. Seeing him motor out onto the stage for applause at the end, equally thrilling.
The costumes were appealing. As was mentioned above, the dancers started out in some very stiff fabric (black skirts with wraps) but shortly thereafter, the women appeared in black leotards that were sheer but for where they shouldn't have been sheer. It looked like everything was cut out except for those certain areas. Bare legs. The men were shirtless and had black tights which, while not sheer were visibly less opaque in the legs than in the dance belt area. Too much information for you?
The choreography was exactly what you expect from Elo. Remember the jerky movement that Cornejo ended Glow-Stop with? Well, he reprises that moment early on. Some of the jerks we can understand, because Elo found his inspiration in an artist's struggle to regain his artistic faculties following a devastating aneurysm. Gomes was the featured dancer and of course was, as were all the dancers, 1000% committed to every excess, jerk and hand signal within the choreography.
In summary, we had beautiful Glass music for C to C, and then beautiful Glass-inspired music by Muhly that followed in From Here On Out. We had beautiful costumes with cut-outs in C to C, and then beautiful costumes with cut-outs that followed in From Here On Out. We had choreography that included women sliding on point shoes in C to C, and then we had choreography that included women sliding on point shoes in From Here On Out. We had a dance that relied more on pas de deux than group work in C to C, and we had dance that relied more on pas de deux than group work in From Here On Out that followed. So there you have it. A trend.
I liked From Here On Out less on second viewing. It was clearly made for Paloma, and Paloma's feet and legs, and flexibility. Gillian Murphy didn't compare favorably in last night's performance. She took the satin off of her GM's but still the lack of flexibilty in her feet was visibly apparent. Nor did she have the go-for-broke commitment that Paloma demonstrated the first night. And after earlier in the evening seeing Paloma and Carreno in Clear, the difference was more apparent. These two were phenomenal again last night. All of the guys were incredible. Radetsky, sporting a stunning six-pack, was fabulous. Blaine Hoven and Alexandre Hammoudi, as well. Hoven is so flexible in the back and hips that he tends to throw it away and can look a bit ballerina-ish, particularly when he flaps his wrists. He really has a lot to offer in the technique area. I'm not going to bring up the t-word, but yes they were noticeable on Radetsky and Hammoudi, and yes they detracted.
QUOTE (Haglund @ Oct 28 2007, 11:04 AM)
Saturday evening, October 27th
The costumes were appealing. As was mentioned above, the dancers started out in some very stiff fabric (black skirts with wraps) but shortly thereafter, the women appeared in black leotards that were sheer but for where they shouldn't have been sheer. It looked like everything was cut out except for those certain areas.
Hoven is so flexible in the back and hips that he tends to throw it away and can look a bit ballerina-ish, particularly when he flaps his wrists. He really has a lot to offer in the technique area.
The costumes were appealing. As was mentioned above, the dancers started out in some very stiff fabric (black skirts with wraps) but shortly thereafter, the women appeared in black leotards that were sheer but for where they shouldn't have been sheer. It looked like everything was cut out except for those certain areas.
Hoven is so flexible in the back and hips that he tends to throw it away and can look a bit ballerina-ish, particularly when he flaps his wrists. He really has a lot to offer in the technique area.
I'm familiar with Rucci as a fashion designer and this highlighted the difference between fashion and costume design. Rucci is known for his intricate cutting and he is the only American designer allowed to show in haute couture (vs. pret-a-porter) shows. He often uses stiff fabrics (especially skirts) while tops are often made of sheer tulle with black bras showing through. He also has spoken about his being inspired by Japanese art. C to C's costumes were characteristic Rucci and the opening moments of the ballet reminded me of the Kursawa films "Seven Samurai" and "Rashomon". However, the initial outfits looked really difficult to manipulate and move in. They definitely worked theatrically but I think other designers (Michael Kors, Isaac Mizrahi) have done more function dance costumes.
