Well, the casting shuffle has again resulted in changes. I just checked the ABT website. Steifel is out of Prodigal for the entire week. Herman Cornejo will dance with M. Wiles tonight and for the rest of the week in Prodigal. Dvorovenko will dance prodigal with Simkin!! (The Corella/Boone Prodigals have not changed, except for the fact that they are not performing tonight, June 1).Steifel is still listed for next week's Giselle with Osipova.

They have also changed the program order: Prodigal/ Desir/ Dneiper

Since I'm planning to see the first two performances on Monday and Tuesday, I guess I should be glad it's now two different couples. I just wonder whether Cornejo and Wiles have had enough rehearsal time together. And, of course, wishing E.S. the speediest recovery possible.

Will D Simkin have enough time to prepare for the difficult role? Maybe, he has been preparing even before the changes were made?He did mention in his website that he is going to do something new in the Prokofief program.

ugh dvorovenko/simkin moved to weds night! irina was dancing the matinee! i can't stand all these casting changes.

[Moderators - you can move this to another thread if necessary]

Just got back from the All-Prokofiev evening. This program is promising but like most mixed bills the first two ballets looked like they needed more rehearsal and will probably settle in by Friday. "On the Dnieper" looks well-rehearsed but has other flaws (not the dancing and choreography though!)

Prodigal Son

I thought that this was a very promising and impressive debut for Herman. We all know the dancing chops are there but his movements were stronger and more grounded to suit the choreography - nicely articulated and angular. The major development was the acting - this kind of impetuous lost boy suits Herman's still developing gifts at characterization. I think all the elements are there but he needs a more suitable leading lady (Paloma or Irina) and more rehearsal. Right now there are hints of "dance now, act now" and the full synthesis isn't 100% there - it should happen by the end of the week.

As for Michele Wiles, this was not really convincing. She had the moves and the attitude but something was heavy and lumbering lacking sharpness and flow and I thought she would crush Herman in the pas de deux. The height mismatch is a part of this ballet but not having seen it in many years, I was unsure if the awkwardness and clumsy lack of continuity was an artistic choice for comedic effect or evidence of unfamiliarity between the principals. Michele is a bad match for Herman but I think this looked like a dress rehearsal in need of serious polishing. Ultimately, Michele would have been better with Ethan and Herman would have been better with Paloma Herrera or Irina Dvorovenko. [Note: Veronika Part could and should do the Siren]. The ballet looks good on the huge Met stage. Good dancing by Sean Stewart (rarely given demi-soloist gigs and missed) and Arron Scott as the servants.

Desir
This piece struck me as pleasant, professional but outside of one lovely pas de deux, ultimately unmemorable. Think of several of the Richard Tanner ballets or Peter Martins premieres at NYCB. They look nice, the music is good, the costumes and lighting are lovely. Kudelka has used Prokofiev waltz themes that are familiar from "Cinderella" and the ballroom scenes from his opera "War and Peace". The choreographer is trying to be neo-classical with a bunch of dancing couples in a moonlit natural setting who break off into duos like "In the Night" or "Dances at a Gathering". Folk touches, some off-center partnering etc. Seven couples in color coded costumes. Feel familiar? It must have felt and looked fresher in Canada in 1991 when it premiered. Like the other ballets, this would look better on the more intimate City Center stage. The one lovely pas de deux was set to the big "Cinderella" pas de deux music from the second act for the Prince and Cinderella. It was danced by Isabella Boylston and Corey Stearns who got a strong round of appreciative applause. The other two major couples were less lyrical - Gillian Murphy and Blaine Hoven as the mature passionate lovers with lots of turning and hurling the girl in the air and Misty Copeland and Carlos Lopez as the young, impetuous pair. Everyone looked good but the familiar "Cinderella" music reminded one of better choreography to the same music.

On the Dnieper

Most of the time you walk away from a premiere humming the lighting design, the costumes, the set design and usually the dancing but the choreography usually not. Here I really did like Alexei Ratmansky's very emotionally specific use of standard dance vocabulary but felt that the design and staging undercut his excellent work. Ratmansky has set the original libretto faithfully and respected Prokofiev's good score (slightly below his most memorable work). The story of a romantic triangle (or quadrangle) is familiar but Ratmansky digs pretty deeply into these people and doesn't deal in clichés.
All of the movements have been seen before but here they are used for very specific character building effect. I was reminded at times of Antony Tudor's dramatic ballets and also a bit of Boris Eifman at his best (I don't have the deep-seated contempt for him that several posters have). The Tudor influence in specific use of dance gesture for exposure of inner life and the Eifman in the almost frenetic pace of the combinations and the general intensity.

Marcelo Gomes as the returning soldier Sergei is first seen alone onstage with a solo that changes direction constantly and is full of nervous energy - clearly this is a man who has seen the outside world and can't get back into the small-town rut he joined the army to escape from. He is restless, he wants something but doesn't know what it is, he feels part of this place and not part of this place, he knows these people but they feel like strangers to him and him to them, etc. In comes Paloma Herrera as Olga with open breezy moments suggesting a fresh wind and Sergei has found what he is looking for. All the dancers reaffirm their technical prowess but reveal new layers as actors. Paloma Herrera never has had more dramatic conviction and seldom has danced better than earlier this evening.

However, the stage setting by Simon Pastukh is a bunch of stumpy cherry trees on casters looking like potted plants in a hotel lobby. The stage floor is littered with piles of cherry blossom petals endangering the dancer's footing. To change settings, the corps manipulates a bunch of grey picket fences into various configurations and rearranges the stumpy wheeled trees. There is a dark backcloth which does eventually show a moon. It looks like the scenery is both too busy and cluttered and at the same time seems empty because it is so unspecific and unimaginative. The other oddity is that after the first scene, no one is alone onstage even in the most emotionally revealing moments. Like the Soviet Russians squeezed into communal apartments, no one seems to have privacy. All the forbidden liaisons seem to occur in public and often in front of the betrayed original partners. Sergei starts to make romantic pas de deux overtures to the affianced Olga right in front of his old love Natalia. At first I thought they were acting out his internal thoughts but no, it was happening in real time and space. Sonya also has a romantic breakdown because of her longings for Sergei right in front of her parents and friends. Frequently Veronika Part as the discarded Natalia is on the side, spying on her lover in despair. That works. The rest plays false in certain places. Veronika Part with her weeping willow arms and long mournful face is an impressive Natalia radiating despair and threatens to steal all the emotional focus from the lovers. I was glad that a volatile David Hallberg as Olga's rejected fiancé was not played as a bland stiff or lumbering heavy but had virtuosic choreography suggesting a man spinning out of emotional control. Lovely turns by Martine Van Hamel, Georgina Parkinson and Victor Barbee as the concerned parents of the illicit lovers.

