I just returned from the performance. I'm not going to get very technical here but I will say that I was pleasantly surprised this evening! The dancers, whom I thought would be worn out from Nutcracker, were on fire (and that's a good thing!).

Ashley did Emeralds and was, as always, excellent. Sara was the other lead and she was gorgeous! The women
were partnered by Stephen Hanna and Jonathan Stafford -- both very good.

Megan did Rubies, and really seemed to come into her own with this performance. She was partnered by the exceptional Benjamin
Millipied (I loved his ballet for ABT too). But it was Tess who was the standout. This woman has it all! I sit a row in front of Peter Martins (and have for nearly 30 years)
and I wanted to say, "why isn't this woman a principal already!!" I think I will say it when I next go on Sunday.
(FYI -- he's always very friendly to all of us who sit near him).

And Diamonds! -- Wendy was truly breathtaking. I saw Suzanne do this (I'm 50. Of course I loved her, who didn't?) but Wendy is, in my opinion, in the same league (so was Darci and Kyra). Her upper body was exceptional tonight. And she was exceptional joyful in her performance.
And Philip! He's never danced better! He was truly wonderful (I think he's a bit unappreciated at NYCB).

One pet peeve -- the woman (three of them) behind me never stayed to applaud (during both intermissions) and ran
out before the curtain call after the performance. Not only that but they put their coats on (loudly) before the curtain came down. This is beyond rude: not only to the performers but to the rest of the audience.
To be fair, most of the folks in my section (and I'm sure everywhere in the NYSTheatre ) in the first ring are pretty good about staying during the curtain calls (as they should be). But occasionally you get someone who
seems intent on getting out of the theatre before anyone else.

All and all a wonderful evening.

Thanks for the report Deborah. Not being able to get there tonight, I just watched POB's Jewels... but I really must see NYCB dance it this season... it's sad to be a starving actor.
Glad everyone did so well!

I was there too, the first Jewels of the season.

Definitely say something to Peter next time!!!!! I thought Tess Reichlen was the star of the night (with the exception of a few wonderful, hunky, handsome men in the demis and corps parts of Diamonds, esp TAngle, Paradiso, D-Waring.

I bet they were on fire tonight!
It must be such a pleasure to dance JEWELS after so many Nutcracker performances.

I first saw JEWELS in 1975 - Mazzo/Martins in Diamonds and Clifford/Leland in Rubies.
It's truly one of my all time favorite ballets.

I always loved watching Stephanie Saland in gorgeous Act I - Emeralds.
Her dancing never failed to hypnotize me.
I moved to Manhattan at 17 so although I knew her I never got to see Violette in Emeralds.
I do have a studio portrait of her in Emeralds that she gave me on my desk at work.

Saland was a stunning dancer, and her performances in "Emeralds" are some of my best ballet memories.

With the exception of Jillana in the filmed/taped version of Liebeslieder Waltzer, I never saw another dancer in any role she danced who I thought surpassed her.

Violette Verdy and Mimi Paul in Emeralds made that ballet a dreamy, sexy, warm, womanly heaven. I'll never forget their performances....Talk about hypnotic!

Sarah Mearns, who danced the Mimi Paul part last night, has a lot of potential in the role, but last night she started off a bit tight and tense in her solo, but warmed up her sensual side in the famous pointe-walking pas de deux.

Warming up....was pretty much the theme for most of the lead and demi dancers last night....On the whole, it was an ok dress rehearsal.... with no thanks to Karoui who conducted far too fast -- which made most of Jewels look rushed when it should have been voluptuous. (The entire performance ended 15 mins earlier than usual.)

Thank you sz for your honest review.
How wonderful that you got to see the originals!
I so wish I had seen Villella live in Rubies.
Based on my long history as an audience member of NYCB your review sounds correct.
I can't believe a whole year has gone by since I saw NYCB in 'Sleeping Beauty'.
I found the company to be very interesting with as you say a lot of potential.
Back in the 70s and 80s when I lived in New York I had a good friend who made it possible for me to see the company several times per week.

A request: it would help those of us not familiar with the full range of current NYCB dancers if posters would include last names, especially in the early posts in a thread.

I don't agree with your criticism of the performance.
Sara (her name is not spelled, "Sarah") was excellent. Sure -- she has a way to go (as she's new to it) but I didn't see tension at all (maybe a bit of caution).
Warming up being the theme (and dress rehearsal?)? Wow! How harsh (and not true in my opinion).
Mr. Karoui did set a fast pace but I've seen other conductors (at NYCB) do the same (and faster!).
I feel that he's energized the orchestra.