I'm also very enthusiastic about Hoven but was disappointed in his partnering in From Here on Out. Of all this men, I thought his partnering was the most awkward. He held Sarawanee about 2 feet in front of him, as though she were some bad smelling fish. As an admirer of Bocca, Baryshnikov and Peter Martins, I've seen that a great male dancer must not only be a virtuoso but be willing to occasionally take back seat to his ballerina, let her have the limelight. And as Bocca/Ferri illustrate, in the best partnerships, the man and woman mesh both physically and emotionally. I sensed that Hoven was unwilling to relinquish the spotlight when dancing with his partner. I hope he realizes that showing off your partner will enhance your performance, not detract from it.
I was at Sunday's matinee (10/28/07).
Most of what Leigh Witchel wrote about his viewing of Michele Wiles in Ballo, I'm in agreement with. She seemed to be having the time of her life, but she lacks the refinement of technique and wit to show this ballet at its best. She's messy and turned in, but at the same time irresistably fun to watch. Michele made me smile, over and over, but mostly for all the wrong reasons.
Thought David Hallberg, as Michele's partner, improved a good deal (already!) since his opening night's performance. He was much more free and confident at Sunday's matinee, also enjoying himself in this ballet whereas at the gala he looked pressured and a bit tight. The soloists (same as opening night's) also seemed to be much more comfortable with the speed and pressures of the ballet.
I noticed more so at this performance how tiny the stage at City Center is, which can easily fool an audience into thinking the dancers are jumping and moving with much bigger strides than they really are. And the exit movements at Sunday's Ballo were all choked, barely visible, because of the size of the CC stage. I wonder if ABT will bring Ballo to the Met stage any time soon. Now that would be really fun.... I suspect the dancers looked kind of "soft" overall because they had such little room to execute their movements as fully and as sharply as a big space would allow. I remember thinking this too when ABT brought Sym in C to City Center.
So, I stayed for C to C mostly to hear the music which was beautiful and beautifully played by the pianist. The ballet's choreography was not nearly so and definitely not as interesting as the sets, costumes, lighting and music. Still, I enjoyed watching Marcelo Gomes and Herman Cornejo both of whom were plenty sexy, masculine and physically stunning dancers at their peak. Loved their bare chests/backs and mostly sheer-black legs/feet which made every movement more precise from the waist down while keeping the fleshy-fluidity from the waist up. Very flattering on both these guys. C to C was an intense, art exhibit, but new ideas re choreography were very much missing.
Most of what Leigh Witchel wrote about his viewing of Michele Wiles in Ballo, I'm in agreement with. She seemed to be having the time of her life, but she lacks the refinement of technique and wit to show this ballet at its best. She's messy and turned in, but at the same time irresistably fun to watch. Michele made me smile, over and over, but mostly for all the wrong reasons.
Thought David Hallberg, as Michele's partner, improved a good deal (already!) since his opening night's performance. He was much more free and confident at Sunday's matinee, also enjoying himself in this ballet whereas at the gala he looked pressured and a bit tight. The soloists (same as opening night's) also seemed to be much more comfortable with the speed and pressures of the ballet.
I noticed more so at this performance how tiny the stage at City Center is, which can easily fool an audience into thinking the dancers are jumping and moving with much bigger strides than they really are. And the exit movements at Sunday's Ballo were all choked, barely visible, because of the size of the CC stage. I wonder if ABT will bring Ballo to the Met stage any time soon. Now that would be really fun.... I suspect the dancers looked kind of "soft" overall because they had such little room to execute their movements as fully and as sharply as a big space would allow. I remember thinking this too when ABT brought Sym in C to City Center.
So, I stayed for C to C mostly to hear the music which was beautiful and beautifully played by the pianist. The ballet's choreography was not nearly so and definitely not as interesting as the sets, costumes, lighting and music. Still, I enjoyed watching Marcelo Gomes and Herman Cornejo both of whom were plenty sexy, masculine and physically stunning dancers at their peak. Loved their bare chests/backs and mostly sheer-black legs/feet which made every movement more precise from the waist down while keeping the fleshy-fluidity from the waist up. Very flattering on both these guys. C to C was an intense, art exhibit, but new ideas re choreography were very much missing.