Frankly I think the piece could use a little rethinking (some sections should be played alone onstage and the development of the central romance needs to be tweaked) and all the sets and lighting should be redone. The costumes however are evocative and fine. However, the choreographic vision and distinctive style are there. The rest can be fixed.

Your reaction to On the Dnieper is thoughtful and specific and your description of the movement is so very accurate - This is just a difference of opinion but I had just the opposite response to the designs and the use of the social groups vis-a-vis the principals - in this ballet I just loved it.

The moving fences and the arrangements of the blossoming spring trees, first in a kind of crepuscular light and finally in the moonlight, evoked for me successively a village, the homes within it, an alley, finally the edge of town and the fields beyond (when the fences cut the stage on a diagonal, from front right to rear on the bias). The differing heights of the fences gave me a sense of architecture. The colors of the blossoms seemed real to me, apples and peaches, in the moonlight scenes. I was sitting quite far back in the orchestra - Row X. I felt I'd never seen the sometimes awkwardly deep and big dramatic space on the Met stage used more originally and dynamically. Think of the frame and compression, and yet the breadth of space it provided, for that brilliant running, tapping, fast dance variation of Hallberg's towards the end.

My thought about the groups being present is that thematically, the ballet's theme is just the exploration of the tense relationship between individual happiness and desire and the imperatives, habits, sometimes sympathies of the social group as a whole and the families within it. The group is, as you say, always present in this ballet, looking on and taking part by turns. The grief, despair, tragedy and happiness of each unit, individuals and couples, creates a problem for the others: parents, villagers, spurned lovers and the village at large - this is the stuff of the ballet, in a specific way that Ratmansky's Russian Seasons could only hint at at NYCB. Maybe this is a particularly traditional Russian theme? Think of Les Noces of which there may be echoes here in the betrothal ceremony scene. And in Russian history, one thing in the 20th century (among others) is the pointed (political, philosophical and historical) confrontation between the claims of society and those of the individual.

I particularly liked, in the blocking, the way that a group of dancers, sometimes the parents, sometimes the principals, often turned their backs to the audience in a row at the front of the stage and focused their attention on the action upstage beyond them - and you in the audience would watch this through their screen; this emphasized the fact that we were looking on at an event that concerned them, a little closed world --

Not the usual grin at the audience and flick the wrist fest at ABT to be sure. In my view this ballet must be seen and I'll go back to see it again as much as I can.

MP

I attended on Mon evening. I was very disappointed with Prodigal Son. Faux Pas is right - it looked like a dress rehearsal in need of additional rehearsal time. Herman was excellent in the first portion of the ballet, as the angry young man who rejects his family to strike out on his own. Here, his technical abilities served him well. However, the final sections, where he is alone and a broken man, did not work for me. His acting here was poor. I guess I've seen it so many times before with great interpreters (Boal, Woetzel) that I have a very high standard for the nuanced acting which is essential to bring it off. Additionally, the partnering sections between Wiles and Cornejo had many rough spots that must be addressed. There were clearly problems which diminished the impact of their pdd. Also, Wiles does not exude the predatory sexuality that I associate with other Sirens (think Helene Alexopolous at City Ballet years ago).

I thought most of Desir was a crashing bore, except for the pdd between Boylston and Stearns,which was wonderful. The choreograpy for the corp was particularly dull and monotonous. It seemed to go on forever.

I liked On the Dneiper for the most part. All the leads danced well, and the story held my interest. As noted above, I think the set design actually limited the choreographic choices. In particular, the presence of little pieces of paper all over the stage (cherry blossom leaves and wedding confetti) restricted the ability of the dancers to move freely. Every second I was worried that someone would slip and fall on all that debris all over the stage. (Moreover, little pieces of paper kept on slipping out from above the stage during the prior ballet (Desir) which was distracting.) I doubt it is a ballet that I would rush out to see again. The choregraphy was serviceable to the story, but not inspired.

The evening program ended at 10:15, with a total running time of 2 hrs, 45 min. All in all, it felt like a very long night.

I hope to write more about the evening later but I wanted to concur with something abatt said...



I am not as familiar with this ballet as many people on here I am sure, but I too found this a major problem. I am not a Wiles fan, but I can enjoy her in some roles, even if she will never be a favorite of mine.

But a Siren has to have some sort of sexuality to her--some sort of animal magnatism or allure. And Wiles had none.
This is not a criticism of her looks, so I hope no one takes it that way--but there was nothing in her portrayal to give any sense as to why she would be remotely desirable and without that, nothing makes much sense. She just seemed like a bossy, tall, powerful (yes, she had that), bore.

I also felt that ABT's Prodigal Son was unsuccessful for many of the same reasons as abatt did – I especially feel that while Cornejo was good at the beginning he was unable to convey the complete devastation and loss the character goes through at the end. I also agree that he and Wiles were not a good match, but I had no problem with Wiles' individual interpretation. I thought her Siren was a total dominatrix – really giving the poor guy no quarter. Unfortunately the partnering between the two principals was poor and even more disturbing – the male corps did not do a good job with all of those intricate manipulations of the Siren. It's impossible for me to say if that was their fault, her fault or a lack of rehearsal time but effects that were supposed to make her look imposing & overwhelming looked awkward. I wish I could see Simkin & Dvorovenko in this but unfortunately I'll be out of town for both of their performances.

I disliked Desir intensely, but it provided great roles for Copeland, Lopes, Boylston and Stearns and I'll enjoy seeing other favorites in it (at least that's what I keep telling myself since I have tickets to 2 more performances of this program!).

I enjoyed Dneiper and agree with Michael that the use of sets & juxtaposition of village groups with principals provided an intricate part of the subtext – collective vs. individual and the closed in feeling of a small rural town where everyone knows everyone else's business and one person's choices affect everyone. However all that confetti/cherry blossoms did have me concerned about slips and falls – but all the dancers got through it fine and were just fabulous. I enjoyed this piece but am not sure yet how much or if it will hold up to repeated viewings. Time will tell.

I also attended last night.

Fauxpas has described the evening very well, I agree with most of his thoughts.

