A fantastic evening tonight as ABT performed for the First time next door in Avery Fisher Hall at Lincoln Center. For non-New Yorkers, AFH is the Philharmonic hall of LC, it has a permanent orchestral shell and a trapezoidal shaped stage. No Preocenium as well, so the audience watched the dancers warm up and practice. Special lighting and speakers were brought in over the stage area.

My Comments:

Lighting: Perfect and well done Kudos to the stage hands!

Sound: Could use a little more oomph, sound was weak from the back of the house.

Seats: AVH seats certainly are not like MOH, not very comfy. Good sight lines.

1st piece: Seven Sonatas
Choreo Alexi Ratmanski
Music: Domenico Scarletti
Costumes: Holly Hynes
Lights: Brad Fields
Piano: Barbara Bilach

Dancers:

Abrera, Reyes, Kent
Saveliev, Cornejo, Hornberg

Nice piece, Cornejo danced with Athleticsm Julie Kent was lovely
Costumes were all white but no two were identical, nicest costumes of the evening
Short section had the men holding hands and dancing, I don't think I've seen that before
Very Lyrical piece that flowed well

2nd piece: One of Three
Choreo: Azsure Barton
Music: Ravel (Violin Sonata in G)
Costumes: Yannik Larivee

Not my favorite piece, First section was elegent, the men in suits flirting with Murphy in a long gown, best of the three.
In the next section the Men took their jackets off and pulled out their shir tails, it looked sloppy. The last section they put their jackets back on and still looked sloppy. Paloma wore a one piece suit that was ok, but did not reflect the music or dancing very well.

3rd Piece:
The Dying Swan
Choreo: Fokine
Music: Saint-Saens

Veronica Part did a magnificent job, Arms and hands were beautiful, she is very talented.
This was the *only* Female-majority piece of the whole evening, ABT has great Male dancers and this was a great showcase for them.

Cellist missed a note, come across as very flat.

Final Piece:

Everything Doesn't Happen at Once
Choreo: Benjamin Millipied
Music: David Lang
Costumes: Karen Young
Lighting: Brad Fields

Mini Orchestra in the back on a small platform: Violin,Cello, Piccolo, Clarinet, Piano, Percussion. Good job gents!


WOW!!!! Most of the company was in this piece, Amazing Pas de Deux by Gomes and Boylston! Simkin was amazing! The Partnering was very slow, but wonderful. Choreo was great! I want to see this again! One small section was all women, another was Simkin and the women, were they jealous of his dancing when they threw him off stage?

Crew placed a square of White Marley on the floor, lighting was from above, and behind using Xenon light bulbs for a "bluish-white look" and Incandescent bulbs used for certain pieces. Lighting design was excellent!

Costumes were black shorts and open vests on the men, and black leos on the women. nice to see a ballet without tights and frilly pink stuff.

Very enjoyable evening.

As noted, the Millepied piece intended to make the most of the lighting. The white material taped to a large portion of the stage highlighted the lighting effects. To me, the lighting effects were a little too obvious. For example, with respect to the Gomes/Boylston pas de deux, at one point, the lighting jumps dramatically to only a portion of the large white material being lit, with the remainder of the original white rectangle being cast in shadow. Then, to an even smaller rectangle being lit. At one point, Gomes or Bolyston might be standing close to the periphery of the area that is lit. As another example, there is speckled lighting (not dots, but a large expanse of modern-looking, combined black and white patterns in the light) used at one of the points when there are a lot of dancers moving across the stage. The lighting augments the feeling of dynamism and kinetic energy conveyed during the scene. I would say the lighting was certainly obvious in the piece. But to me it was a "hit you in the face" type of approach to lighting.

The costumes in Millepied's piece were quite nice-looking. The men's costumes revealed their chests, as they consisted of modern-looking black vests that swung around a bit, with no shirt underneath. Instead of a "V" shaped made by the neckline in front or a straight edge there, there was a straight edge and then, halfway down the best, another straight edge to the vest, but much further "in". Maybe somebody else can describe this better? Gomes was the only danseur that did not seem to feel the need to achieve a closely shaved effect. The revealing vests also showed that, continuing a trend that already had begun earlier this season at the Met, Blaine Hoven's physique has bulked up for the worse. He has lost some beauty of his line, and he seems like the most "gym-bulked-up" danseur out there. Also, Hoven's current hairstyle and hair color are not flattering. Hoven and, more than him, Simkin have more significant roles (after Gomes of course) relative to the other danseurs.