Saw Saturday evening (10/27)--but ONLY first two pieces to prevent stranding in NYC; am returning for Saturday matinee (11/3) so will see Millepied's piece then. That's it this season, hard to get away and do that single-day 8hr roundtrip. But anyways...
After my first viewing of Clear by it's original cast, I've since come to observe it to see the contrast between steps created for a particular dancer vs. a new cast. And Saturday night, it seemed as if JMC was performing it all in slow-motion. He can be so elegant, strong, pulled-up, and controlled, and in Petipa this works wonderfully, but in this it was lugubrious in the connecting steps, with truncated arms as well as legs (was it a flexibility issue?), and though he did those many many turns cleanly, I still felt the push into the floor more than the freedom of flight or spin; like he was thinking hard the whole time. During the pdd, I again felt like I was seeing both performers think too hard while doing it--as if they were still in a studio. I definately agree with all comments re Blaine Hoven, who has so improved this last year and is excellent in Clear (his form, line, extension reminded me of Gomes). Sascha Radetsy too did an amazing tour that woke the audience up, amidst other fine work. But after seeing Cornejo, Stiefel (last year), and now Carreno perform, only Herman has come close to equaling Corella in the central role. *Note to all those who wonder what the point of the ballet is... If you consider it as a view thru a microscope, it becomes pretty obvious; a perfect illustration, yet oblique enough to be beautiful. Bravo Mr.Welch.
Is it just me? Or is all of Elo really beginning to look repetitive? I've seen so many works for Boston Ballet, and now ABT, it is all starting to blur together. In this case, though, I appreciated the central solo for Mr. Gomes that seemed to illustrate the conflict between a confined physique and a free-flowing expression rather well: Amazing contortions in static poses, and then the full out extension and elevation of Gomes' so expressive form. Ditto Herman Cornejo giving the work it's only major movement and lift...and thrills. All the women did fine, given the quirky moves and pointless action. I was proud of them. (and felt sorry for them too.) The kabuki skirts were confining, constricting, and slowed all movement to mimelike robotics. As a metaphor for Mr.Close's health:ok, as a means to dance no. The sheer vs. strategic cut-out leotards were awfully reminiscent of those for C.Wheeldon's Liturgy et.al. across the way. Agree with others about music--which I liked (and again felt sorry that the choreography so underutilized it in the beginning), and artwork, which I also liked. (Q: Wasn't there supposed to be artwork on the interior linings of the costumes too?) I would go to hear that pianist do that music again--and enjoyed watching/listening to him, when the choreography failed to retain my attention. Somehow it seems (IMHO) more of a gala piece than a continuing, on-going rep work.
After my first viewing of Clear by it's original cast, I've since come to observe it to see the contrast between steps created for a particular dancer vs. a new cast. And Saturday night, it seemed as if JMC was performing it all in slow-motion. He can be so elegant, strong, pulled-up, and controlled, and in Petipa this works wonderfully, but in this it was lugubrious in the connecting steps, with truncated arms as well as legs (was it a flexibility issue?), and though he did those many many turns cleanly, I still felt the push into the floor more than the freedom of flight or spin; like he was thinking hard the whole time. During the pdd, I again felt like I was seeing both performers think too hard while doing it--as if they were still in a studio. I definately agree with all comments re Blaine Hoven, who has so improved this last year and is excellent in Clear (his form, line, extension reminded me of Gomes). Sascha Radetsy too did an amazing tour that woke the audience up, amidst other fine work. But after seeing Cornejo, Stiefel (last year), and now Carreno perform, only Herman has come close to equaling Corella in the central role. *Note to all those who wonder what the point of the ballet is... If you consider it as a view thru a microscope, it becomes pretty obvious; a perfect illustration, yet oblique enough to be beautiful. Bravo Mr.Welch.