Prodigal Son was ok, but I think that Herman needs to work some more in the acting and I didnt like Wiles.
Their partnership wasnt good, which could be because of the lack of rehearsal (last minute casting change).
I am not a big fan of this ballet, but I think I could have enjoyed it more.

Desir was so so boring to me. Lovely costumes and lightning, but I found the coreography terrible.
Except for the pdd that Stearn/I.B. got, the rest was the same boring thing over and over again, and it seemed to last for ever. I dont like Kudelka's cinderellas either, so..

On the Dnieper:
I found the coreography pretty brilliant. The story is interesting and very well translated to the audience through the steps. I am not crazy about the music and thats one of the things that probably didnt make me love the ballet.
I think the 4 principals were wonderful, loved Veronika Part. Herrera also looked real good.

I did not like the fact that the stage seems to be very crowded all the time, like people almost jumping on top of each other. I wd have liked a couple of quiet pdd and/or maybe a beautiful solo for Part at the very end.
The costumes look good but I think they are not confortable for the dancing or at least they dont allow for more exciting dancing to happen. Is emotionally intense and very well coreographed, as i said before.

Between P. Son, Desir (which I hate it) and the new piece, I think I am done for this week.
I bet the press is going to love the program and they wd probably say "this is what abt has to do more often, instead of boring full-lenght old classics". I did love the balanchine program, but to be honest, maybe its me, but I would have liked well more to enjoy a well danced bayadere or Manon that what I saw last night at the met.

Loved it! The evening really shows the strength of the Male Corps!

I felt "On the Dnieper" was poorly lit, it could have been a little brighter. Principals were often in dark spots. The fight scene was in red and the cherry blossoms on the stage floor made everything look ultra Barbie pink. I felt the beginning scene could have been more emotional. A Son/lover returning from the battlefield in Springtime. The Photograph scene was very well executed, I have never seen anything like that in a Ballet before.

"Desir" had the women corps in the back for most of the piece, and the men were dancing up front, nice change.

I've never seen PS before, I found it touching.

I thought the lack of privacy further demonstrated the oppressiveness of a small town, in which everyone knows everyone else's business.

I hated the men's costumes in Désir. I don't think they matched the women's gowns, which were quite glamorous in comparison to the men's loose-fitting, untucked shirts.

Alistair Macaulay's NYT review for Monday's Prokofiev program is now up:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/arts/dan....html?ref=dance

It was interesting to me that so many of his points were already covered by various ballettalk posters!

Thanks to everyone who has posted such great reviews: I'm still trying to decide on cast for Prodigal, between Cornejo/Wiles or Simkin/Irina - would love to hear feedback on the Simkin/Irina Wed. evening performance. I'd think Wiles would be cast a bit against seductress type, but I would love to see Cornejo in this role even if theirs is not an ideal pairing. General consensus seemed to be that he would have settled in more with Wiles by Saturday when I'd go.

I thought V. Part was outstanding, contrary to what the NYTimes review said.

Mamma mia, what a difference a day makes. Last night I came back home terribly disappointed by what I saw, especially in Ratmansky's On the Dnieper. Tonight it was a completely different story - literally, with Vishneva lightning up the stage and completely stealing the show from everybody else. Turns out her heroine is the protagonist of this ballet, not the other way around as it looked yesterday. Hammoudi was also so much better than Hallberg, but Diana - what an incredible artist. Without her there was no depth, no emotional involvement, nothing.

It would be very interesting to see this with Part/Gomes and Vishneva/Hammoudi. Could be a masterpiece.

And to think that I never liked Ratmansky:)

He's made it very clear he doesn't care for her. I think one has to accept that as a given (as with other dancers at both ABT and NYCB).

Dneiper's a keeper!

I also preferred the Tuesday performance over Monday's. Why? Perhaps because I skipped ballets #1 and #2 and watched only Dneiper. The cumulative effect of Prodigal, Desir and then Dneiper was too bleak and heavy. It cried out for something light and fluffy. If they had to have an all-Prokofiev program (that is, if they had to have a themed program) why didn't they (whoever "they" are) open the program with Gala Performance? A little variety of mood is called for.

When you commission a ballet, you take a chance. A word on the commission later, but I assume that before acquiring rights to Desir, someone from ABT's artistic staff saw it. And what was that person's reaction?

• The audience will love this!!!!
• This will expand our dancers' range
• Both of the above
• This is adequate filler for a program

I would venture, not even the last.

I thought the Tuesday performance (with the multi-ethnic cast of Vishneva, Carreno, Hammoudi and Seo -- props to Ratmansky or McKenzie for that!) told the story more clearly. Vishneva emphasized her character's slutty and calculated personality. Herrera seemed sweet and somewhat passive in comparison.

I love the sets and how their rearrangement sets up a change of mood. I won't be seeing this again this week, but I do fervently hope to see it in ABT's near future. It deserves a long life.

The rose petals scattered all over the floor scared me. I expected lots of falling. They did not seem to present the same hazard as NYCB's Nutcracker Snowflakes. In fact, early in Tuesday's performance, Hammoudi collided into Vishneva who was pirouetting on pointe, and she stayed completely vertical.

A companion began grumbling at the conclusion of Monday's premiere. I don't know why, but I had to reply, "At the very least, you know this ballet was made by someone who understood craft is part of choreography. Be grateful for that much." I am, but I think it's much more.

Just to add that young corps dancer, Hee Seo, in her first big role of the season, held the stage as well as any of her castmates. I am even more eager than before to see her Sylph.

Prokofiev is by far my biggest obsession in life, and I started jumping up and down when I heard that Ratmansky was going to be choreographing On the Dnieper. It's an absolutely amazing score, and I've never heard of its being performed in the concert hall, much less as a dance piece. But it's more introverted than any of his other ballets. It exudes a rural atmosphere akin to Stone Flower, but with more fusion of melody and modernism, more rhythmic vitality. It's not the kind of rhythm that calls attention to itself, but rather it's integral to the melody. It tends to come and go without a fuss.

I went into this a bit on a post I made to an online reviewer. Ratmansky's response to this score is so inside the understated rhythms, the folk-tinged ambience, and piquant harmonies, that it took my breath away on both nights. But this score, just like the choreography that's inevitably associated with it, is almost inaccessible in creating an introverted landscape. It never reaches out for you, but you also don't disturb it and float seamlessly back out of that world when it's over. Therefore, the choreography seemed purposefully understated, using a more traditional dance vocabulary, and to some extent, underdeveloping parts of the tale.