I thought Avery Fisher was actually a nice place to host ABT. It was cozy and I had no problem seeing anything (I was in row N; Orchestra).
As MJ said, the evening was fantastic. And it was so much fun to see so many ballet stars (from other companies).

SEVEN SONATAS (Ratmansky)
I liked this ballet a lot.
Outstanding dancers were Hallberg (when isn't he incredible?), Cornejo, Julie Kent (so good to see her back). Stella Abrera, Xiomara (a favorite), Gennadi Saveliev were all good too.
I loved the music.

ONE OF THREE (Barton)
Didn't like this ballet at all. However the dancers were excellent particularly Misty Copeland, Paloma Herrera, Gillian Murphy, Cory Stearns, Eric Tamm, Carlos Lopez, Jared Matthews (and the others were good too!).

I did love the music (I'm a huge fan of Ravel).

THE DYING SWAN

Veronika!!! The only bad thing is that the excerpt was less than 5 minutes. She is simply stunning.

EVERYTHING DOESN"T HAPPEN AT ONCE (Millepied)
Marcelo was brillliant. Isabella was excellent!
I also loved Kristi Boone, Maria Riccetto, Alexander Hammoudi, Blaine Hoven, Leanna Underwood, Marian Butler andothers.

But the standout -- was (no question) -- the brilliant beyond words Danil Simkin.
Gorgeous technique, jumps, stage presence and more. He's not a show off either.
Danil -- you rock!

Bravo Ben! As much as I love him as a NYCB principal (and I do), he's a choreographer to rival the fantastic Chris Wheeldon and Alexei Ratmansky.
I can't wait to see this program again on Sat. and Sat. night.

Some aspects of Millepied's choreography:

(1) The Gomes/Boylston pas de deux involved, at some points, the two dancers stretching out their palms, and putting them together in modern-looking ways.

(2) After a group introductory segment, it is Maria Ricccetto with two danseurs for a little while. Initially, they lift her in a slanted position off the ground while she is positioning herself in different ways in a nice looking and modern looking manner (e.g., pretending to "walk" in the air slowly, by moving her legs in a stretched way above the ground).

(3) The first group piece begins with all the dancers in this piece lined up along the three "edges" of the large rectangular area that has been taped down in white, at regular intervals. The only "edge" of the rectangle (if one looks at the stage as being a larger rectangle) is the edge closest to the audience. Then, Blaine Hoven leads a small group that was standing on the side opposite the audience and that includes Boylston, but may have excluded Gomes, through the first steps by moving forward towards the audience. The rest of the dancers, positioned on the left and right sides of the rectangle that is formed by the large white taped down area are initially not moving. They are the so-called "pillars", made of human beings, that Millepied talked about in the NYT article from a few days ago. He had to deal with exits and entrances in Avery Fisher and that is part of how he dealt with that.

(4) At one point, in the second half of the work, Millepied has dancers in large numbers almost "marching" (almost; it is walking, with a distinct tempo) along certain edges of the white taped down portion of the stage. This, while a smaller number of dancers are performing other steps. At one point, there are two "groups" of such "marching" dancers moving in different directions.

That was not an excerpt. That was Fokine's Dying Swan in its entirety.

Sorry, Abatt. I wasn't familiar with that piece so didn't know.

I don't want to be critical of Veronica Part when I feel ambivalent about why I don't like her dancing (her dancing or her larger-framed body type and lack of lightness, not that this piece demanded lightness). But didn't Part look more like a diva melodramatically "preening" and "overacting" a fake anguish, than a swan suffering a fragile, vulnerable and dignified death (not that I know what Dying Swan is intended to invoke, but I assume it's not intended to invoke images of a self-conscious movie star dying)? I found Part's performance artificial and lacking in subtlety. She seems to try too hard to please, to exaggerate some aspects of the emotions she was trying to convey so that all subtlety was lost.

I would have a similar complaint (trying too hard to please; going for the obvious and the exaggerated) against the choreography of A Barton's work, definitely, and, to a lesser, but still meaningful extent, Millepied's work. Against these two choreographers, Ratmansky seems even more accomplished because his works don't make it seem like he is trying so very hard that he oversteps the boundary between something artistic and something obvious and crowd-pleasing and deliberately so (sort of like high-brow things versus low-brow things, with low-brow in this context meaning more obviously likely to please the crowds, but lacking in shading and gradations). Ratmansky is trying less to appeal in obvious ways.