It's great to appreciate wonderful dancers (I too LOVED Stephanie Saland, Merrill, Lourdes, Maria C, and so many more) but we have new dancers now. Many are exceptional -- others will grow into their roles.
There's a bit too much negatively (lately) about the current NYCB (on this board at least). They aren't perfect but
who is (I'm certainly not!).

Again, I'm no novice here. I've been going to the NYCB for 30 years so I do have some frame of reference.


These comments are with all due respect, by the way.

So sorry about not putting last names! I'll be sure to do this in the future. Here are some of the folk I mentioned in Jewels:

Sara Mearns
Philip Neal
Stephen Hanna
Jonathan Stafford
Wendy Whelan
Tess (Theresa) Reichlen
Ashley Bouder
Megan Fairchild
Benjamin Millepied
Dena Abergel (a long time corps member and one of the best. She's a most joyful dancer).

Mary Cargill called out Abergel's performance in "Diamonds" in her review of "Jewels" in danceviewtimes.



[ADMIN BEANIE ON]

Just a reminder that one of Ballet Talk's cardinal rules is:



[ADMIN BEANIE OFF]

I attended tonight's performance, with the same cast as the opener. I had mixed feelings. This is a sad thing to say but one thing I noticed was the company looked flat-out uncomfortable dancing the ballet, as if they were trying too hard to master the steps. I remembered this year when I saw them dance the Nutcracker. There were a few bobbles, but the company danced it as if it were in their blood. That is always a joy to watch. I didn't get the same feeling tonight.
In Emeralds, I liked Ashley Bouder's bubbliness and charm, but she looked as if she wasn't 100% comfortable in the role. But her pique turns are a wonder of the ballet world. She dances with joy. Sara Mearns was a highlight in the walking duet. What was disappointing was the corps de ballet, who looked rushed and uninspired and often, rather unsynchronized with the orchestra.
In Rubies, I think a lesson needed to be taught on the difference between looking *playful* and flat-out childish. There was no excuse for the corps, as well as all the men, and Meghan Fairchild, to prance around onstage like actual children, elbows jutting around and hands flapping, as if they were literally hopscotching. Meghan Fairchild, as I said, added some unfortunate child-like mannerisms to the role. She already looks like a "baby," she really needs to mature into this role. Only Teresa Reichen as the tall girl got the mix between glamor and playfulness right. She got some justified cheering after her solo.
Diamonds is probably my least favorite section of the ballet but it was for me the most enjoyable part of the evening, thanks to Wendy Whelan, who looked, acted, and danced as the part demanded. She managed to sustain my interest during the entire pdd, and I always end up bored with that pdd. Whelan's developpes and arabesque penchees are fast but never tasteless. She's gained some much-needed weight, which gives her a softer look and line. But most of all she radiated *goodness,* just as she does as the Sugar Plum Fairy. She made all the obeisance towards her that Balanchine choreographed for Farrell look justified. The final tableu seemed like a fitting tribute to Wendy, a real NYCB jewel, someone who I've never seen give a bad performance.

Re last night, I pretty much disagree --

Especially as what I thought best was the way the company got the spirit of the ballet and seemed committed to presenting it at top level.

For example Whelan in Diamonds -- she may be slightly on the downhill slope technically at this point in her career (she must be over 40 years old) . . . and maybe she doesn't finish her steps with her feet all the time, but my gosh the radiance, joy, committment and spirit with which she nailed this performance.

I also thought Bouder's Emeralds about the best I've seen this role danced at City Ballet and the best I've ever seen Bouder in interpretive power -- the feel she had of introspection, of a little private world with her partner, the way she carried her steps through so that the dance impulse ended with every final placement of her hand, and also how she placed and presented her face, eyes and expression. I also very much liked Fairchild in Rubies.

Hanna is a much stronger partner for Bouder than Gonzalo Garcia (whose partnering skills were nearly zero the previous night in Brandenburg) and together they created a lovely enchanted little space.

For the past two seasons Diamonds has been coming into its own as a summation of a lot of Balanchine's work; you can see it as derivative, but when the audience reaches the point (in age and generation change) where the stuff it derives from has become obscure to them, this piece that has little echoes of other things (Snowflakes, Theme and Variations, Symphony in C, Symphonie Concertante, for example) becomes a primary source. Anything is a primary source the night it is danced.