Is it just me? Or is all of Elo really beginning to look repetitive? I've seen so many works for Boston Ballet, and now ABT, it is all starting to blur together. In this case, though, I appreciated the central solo for Mr. Gomes that seemed to illustrate the conflict between a confined physique and a free-flowing expression rather well: Amazing contortions in static poses, and then the full out extension and elevation of Gomes' so expressive form. Ditto Herman Cornejo giving the work it's only major movement and lift...and thrills. All the women did fine, given the quirky moves and pointless action. I was proud of them. (and felt sorry for them too.) The kabuki skirts were confining, constricting, and slowed all movement to mimelike robotics. As a metaphor for Mr.Close's health:ok, as a means to dance no. The sheer vs. strategic cut-out leotards were awfully reminiscent of those for C.Wheeldon's Liturgy et.al. across the way. Agree with others about music--which I liked (and again felt sorry that the choreography so underutilized it in the beginning), and artwork, which I also liked. (Q: Wasn't there supposed to be artwork on the interior linings of the costumes too?) I would go to hear that pianist do that music again--and enjoyed watching/listening to him, when the choreography failed to retain my attention. Somehow it seems (IMHO) more of a gala piece than a continuing, on-going rep work.
The composer's brief program note for "From Here On Out" mentions Bach as an inspiration, but says nothing about the clear reference to the opening of Tchaikovsky's Pathetique at the beginning of the piece. I'm still scratching my head over it. Does anybody have any idea what connection the composer was trying to make? (Was it just, This is a ballet score so let's throw in some Tchaikovsky for good luck?)
QUOTE (Adam @ Oct 26 2007, 11:59 AM)
Is that any worse than the noisy, unruly adults that are the bane of my existence?
I really worry about what will happen during the Kirov season, as I recall how it was when the Bolshoi was at the Met. I expect I'll hear from a few people about this, but a Russian friend of mine confirmed my perception. I'd asked her about whether Russian audiences tend to be less, uh, attentive, because I was concerned that I might be unfair, and she said, "It's different for Russians. We don't go to the ballet to watch the ballet. We come to socialize AT the ballet."
I really worry about what will happen during the Kirov season, as I recall how it was when the Bolshoi was at the Met. I expect I'll hear from a few people about this, but a Russian friend of mine confirmed my perception. I'd asked her about whether Russian audiences tend to be less, uh, attentive, because I was concerned that I might be unfair, and she said, "It's different for Russians. We don't go to the ballet to watch the ballet. We come to socialize AT the ballet."
A few years ago at the Met, my son and I were there to see Angel Corella and Julie Kent in Swan Lake. Sitting right behind us were 2 Russian women, talking during the first act and eating vegetable soup. How annoying. I finally got up and got the head usher who showed them the exit.
I saw one performance of Eugene Onegin at the Bolshoi Theater in 2005, and you could hear a pin drop. I know that this was neither ballet nor a statistically significant sample size, but do Russians socialize (talk, eat) during ballet performances in Russia?
QUOTE (Anthony_NYC @ Oct 29 2007, 08:51 PM)
The composer's brief program note for "From Here On Out" mentions Bach as an inspiration, but says nothing about the clear reference to the opening of Tchaikovsky's Pathetique at the beginning of the piece. I'm still scratching my head over it. Does anybody have any idea what connection the composer was trying to make?
I attended the Works and Process where Nico Muhly and Ormsby Wilkins spent a good deal of time discussing how the music for From Here on Out was conceived and composed. There was no mention of Tchaikovsky, only Bach (and a good deal of time about how Nico composed on his computer and later transposed to piano for the dancers to rehearse to). I, myself, didn't hear any musical reference to Tchaikovsky, especially with all the different individual voicing of instruments. Others have mentioned Glass (whose work Nico was conducting at the time of the work's conception) may have been an inspiration.