But then much of the time, the story can still come through in emotional terms. In Ratmansky's opening choreography, Sergei's restlessness, the fact that he's alone, helps explain why he, all of a sudden, gives up on his fiancee for this new woman, Olga: she has two legs. She's probably the first woman he's seen in five years of fighting. Simply, he sees her before he sees his fiancee, and Ratmansky's opening characterization of this restlessness helps to explain things without a lot of pretext.

As regards stage images, I particularly enjoyed the quarter-turn pivots with one arm raised that open and close the ballet; the "confetti" image with Olga and the fiancee; Natalia resting her head in a kind of prayer, and many others.

Oh boy, could I not agree less with Apollinaire Scherr in that this score is match. As I've listened to this piece, I've always wondered what so many of the numbers might look like on stage, and some of them just scream for choreography. It's the story that's thorny; the music would light up like kindling. That we haven't gotten Chout or Le Pas d'Acier into the international repertoire is a big tragedy for Western culture.

So nice to read that Alex Hammoudi is getting this kind of opportunity . . .

I have not seen Desir but i vaguely remember Anna Kissellgoff giving it positive reviews and raving about the partnering.This was several years ago(NY premiere?) and i always wanted(desired) to see it.Everybody seems to hate it.Is it too oldfashioned or the choreographic taste is different now? Any comments?

I enjoyed Desir greatly last night, especially Xiomara Reyes and Roman Zhurbin. They had a wonderful energy together, so youthful and exuberant. I've never enjoyed Reyes so much. I did not find the piece cliche or old fashioned in the least, but perhaps poorly rehearsed. Especially in the group sections, I noticed that Reyes and Ricetto danced with so much breath and movement in their torsos (more of a modern dance approach, I guess), whereas the rest of the woman didn't allow themselves those contractions and releases and maintained more of a traditional ballet posture. I felt that Ricetto and Reyes really threw themselves into this performance with abandon, and the audience was appreciative. The partnering was astounding though . . . jaw dropping really.

I want to write about Dnieper and Prodigal, but will wait until I see another cast on Saturday from up high. (I got tickets through the 18-29 thing and could not believe that they gave me Orchestra row G. Yet despite my delight at these fancy seats, throughout the performance I was kind of wishing I was back up in the dress circle. I felt I was missing things and not getting a full view of the staging and formations. However, it was nice to observe facial expressions and see the dancers up close. Hee Seo and Diana Vishneva are just so incredibly beautiful.)

That's interesting because I see Désir as an enjoyable, light piece. I don't see it as bleak and heavy at all.

The lighting is dark for all three ballets - large sections of "On the Dnieper", "Prodigal Son" and "Desir" are set at night.

I wonder if Kudelka set "Desir" for ABT? I remember being blown away by "Cruel World" when it was new but then there was a badly rehearsed revival a few years later with Marianna Tcherkassky and Katheen Moore replaced by much less striking dancers and the corps was a mess. The piece looked really uneven where it had been stunning at its original premiere. "Desir" I bet would look better on a smaller stage with less famous dancers who had been rehearsed by Kudelka.

I also suspect that "On the Dnieper" looks very different from upstairs than downstairs.

just back from the matinee. veronika p was lovely lovely. how tall is she? her legs go on forever. i thought the staging of dnieper was messy, all the fences and trees and confetti moving all over the place... and so many dancers in each scene. a girl in the corps wiped out at the beginning. herrera was sweet but i'd like to see vishneva in this ballet from what others have said because it did feel like natalia's story.

i really liked desir. the partnering was beautiful!! boylston/stearns were great. did not like wiles in prodigal son. i bought tickets for today to see dvorovenko in this role. maybe wiles is just not my thing. she also slipped off cornejo's head in the pdd; her feet slid off his knees and he tried to hold her up by her ankles.

Wiles also had difficulty with that portion of the ballet on Monday night. She didn't slip off his head on Mon., but she could not position her legs properly and Cornejo had to grab her right leg to try and get it into the correct position. That was just one of the numerous minor mishaps in Monday evening's Prodigal.

Dark lighting and very little (if any?) major-key music. Even the waltzes are minor.

I also suspect you're right. I saw both from the back row of the Grand Tier. Where were you seated?

Wow! Daniil Simkin's debut in Prodigal Son was absolutely amazing (Wed eve). He's such a fine actor, a beautiful young man, physically, as well as a fantastic dancer technically. He'll need a little time to get used to the orchestra for this ballet -- to better connect to the music in his opening solo, but that's a minor detail/correction compared to all he brought of himself to Prodigal. Just wonderful.... Irina D. was a terrific Siren too -- just perfect for the part in her current tip-top shape and commanding presence. I will definitely see the next Prodigal with these two on Friday.

The ballet world is one, big, open door for Daniil....

I wish I could have seen Herman, but I had a very limited schedule in NYC, so only saw Tuesday's performance of the triple bill. Just a few quick impressions...

PRODIGAL SON:
I had an odd reaction to this; similar to that after seeing Allegro Brillante in London two years ago:
When I've seen Angel Corella do Balanchine, (except oddly enough in T&V), it's like watching something usually fluid and free enclosed in a box. The impetus and precision are there, but the underlying details are slightly at odds with the choreographic interpretation; almost "constricted". It was immediately obvious to me watching him with Ansanelli in London: Like the difference between a 90 degree angle (AA) and a sine wave (AC). This is absolutely not a comment on his overall technique or acting of the part which had many smart details and nuance. Just MHO.

Kristi Boone from most comments I heard was a big improvement on Michele Wiles performance of the night before. She was assured and slinky, commanding and seductive, with a long line and extension, and some neat interplay with her partner (which I wish I could remember whether or not was part of the original choreography). She obviously had rehearsal time enough so that no major partnering difficulties appeared, and all the iconic poses were caught. My only complaint was the phrasing was a little quick in spots. Brava Ms. Boone, I wish I could see it again, AND the other casts.

DESIR:
Was what I expected. I agree with most posters here and with some of Macauley's criticisms too--the lifts do get a bit frenetic (and repetitive), but the dancing was fine. The central pdd was beautiful and more subtle--though I too kept thinking of other choreography to its Cinderella music, and I also liked Xiomara Reyes and Roman Zhurbin's abandon in their final pdd. The rest was interesting in parts, and pleasant enough to watch--you could always listen to the music if you were too bored. It will probably look good at City Center. I wasn't overly thrilled, I wasn't bored; like I said, it was pleasant enough, and light after Prodigal Son.