I found the spirit of "Rubies" largely missing. Perhaps the fault was in Karoui's conducting. Normally I like what the orchestra does for him, but there was a lack of excitement, tension, and musical playfulness in the Stravinsky last night which washed out the whole thing for me. I agree with Michael about "Diamonds." The last couple of times I've seen "Jewels" it's provided a nice climax to the evening, and it certainly did last night in the performances of Whelan and Neal. But after gasping with pleasure at the decor for "Emeralds," the audience attended quietly througout the movement and remained quiet when it was over. Some of us veteran applauders had all we could do bring out the dancers for a single curtain call. I thought Bouder was fine, but all-in-all, this seemed to me one of the most tepid performances of "Jewels" I've seen at NYCB in forty years.

This is a very interesting observation. And one with which I identify.

It seemed to me this fall that the stature of Diamonds has grown since I (we) first saw it several generations of dancers ago. This may have to do with the passage of time, with changes in audience expectations, with the accumulated experience of several generataions of viewers, or all of the above. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

From the criticism I've read, it seems that "Rubies" was the first of the three to be embraced, but then it became fashionable to put it down as too accessible -- not "Agon"? too much frolic and not enough pain? -- and to appreciate "Emeralds," especially in retrospect after Violette Verdy was no longer dancing the lead. "Diamonds" was the ballet that didn't get much respect: too derivative, not up to "Theme and Variations" or "Symphony in C" snuff -- too much Farrell, not enough substance -- not enough formal architecture, boring ensemble work.

I've always loved "Diamonds," and my favorite part of the Paris Opera Ballet "Jewels" DVD is the movement with the corps, for the way those dancers make it live and breathe. I love the authoritative statements that ballerinas can make in the role, each one different, and it certainly doesn't hurt that I was able to see Carla Korbes instill it with her style and grace.

The music isn't as eerily evocative as the Faure -- last night, when "Pelleas et Melisande" started to play on XM Classics, I got chills up my spine, even though I was working on something drier than a desert and mind-numbingly dull -- but I love the symphony as well, and I'm always happy that the ballet is an excuse for its being played.

Yes, there's nothing quite like Faure, and when you get that feeling during something 'drier than a desert and mind-numbingly dull', you know how important he is. I too adore his 'Pelleas et Melisande', and remember a fine concert at Alice Tully Hall by a French orchestra (can't remember who they were, although I should) sometime in 1992; it was so much a part of these players that they brought you into the special world of this piece from the very beginning.

I just came back to my hotel from tonight's performance!..I will be giving more details once i'm back in Miami (i'm flying in a few hours!), but hey, i really have to say something before leaving... to "Emeralds"...
See ya!...
P.S. Also coming, a review of the 2:00 P.M Romeo&Juliet performance, which i also went to...

Alistair Macaulay's review in the Times was illuminating, I thought, and quite favorable considering some of his comments earlier this season.

I especially appreciate the way that he -- more than almost any other major reviewer nowadays -- writes verbal descriptions of the movements, blocking, etc., that he actually saw onstage. His general observations on the schematics and the details of Balanchine's choreography were right on target. And his comments on individual dancers were always illustrated with carefully written descriptions of something that they actually did and how it related to the larger picture of the ballet as a whole.

I was wondering what others who saw the performances have thought about Macaulay's and other reviews of the current Jewels.

I saw the same performance as Cristian on Saturday evening, and while I am delighted that he loved Emeralds, for me Diamonds was strongest. Mostly I think it was because the orchestra did its best work here. Both Emeralds and Rubies seemed pretty slow to me, and Rubies only sounded lively during Elaine Chelton's piano solos. But for Diamonds, I can't discount the principal dancers. I can't recall a better performance from either of the principals. Both Kowroski and Askegard were strong and clean. There are few sights as sublime as Kowroski's deliberate presentation of her leg. She can't pull off Farrell's remote Ice Queen, and she shouldn't try. She exudes a gracious warmth, no less regal, and is a pleasure to behold. The ensemble was fine, but standing out among the demis was Gwyneth Muller. Loved those springy landings! (Abergel did not appear, replaced by Glenn Keenan).

Besides the music, Rubies suffered from an e-mailed in performance from Ben Millepied. Megan Fairchild has added a dash of sexiness to her performance. I would have loved to see what she would have done with a zippier orchestra and a responsive partner. Teresa Reichlen's Tall Girl suggested, so slightly, a predator. Just a suggestion, and very welcome.