I normally enjoy Part's performances very much, particularly her Swan Lake. However, I found last night's performance of Dying Swan strangely unmoving and uninvolving. I thought maybe it was because I was so far away from the stage (3rd tier center). It wasn't bad, but I think she has a long way to go with it. This may have been her first performance of the role. I have memories of being blown away by past performances of the role by Nina Ananiashvilli and Lopatkina. Part's performance was not in the same league as those, in my opinion.

By the way, did anyone else feel that the Ratmansky piece quoted heavily from various Jerome Robbins ballets? I loved the pdd for Stella and Genadi, and the solos for X. Reyes and Cornejo. However, I thought the group dances were the weakest link, and became tedious. I really enjoyed the Millipied work. I thought the Barton work was pretentious and suffered from unimaginative choreography.

________________

From what I understand, people either love Veronika (no C in her first name) Part or they don't.
I don't think that she preened or overacted. Nor did I see fake anguish. What a saw was a stunning (albeit too short) performance. Everyone around me (mid-orchestra) also loved her. But again, to each his/ her own.

it's Вероника in Russian, and can be spelled either way, so no biggie, i guess

I forgot to add this -- it was a very long program. It started at 6:30pm (they were fairly prompt) and ended at 9:30pm.
There was one speech by Imani (spelling? She's a model) and also Veronica Webb.
Ms. Webb butchered Benjamin's Millepied's last name. It might have been nice if someone at ABT phonetically spelled out his last name.

Yes, someone at ABT fell down on the job in that department. How hard is it to get someone to listen to the ladies' speech and get it right for them? In truth, the intro speech came across as sort of a bad awards ceremony speech with the ladies alternating lines as they did. It would have been a nicer gesture if Kevin had come out and made a nice speech, especially since they were performing in a new space. And yes, the evening was long. I would have eliminated "The Dying Swan". Coming where it did in the program it sort of fell flat. The other works were all interesting (especially the Millepied who made the best use of the odd space), and it will be good to see them all again. I wasn't as thrilled with the lighting as in most instances the dancers faces seemed to fade and disappear. Loved the "casual" look of the dancers warming up. A fun evening and certainly different!

They closed with Danil doing multiple pirouettes to a hard bump to black, very cool, very dramatic.

This is a very short fall season, I'm sure they are economizing like we all are.

It's a pity they don't broadcast the Galas and black out NYC. It may drive ticket sales.

In a word, NO!

And though I've seen the Dying Swan up-teen times I have never found it particularly moving. It has only made me cry once, at a performance by (of all people) Anastasia Volochkova. I'm pretty sure the tears came because my cat had died earlier that week, rather than due to the subtlety of the performance. Having seen Vishneva dance the Isabel Fokine sanctioned version last week I found the differences between her version and the more familiar one that Part danced fascinating and unmistakable. The version Vishneva danced used different positions in several places, there was much more tension in the execution and much sharper imagery. It evoked more struggle & anguish. Veronika's version was more like Lopatkina's - a graceful, beautiful, wounded bird succumbing to her inevitable fate. Although I agree that Part's performance was not quite in the same league as Lopatkina's (few are).

As for the new works, while the Ratmansky was pretty, witty & lyrical I thought it became tedious after awhile and I agree that it did seem somewhat derivative of Robbins. I might have like it better if it had been shorter. It goes without saying that all the dancers were fabulous.

I found the Barton quirky & charming although I'm not sure how well it will hold up to multiple viewings.

My favorite piece of the evening was Millipied's, by far. I thought it was very inventive & kinetic and I loved the way he used his corps, loved his use of patterns. The only thing I didn't like was the clanging during the Boylston/Gomes pdd, but other than that I also loved the music.

By the way - the view from the side boxes is terrible! The seats are set so far back from the rail that you only see about a third of the stage unless you lean all the way forward. There is also the issue of the rail bisecting your view if you sit back in your seat properly.

The rail is also a problem in the center tier seats as well. It is so high that it interferes with your stage view. I have been to AFH to see numerous Philharmonic concerts, but the rail has never been an issue because I did not need to focus so clearly on what was happening on stage. For ballet, the rail at AFH is a disaster for anyone sitting in the first row of the tier, as I was last night. The only options for seeing the whole stage was either to sit up very tall, or to scrunch down in your seat in order to see underneath the railing. Leaning forward was not an option because it obstructs the view of the people behind you. For me, that was just one of many reasons I think AFH is totally inappropriate for dance. Please return to City Center next year!!