ON THE DNIEPER.
Okay all Russian/Ukranian et.al. speakers, how do you pronounce it? I heard a lot of mangled versions last night during the intermission. (I thought "Neeper" but may be way off.)

My first reaction viewing the opening solo (other than yeah, I finally get to see Jose Manuel Carreno dance after that unchoreographed Piece d'Occasion at the gala) was a technical one: GIVE HIM A KICKER/RIM LIGHT/BACKLIGHT please! His military green costume blended perfectly into the busy (and murky) background, and from Dress Circle it was hard to watch his so controlled strong technique get swallowed up in the scenery. Unfortunately, the lighting was dim throughout the piece--Was this a deliberate low-key choice; an effort to "grey" the tone to blend with the sets/costuming? (No warm sunshine for this plot/story.)

I did like the scenery, and its portability, but I did think a few too many trees were placed so that the dance felt constricted slightly and made me worry about blocking. I believe the corps dancers themselves acted as stagehands shifting it. But for me, it was very evident that the scenery's placement was a commentary on the action itself: now narrow and constricting, now overshadowing, now open and free.

I was concerned by the excessive petals, snow, confetti onstage--especially after the slip I saw in PS, and then heard afterwards was a problem that had occurred repeatedly on the same spot with other dancers--but at least then I understood why the order of performance was changed so Dnieper was last: intermission would have been interminable if they had had to clean the stage before the next work could proceed.

The cast was excellent. Vishneva of course owned the show. But Hee Sao held her own very strongly in a more passive role. Her technique and poignancy was excellent and made me wish I too could see her sylph. Alexander Hamoudi had the height and presence to make his role felt both for those onstage and off, and danced the quick and intricate choreography well. In essentially non-dancing roles, I tried to watch the details of the acting and mime sequences of the various parents (with many memories of Susan Jones abilities in my head). I also enjoyed (finally!) the classical details embedded in the choreography. A rejoicing for all concerned.

Sorry I will miss the other performances, do keep the posts coming!

4mrdncer, re pronunciation: I thought Neeper too but heard a radio host pronounce it Ne eh per. I would think radio hosts know how to correctly pronounce words but I've found this not be so on more than one occasion. Await the native speakers to weigh in.

as i've been told in and around ABT, there are two ways to pronounce this name:

d-NYEH-per (which is reportedly more Russian)
or
d-NEE-per (which is more Ukrainian)

the 'D' is slipped over but not totally silent - which as far as i know in this pattern of most phonetic languages, i.e. there are no completely silent letters.

I attended the June 3rd matinee. I agree with what most posters have said about the partnering between Cornejo and Wiles. I think Cornejo would be more comfortable with a smaller ballerina (this too has been mentioned many times). That being said, I thought Cornejo was wonderful as the Prodigal Son. His dancing is very exciting (especially at the beginning of the ballet), and his acting throughout the ballet is spot on. I was especially moved by his reunion with his father at the end of the ballet. I have seen “Prodigal Son” many times (most recently with Daniel Ulbricht in the title role), and I think ABT’s version compares favorably with NYCB’s Prodigal. Richard Tanner did a great job staging this Balanchine classic.

I really did not like “Desir”. The choreography is very repetitious, and the ballet just seems to go on forever. Recognizing the two waltzes from “Cinderella” just reminds me of another forgettable James Kudelka ballet. I saw ABT perform “Gala Performance” at City Center several years ago, and I agree with both MacAuley (which is so rare for me) and other Ballet Talk posters that Tudor’s ballet would have been a much better choice for the Prokofiev celebration.

I did enjoy “On the Dnieper”. I loved both the choreography and the music. But my problem is that I can’t see why Sergei would run off with Olga. There was nothing about Paloma Herrera’s performance that could make me understand why any man would want to run off with Olga. I really wish I had seen Diana Vishneva in the part. Herrera is not known for her acting, and that is certainly true in “On the Dnieper”. If there’s no obvious chemistry or attraction or anything between Sergei and Olga, then the whole ballet makes little sense (in my opinion anyway). I do think, however, that Veronika Part was perfect as Natalya. She gave such a touching, heartbreaking performance. The whole ballet became about Natalya and her sacrifice. I would love to see it again, with another dancer in the role of Olga.

I went to the Thurs evening performance. Corella and Boone were a good match for Prodigal, and the partnering was smooth, They both did a good job. Corella wasn't as expolosive in the initial angry young man scene as Cornejo. However, overall Corella's acting was better than Cornejo's, especially during the scenes where he is crawling on the floor as a broken man. Desir was boring, again. The main problem is that the choreography is so repetitive and dull. The choreography for the corp is especially bad. Hee Seo and Gomes were brilliant - the bright spot of thel ballet. Also, I preferred Misty on Monday evening. Sarah Lane failed to dance with the abandon that I saw in Misty's performance. We had the "C" cast for Dneiper- Saviliev, Tamm, Ricetto and Messmer. The dancing was adequate, but not nearly as wonderful as the performances on Monday's opening night. I thought that most of the dramatic life was sucked out of the story because these performers were not at the same level of dramatic intenstity or technical skill as the principals on Monday.

I only attend a half dozen ABT performances a year (half of them at City Center), so I'm not as familiar with the dancers as I am with NYCB's (which I go to 2 or 3 times a week). That said, I was besotted by Hee Seo's performance in "Desir" last night (although I was not a fan of the ballet
itself). She is simply gorgeous -- a star in the making for sure. I was also very impressed with Eric Tamm in "On the Dnieper."

I absolutely hated Cornejo's "Prodigal Son" and loved Corella's.

With Cornejo, the prodigal son is looking for babes. He seems to make the ballet low art; there's no comedy; there's nothing likable about the prodigal son.

Corella's was one of the best prodigal sons I've ever seen, and I even preferred it on most levels to Baryshnikov, Woetzel, and Ulbright's. He gets the comedy of the piece. I was completely amused by the story when the prodigal son, the strange drinking companions, and the brothers all start dancing in unison, and he has a very innocent and maudlin smile, having a good time. When seduced by the siren, he seemed innocent again; he seemed like a nice boy.

This bears repeat mentioning: "On the Dnieper" is an amazing piece of music, and perfect in every way. It's absolutely crucial to bring "Chout," "Le Pas d'Acier," "Trapeze," and "On the Dnieper" back into the fold in order to resuscitate some of the works for this greatest of 20th century composers for the stage.