I asked one of the women in my office, who was a regular at the Kirov and the Bolshoi when she lived in Russia. She said (and this is kind of funny) "It was Ukrainians - Russians wouldn't do this. Okay, maybe in Brighton, but never at the Met or City Center, and certainly never at Maryiinsky or Bolshoi. We even bring change of shoes when there's snow, so that we look right." Okay, it's Ukrainians? I'll have to ask the Beloserkovskys.
I can tell you that in New York (including the Met and City Center), it seems quite common for Russians to bring soup, sandwiches and jars of pickles and to walk around and call out to their friends during the performance. They generally come as families and large groups, and people who know each other will buy an entire row, or several seats in each of several rows in a section, which exacerbates their wandering around. Various Russian friends have made similar comments to me, along the lines of, "We come to socialize, not to watch the ballet" and "We're there to see our friends, not the ballet."
Although I had the same experience at the Bolshoi performances two years ago, and at last year's Ballet Stars at the NY State Theater, this isn't a ballet thing - it's a Russian thing. (Okay, perhaps a Ukrainian thing - not every person was being disruptive, and I can't tell the difference between a Russian accent and a Ukrainian one.)
As I believe I mentioned, the same thing happened last year at an Argentine tango performance which, for some reason, was heavily advertised on a Russian-language cable television station. Virtually the entire section in which I was sitting was taken up by Russians (Ukrainians?).
Usually, the audience for tango in New York is American tangueros, many of whom I know, and Argentines. I wonder who'll turn up at Brooklyn College for Boccatango next month? And, as I said, I shudder to think of what the Kirov audience will be like.
I can tell you that in New York (including the Met and City Center), it seems quite common for Russians to bring soup, sandwiches and jars of pickles and to walk around and call out to their friends during the performance. They generally come as families and large groups, and people who know each other will buy an entire row, or several seats in each of several rows in a section, which exacerbates their wandering around. Various Russian friends have made similar comments to me, along the lines of, "We come to socialize, not to watch the ballet" and "We're there to see our friends, not the ballet."
Although I had the same experience at the Bolshoi performances two years ago, and at last year's Ballet Stars at the NY State Theater, this isn't a ballet thing - it's a Russian thing. (Okay, perhaps a Ukrainian thing - not every person was being disruptive, and I can't tell the difference between a Russian accent and a Ukrainian one.)
As I believe I mentioned, the same thing happened last year at an Argentine tango performance which, for some reason, was heavily advertised on a Russian-language cable television station. Virtually the entire section in which I was sitting was taken up by Russians (Ukrainians?).
Usually, the audience for tango in New York is American tangueros, many of whom I know, and Argentines. I wonder who'll turn up at Brooklyn College for Boccatango next month? And, as I said, I shudder to think of what the Kirov audience will be like.
I'm surprised to hear this about Russian audiences. About 4 years ago, when the Kirov Opera performed at the Met in July, the audience was probably 75% Russian but everyone was quiet during performances (although quite social, as NYers are, at intermission). I also don't recall anyone being disruptive during the last visits by the Bolshoi ballet (2 yrs. ago at the Met) or the Kirov ballet (5 yrs. ago in NY?).
I had forgotten about the audiences when I saw the Kirov Opera Demon and The Gambler at the Met. I know there were a substantial number of Russian speakers in my section, and at intermission there were lively conversations in Russian, but during the performances, the audiences were quiet in general.
I've had the same experience when the Seattle Chamber Players perform. One of the violinists, Mikhail Schmidt, and the artistic advisor, Elena Dubinets, are both from Russia, and there are many Russian speakers in their core audience. Same experience.
Maybe it's another opera vs. ballet thing...
I've had the same experience when the Seattle Chamber Players perform. One of the violinists, Mikhail Schmidt, and the artistic advisor, Elena Dubinets, are both from Russia, and there are many Russian speakers in their core audience. Same experience.
Maybe it's another opera vs. ballet thing...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.