Emeralds, to me, just simply didn't hold together. Karoui pulled a lot of moodiness from the orchestra -- wonderful, lush tones -- but was it too slow? Was he overcompensating for his speedy conducting of early in the week? He didn't give the dancers the right support. Despite this, both Ashley Bouder and Sara Mearns found the heart of their variations. I agree with Michael's remarks about Bouder, and Saturday without sacrificing her own persona, she seemed to inject a Verdyesque wit. Ana Sophia Scheller was a standout in the trio, where Antonio Carmena's landings could be heard halfway back of the Fourth Ring.

SATURDAY JAN. 5 PERFORMANCE.


Carbro, i was during the two intermezzos walking all over the place asking everybody about BT to see if i could find and meet any of the site's new yorkers ...No luck...
Well, about the Saturday evening performance, i just have mixed feelings.
EMERALDS:
It was very shocking to me that, not being a fan of "Emeralds" or Faure's music, i was so moved by this particular performance. I think it had to do more with Bouder, Hanna, Mearns and Stafford spectacular performances-( Bouder being truly the highlight of this part sharing the whole ballet's glory with Kowroski's "Diamonds"). I mean, i was just so moved , and i felt so much poetry and lyricism during the whole part, that it really took me a while to digest the contrast once "Rubies" had started...But back to "Emeralds", there's something i really saw beautifully done this time which i didn't appreciate that much in Miami: the "walking" PDD. Wow...how delicate and tasteful was it performed...It moved me deeply. Also, from the 4 ring, i really had the unexpected good surprise of watching all the soloists and corps variations in full view. It's been years since I'd been up there (i always get orchestra seats), and now I'm grateful to had seen the ballet from such a different visual perspective. The pas de trois was also very well danced. Alina Dronova and particularly Ana Sophia Scheller were excellent, while Carmena didn't impress me that much. Bravos also to the corps. They did a beautiful job. Epaulements and port de bras were at their bests, and yes, i think the score, played slower with an extra dose of melancholic echoes , along with the performers romantic-like mood, made "Emeralds" look that night, to me, like a green "Chopiniana/-Giselle" vision/homage/inspiration.
RUBIES:
Contrary to the miamian production, in which this was their main dish, i felt it as the weakest part of the new yorker production. It lacked the raw, extra force and energy that are its main attractions , and while Fairchild and Millepied did a decent job, i still haven't recovered from the magnetic-super powerful miamian Albertson/Cox turbo performance. Teresa Reichlen also didn't gave me a convincing "pin-up posing " attitude and sexiness that i like from this role.
DIAMONDS:
I hate to say that I'm glad of the change of Whelan/Neal for Kowroski/Askegard but OMG, Kowroski was outstanding! ...From this part of the ballet, which for me looks more like a tribute to the white acts and full of reminiscences of swans and snowflakes, the object of interest is its PDD, (which i always think it can blend and be perfectly part of, let's say, "Aurora's Wedding"). Kowroski and Askegard were just as regal as Aurora and Desire. Their technique was impeccable, and Kowroski's body placement was at its full glory. Askegard's 5 stars partnership was a great deal of help to achieve this.
THE COSTUMES:
to Mme. Karinska.
THE SCENERY:
Umm...didn't like them. I wrote about how overwhelmed did i feel on the lavishness of the miamian production, with the infinite chandeliers shaped-forming lights emerging on the backdrop and morphing into a "milky way of lights", (just as Mr. B wanted) at the end of "Diamonds". Well, i guess i was still blinking from that maharajah's treasure-like setting when i saw the NY production. It fall way below my expectations, particularly the long red sticks of "Rubies" and the Christmas-like hanging things of "Diamonds".
This is-as usual- my humble, non-professional point of view.

Silly Boy.

Next time, PM us BEFORE.

I'm going to sound like an old-timer but they don't make them like that anymore. The pas de deux you see being made now have a different feel and look to them, and this includes the pretzel pas de deux that seem to be very much in vogue. The Diamonds pas de deux evokes images of mutual admiration and respect between the two dancers, with the man showing off the woman in all her power and glory. Because of this she is allowed to be vulnerable too. Balanchine didn't just place Farrell on a pedestal and admire her, her learned from her and from that advanced his own art.
Personally I don't mind being put on a pedestal every now and then, the air up there is awesome

Oops..!

totally agree. I love Tess