MacAulay's point about Ratmansky's specialty being to depict the Soviet Union as it might have been reminds me of what it was that I saw in "Concerto DSCH." When I saw that piece, I immediately thought of Prokofiev's "Le Pas d'Acier," which I saw at Princeton University in 2005. This piece is again, a depiction of the Soviet Union as it might have been. It's a celebration of steel, factories, and the original decor and setting in many ways was in the expressionist manner of "Prodigal Son." I think this would be an interesting piece for Ratmansky. Difficult, but it would give an opportunity for one of the great 20th century scores to get a hold on the repertoire. Too, there's a lot of music there that screams for choreography.

You're absolutely right, she was gorgeous . Her PDD with M Gomes was a highlight in last night's performance. Can't wait to see her La Sylphide and Juliet.

I went to Thursday evening performance.

Never have seeing Prodigal Son before, I absolutely loved it! My God, Balanchine really was a genius. Angel Corella created very vivid Prodigal Son - sometimes funny, sometimes truly dramatic. Kristy Boon was a true siren - gorges, dark, seducing, powerful. Perfect lines, beautiful arches!
Desir seemed too long. I though it should be cut in half..

As for On the Dneiper - it is already Saturday afternoon, but those blooming trees in a moonlight and figures of dancers are still seem to be in front of my eyes. I keep thinking about it - and usually this is how I know that performance/book/movie is really good.

Maria Ricetto - lyrical, tragic, really heartbroken, wonderful! I want to see more of her dancing.
Gennadi Savelyev and Simone Messmer looked good together as partners, but love chemistry was not quite there.. Simone was strong and energetic Olga. Though, I could not help myself noticing that her landings were disturbingly loud. Could that be a certain type of point shoes?
Eric Tamm was impressive.
I loved choreography, sets, music, costumes and dancing! I want to see this ballet again.

Question about the music - did anybody felt that sometimes it is not really reflecting the story? I mean - in R&J the music is almost like a painting, you could see Montague's and Capulet's, Juliette as a child, Juliette as a woman etc..

I went to Sat. Mat. - Simkin & Boone replaced Cornejo (who was replacing Steifel) and Wiles. I really enjoyed it. I'm glad Simkin is going beyond the classical virtuoso roles. His very youthful look brought a different dimension to the role. I agree that Boone is wonderful in this roll, powerful, seductive and beautiful. All of the partnering went very well. The end of the ballet never fails to move me. For me the most moving moment of the evening.

Desir - lets just say that dancers try to do a lot with a little. Murphy, Hoven, Lane, Hammoudi, Seo, Gomes and all the corps members did their best with what they had to work with. Gomes partnered Seo in what bordered on an acrobatic night club act.

Dneiper - Ratmansky is a real choreographer, but this is my least favorite of his works that I've seen. He moves groups in a wonderful way that directs your eye (unlike Kudelka in Desir) and some of the solos were beautiful and meaningful, but I found the ballet too long. At times it was like he had more music to fill so he continued providing steps. I also disliked the moving trees and falling blossoms (I guess they were blossoms). I also have to say that Riccetto is not my cup of tea. Interestingly, a friend who was with me who has only seen ballet once before remarked - "He left Natalia because she is boring." That's how I feel. I've seen Riccetto as Lilac Fairy, in Mozartiana and in this. I always find her technically secure and uninteresting to watch. Like I said, not my cup of tea.

I also went to the Sat Mat performance. 'On The Dnieper' was in the grand Ballet Theatre tradition of Tudor and deMille. What struck me was the real world and people Ratmansky created--which is what deMille did in 'Fall River Legend' and Tudor in 'Pillar of Fire'--the characters rang true. I did not see the original cast but felt that both female leads (Riccetto and Messmer) lacked the gut-wrenching angst that both parts need. Eric Tamm as Olga's fiancee was the more effective of the t wo male leads. The final lift at the end of the ballet was reminiscent of 'Pillar of Fire"--it had the same effect on me--I was left with a peaceful feeling;--yes, this is as it should be! I look forward to seeing it with different casts. I liked the ballet immensely---anything that smacks of Ballet Theatre's glory days is truly welcome. I don't think 'Desir' was quite the disaster it has been made out to be. Gillian Murphy and Hee Seo saved the day. The latter had a well deserved roar of approval at the end of the ballet. The middle section with three couples was the weakest part of the work. Three couples all doing the same choreography is very dull---it looks like a classroom exercise, or a second and third cast learning the role---some diversity and imagination, please. Stop the cloning. The real treat for me was Simkin in 'Prodigal Son'. I bought tickets to this performance to see Stiefel---disappointed with Cornejo replacement (I am not one of his cheerleaders), and absolutely delighted to see Simkin.

It's probably familiarity with Romeo and Juliette that makes it appear this way, no? I think there's a lot in Dnieper that's specific. "The Fight" is very specific. Certainly the "Fiance's Dance" is specific.

Then again, there are many instances in the score which are specific in creating an impression of the characters but aren't associated with specific actions, footwork, or characterizations. They seem to be speaking about the action and mood of the story as a whole. Take the "Introduction" with Sergei's opening solo. It's very serene, wistful, nostalgic, and it describes Sergei, but it also serves as an introduction to the story as a whole. The score is remarkably consistent in mood, and this may be what you're picking up on.

In contrast, Romeo and Juliette is much more reflective of Prokofiev's experience with film and montage. It's more tightly linked to particular actions.

Put another way, Dnieper is less of a story ballet in many respects than Romeo and Juliette or Cinderella.

I saw Friday's show, with Simkin/Dvorovenko in Prodigal. This was my first time seeing Daniil Simkin, and he was terrific - heartfelt and convincing acting alongside bravura technique. His extremely secure partnering of Irina in the tricky pas de deux was even more remarkable considering how (I hadn't realized quite how) slight of frame he is. Dvorovenko was flawless, her Siren being compelling, sexy and downright evil. She also seemed completely at ease maneuvering all those yards of fabric.

Desir suffered from the changed program placement. Coming after a Balanchine masterwork highlights its minorness. I enjoyed several bits of the choreography, more than I had expected, but the piece as a whole seemed to be trying too hard to impress. There were also a couple of odd places where the dancers walked in patterns and looked as if they were just milling around. The quality of the dancing was so high, though, I did really enjoy it. Xiomara Reyes and Roman Zhurbin were outstanding in the final pdd. Despite the speed of the steps Xiomara managed to seem entirely relaxed and fluid. Yuriko Kajiya, who danced the second couple with Craig Salstein, also has that beautiful flow through her neck and shoulders that Xiomara has. In contrast, in the third couple, Maria Riccetto seemed a little tense in her carriage. This was not the first time I've thought that about Riccetto - she is a fine dancer, but I agree with poster Vipa, she's not my cup of tea. Riccetto danced with Jared Matthews who did very well himself.

I was sitting in balcony box, so my comments on Dnieper are based on a fairly high-up view. I had to really focus to see Carreno's Sergei as his muted-green military costume was no brighter than the soft black of the dance floor. It was definitely a staging and/or costuming error that should be fixed. Poster "4rmrdncr" suggested a fill-in light for him, and that might help, or brighter shade of green cloth. Hee Seo was lovely as Natalia, so light and free. Yet there was such a contrast between her innocent young maiden and Vishneva's riper Olga that it was easy to see how the returned Sergei would be more attracted to Olga. He must have known Olga before he left, but he returned a different man after his military experiences and finds charismatic Olga more his speed now than his sweet fiance is. Vishneva is the dancer to whom all eyes go onstage - she's just a star. Yet Hee Seo did indeed hold her own against Vishneva, both in technique and acting, which is not an easy feat. I'd say Seo is more than fulfilling the expectations of company management (who are patting themselves on the back for spotting her promise). Hammoudi as Oleg's fiance danced especially well and crisply in his fast variation. I believe his star is rising too, and I hope to see him featured in leading roles soon.

As to the crowded staging (the cherry trees, fences, and prop villagers), I ended up admiring it. I'm not used to having so much stuff around the dancers downstage but the reimaginings of the space were creative and effective (suggesting yards, a country road, a town square). Maybe a couple fewer trees in front would be better and a lot fewer fallen petals on the ground. All the scattered petals made the floor a busy and distracting background for the dancing. From the orchestra seats I don't expect that the floorful of blossoms much affected how well you could see the dancers, but from up above, in that dim lighting, it really did. I couldn't fully appreciate the choreography when all the dancers were hard to see clearly.

Ratmansky's choreography is indeed excellent: he designed great solos and pas de deux, but he also demonstrated good pacing of the story, superb movement of groups, and complex responses to the currents of the music. I thought Dnieper deserves to be seen more easily (fewer blossoms, more light) and more than once.

As someone who managed to see pretty much every cast that went on in each of these pieces this week I would like to take a minute to speak on each of them.

Prodigal Son- I had not previously had a chance to see this piece but I was told that I would love it. As expected I did. However of the three principle casts Wiles/Cornejo were indeed the weakest. I didn't so much have a problem with Cornejo because, who can hate a boy who can fly? But, I severely disliked Wiles in the role of the siren. As previously mentioned in the thread she lacks the sex appeal that makes it necessary for the part to be wholly acted out and the sheer size of her hindered Herman's performance. As far as Corella/Boone, I fell in love with Kristi. Her body, face, line, attitude,...everything is suited for that role. She was the ultimate diva.(Not to mention, no one else can make that intimidating lift where she's tossed across the table work so well) Corella while better than Cornejo wasn't fresh enough. He acted the role brilliantly but I was in need of something new. Simkin ended up having the newness I needed. His boyish portrayal (and looks) served the role well. He uses his face and has acting skills better that some older members of the company. Dvorevenko was a good Siren, though all still pale in comparison to Boone. On a side note, the goons have to be my favorite part of that ballet.

Desir- I don't know why everyone's hating. I am very fond of Kudelka's work since I saw his production of Cinderella. Of the lead couples Blain Hoven & Gillian Murphy, Xiomara Reyes & Roman Zhurbin, and Roddy Doble & Simone Messmer, I found Doble/Messmer to be the most passionate. Simone dances with such a full understanding of the material and such artistry. I was less fond of the other red couple's bits though Misty Copeland and Carlos Lopez were my favorites (despite my admiration and love for everything Craig Salstein does. I found Sarah Lane and Alex Hammoudi to be very uninteresting. Now the beautiful purple couple. No other cast can compare to the amount of energy, longing, beauty and passion that Cory Stearns and Isabella put into what is clearly the most popular, and undoubtedly the most beautiful pas de deux within the whole piece. Don't even get me started on Isabella's line. Her legs and feet are to die for and while I was very fond of Hee Seo and Marcello I fell in love with Cory and Isabella the first time I saw it. I was unenthused by Jared Matthews and Maria Ricetto's rendition on that pas. On a whole I love the male corps work seen in the ballet it's strong and interesting although the sextet portion of the piece does get a little lengthy. I loved the piece but over all, and this carries across to each cast, I felt that the "desir" was lacking. Simone was the only girl who ever managed to convince me that she desired her partner or was even in a relationship with him.

On the Dnieper- I am in love. This was my first experience with Ratmansky's work and yeah, the story may be a little strange but hey, look at corsaire...it's better than that. The quality and style of Ratmansky's movement instantly enamored me. While being a contemporary choreographer Ratmansky managed to give this piece a bit of a twist on the classical resulting in a sophisticated and current style of choreography that is enrapturing to watch when done correctly. Most remarkable about the choreography of this piece is the way in which, much unlike a Balanchine piece based so much around stark and solid immobile poses, Dnieper keeps a continuous stream of movement. It only makes sense that dance consist of movement and this did so exquisitely. As for the design the costumes are flawless and David Hallberg is pretty much the most adorable thing ever in his baggy suit. The set I found to be brilliant. Given on opening night the fence moves may not have gone too well, when they work, they work beautifully. As for the principle cast the boys of the first cast (Gomes/Hallberg) were 100% brilliant at everything. I found both Carreno and Hammoudi to lack an energy. Carreno possibly because of his age and Hammoudi possibly because his lack of experience. I found Saveliev to be flat and boring and Eric Tamm to be entirely adorable and a close second to david in my book. For Natalia- Veronika was complete perfection, with those never ending legs. Hee Seo was great but Maria Ricetto didn't give enough anything. It is difficult to judge in the way of Olgas I've never seen Paloma dance so well, but by far Simone was my favorite Olga. While Simon might not come across as a prima ballerina at first glance the extent to which she understands the character and the choreography is much more developed within her than Herrera and Vishneva. When Simone dances it is easy to tell that she is giving everything she has in her to the audience and as Olga, especially in her variation which made me tear up. For now this is all I can say and I look forward to seeing many more Ratmansky pieces.

Sat evening- Enjoyed Corella in "Prodigal". His youthfulness leant realism to the part (not as youthful as Simkin, of course), but the last part- which should bring to tears- did not. I thought Boone terrific as the Siren. "Desir" was boring. The dancers were fine, but the choreographic language was so limited it didn't matter. My husband tried to sleep thru it.
I liked "Dneiper" and would like to see again. Overall, I thought the acting excellent- Herrera, Part (so sad and devastated), Hallberg, Gomes. Of the Ratmansky I have seen (Concerto DSCH 2x, bits of Russian Seasons), it seems the most grounded. The corps really doesn't play much of a role, and their choreography is relatively uninspired. I agree with previous posters- too much paper on the stage!

I went to both Saturday performances and was thrilled at the substitution of Simkin and Boone in the matinee. Simkin's Prodigal was extraordinary. I feel like I keep using that word each time I see him, but he continues to impress in every new role. His dancing is so pure – high jumps in perfect position, executed with perfect control and that uncanny ability to make a jump linger in the air so you see that perfect line so clearly. Turns? Beautiful, fast and ended cleanly each time. But of course, what wins me over completely is his artistry and that's what made his Prodigal so extraordinary. As impressive as it was, the technique was secondary to the telling of the story and creation of a character. His Prodigal was a naïve innocent – in no way prepared for the big, cruel world. He alone among the ABT men really did the ending justice and brought a tear to the eye. Kristi Boone was fabulous as the siren with big, juicy developees, very sexy and very much in command of the stage. Her eye makeup reminded me of the eyes you see on Egyptian statues. That plus the many 2 dimensional, serpentine poses gave her Siren an air of "otherness" along with seductive power. And there were no partnering glitches, none.

I also enjoyed Corella's Prodigal. It was instructive to see this much beloved dancer in the same role and on the same day as Simkin. He has very different gifts. His dancing was exuberant and heartfelt though the positions were much less clearly articulated. His Prodigal was hungry for experience and his scenes with the Siren were super hot however I agree with Dufay that his ending was not effective.

By the way – for Simkin fans – the casting handout at the Met includes the role of Eros for Sylvia and Simkin is scheduled for it once, with the Wiles/Bolle cast on Wednesday.

As for the rest of the program, I agree with previous posters who noted that Lane and Hammoudi were not as effective as Copeland and Lopez in Desir. Copeland's dancing was just so fierce and gutsy that I think she really made something of nothing…a feat that Lane didn't accomplish for me. Hee Seo & Gomes were gorgeous in that 3rd pas, but seeing Boylston and Stearns again in the evening performance made me realize just how beautiful and evocative Ms. Boylston's dancing is. Messmer and Doble were beautiful in the first pas, she especially took a very different approach from Murphy. It seemed like much more of an adagio pas, filled with yearning, while the image I recall from Murphy was one of allegro with quick, sharp changes of direction.

The 3rd cast of Dneiper just didn't do it justice, in fact I had to fight to stay awake for the last 2/3 of the matinee. All the performers were up to par technically, but they didn't have the personalities or theatricality of the first cast. I had no such problem at the evening performance where Gomes, Part, Hererra and Hallberg again drew me in to this very old story. Dneiper is a keeper in my book.

Lawson, this is exactly what I thought/felt about the music in this ballet! You explained my thoughts better then I could express them.
Thank you for very interesting posts about Prokofev's music.

Thank you everyone for the great detailed reviews of the Prokofiev program! It has been a delight reading this thread.

YES!!!!!

I saw the Simkin/Dvorovenko Prodigal on Fri. Dvorovenko, in my opinion, was electrifying. She was my favorite of the 3 Sirens that ABT put on. She perfectly executed all the acrobatic sections. The parterning with Simkin was flawless. Her acting was magnificent. Also agree w. all the posters above who highly praised Simkin. Give this guy more leading roles immediately! I didn't stay for the rest of the program.

I was there Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights.
I'd never seen Prodigal Son before, and was totally blown away. I'm still a relative newcomer to ballet, and between this and several viewings of the Tchaikovsky-Balanchine program, I'm really appreciating Balanchine in a way I never did before. I saw two casts: Corella/Boone and Simkin/Dvorovenko. Both were excellent. Simkin had freshness, impteuousness, and tremendous height and form; and Dvorovenko was, as someone else said, virtually flawless. So right for the role, and in command of all that fabric! Corella I thought was the better actor. Years ago I found myself resisting him, as if suspicious of his charm and dazzle. Now that he's older, I find I really appreciate him as someone with an unusual connection to the audience, someone who goes all out in whatever way he can, when he's onstage. I thought he was tremendous, and I was in tears at the end on Saturday night. Kristi Boone is slightly less fluid and sinuous than Dvorovenko, and she had a little more trouble getting the fabric where it was supposed to be. But these are minor quibbles; I thought she was sexy and very commanding.
Desir... put me with the crowd that found this really dull and repetitious. Misty Copeland, Hee Seo, and Isabella Boylston were all terrific. As other post-ers have said, Boylston's line is beautiful, and Misty brought an intensity and explosiveness. But having seen this piece three times now, I feel that's two times too many.
On the Dnieper... I wasn't so crazy about it. It's too confused and muddled for me. There's too much goings-on, confused groupings, staging moving about, and few if any memorable images. The music doesn't strike me as the best music for dance. I saw Saveliev-Messmer-Tamm-Riccetto; Carreno-Vishneva-Hammoudi-Seo; and Gomes-Herrera-Hallberg-Part (if I'm remembering correctly). I thought Simone Messmer danced beautifully, and Eric Tamm impresses me every time I see him. Alexandre Hammoudi looked terrific too. Hee Seo was the most dramatic of the Natalias that I saw. To my astonishment, I'm really liking Paloma Herrera this season. And David Hallberg... well, here words fail me, but to all who have seen him, you know what I'm talking about

Michael wrote a brilliant analysis of "On the Dnieper" for his blog on danceviewtimes that puts the ballet in its proper historical and artistic context:

Class Struggle on Broadway

He concludes,

Sorry, but the Tsarist army uniform that Sergei is wearing clearly indicates that "On the Dnieper" takes place before the Revolution of 1917. "The New Soviet Man" came much later.