I've been mulling over Millepied's choice of title for "Everything Doesn't Happen at Once," where, at times, it seems that everything is happening at once. This was the one new piece that I distinctly disliked. I watched it from the rear of the orchestra, where there is a gentle rake, but looking at the stage from that level, the last movement looked unintentionally chaotic. My eyes could not make sense of it. And I hated the music.

Yes, in its details and in its resemblance to Dances at a Gathering as a small group of friends. But unlike DaaG, here the partnerships are fixed. Also, the first movement, with all six dancers together on the stage reminded me at moments of Paul Taylor's Arden Court. There was, however, plenty of originality in the choreography, the best of which went to David Hallberg and Julie Kent. Unlike most of the other work of the evening, Ratmansky really used the qualities of the dancers to show them to great advantage -- for example, Abrera's seamless lyricism -- and mark them as individuals. (With the exception of the central adagio and Simkin's bravura flying and turning in Millepied's ballet, not many of the other roles gave the dancers much distinction.) Like In the Night, each of the couples had its own personality, Reyes and Cornejo being the frisky, youthful lovers; Abrera and Saveliev the complicated couple, and Hallberg and Kent somewhere in the middle. It was a gentle ballet, and I hope it enters the permanent rep.

I adored Part's Dying Swan. As nysusan noted, it was not the familiar interpretation of a creature fighting desperately against her doom, but a serene one accepting her fate, and I found it fascinating. I generally consider Dying Swan a bit of kitsch, and even though I've seen it done many times by some of the acknowledged great ballerinas of the 20th (and now the 21st) century, with few opportunities for subtlety, I thought Part immersed herself in the choreography, and her use of stillness and her response to her music were quite affecting. I think the "preening" that abatt objects to is inherent in the choreography.

The Barton ballet wasn't bad. The men were all dressed in black suits with white shirts, no ties, and in the first movement, Gillian Murphy with her blazing red hair (the only bright color on stage all night, btw) entered in a long, white gown. She never joined the all-male group. In the second movement, Misty Copeland, in a short-skirted black and white costume, was less of an outsider. When Paloma Herrera came on in her black jumpsuit, I wondered why the choreographer had chosen to cover the most beautiful legs in the company. Then I realized that it was to make her an integral part of the ensemble, unlike her two "sisters" in the ballet.

With Ratmansky's dancers all in white, the Dying Swan in her customary white tutu, the Barton dancers in black and white, and the Millepied dancers in black and slate, I was hungry for color on the stage. Again, grateful for Murphy's red hair, but it wasn't enough to break the visual monotony of the monochromatic evening.

I had the same problem with the Ratmansky and wondered how Avery Fisher Hall felt entitled to sell those seats for ballet. Add to that the acoustics, which amplify the extraneous, ambient sounds, and I was so unhappy that I moved to the rear orchestra during the first intermission. Not ideal, but as predicted weeks ago by other posters, this is a poor house for ballet. I hope ABT learns from this and, if City Center is unavailable for future seasons, finds a more suitable venue. My goodness! Who'd ever have thought we'd be ruing the absence of City Center???

Although it was a number of "renovations" ago, I saw a program that included some ballet in the early 70s at the then
Philharmonic Hall. It was one of the old Philharmonic Promenades Concerts. And it sure didn't work too well then. (Villella and McBride in some Gayaneh excerpts)

But then AFH isn't even ideal for orchestral concerts!

Agree things are not well if we are missing City Center!

Am I correct in perceiving some cast changes for "Some Assembly Required", on the current ABT Calendar?

Boylston and Stappas are no longer paired, and all performances of "Some Assembly Required" remaining are being danced by Riccetto/Matthews, with the exception of one Nicole Graniero/Stappas. I think N. Graniero's naming to this cast is a recent development. This is a good opportunity for Nicole, who, according to the ABT website, "joined the Studio Company in 2004 and the main company as an apprentice in 2006."

Not a fan of city center, even though you may be closer to the stage, the low ceilings and bad rakes (very steep in the balcony, hardly any in the mezzanine.) No lobby to speak of for entertaining afterward (the reason the Donors pay the big bucks is so they can sit down with a dancer and enjoyed a yummy re-heated meal.)

Jazz at Lincoln Center has some nice stages too.

Since AFH is a different kind of venue, I suspect the union house rules are slightly different. No grips, no riggers needed. AFH may be a "cheap date"

I liked "Everything" From the Second Tier.
AFH has lovely wooden walls in a subtle brown patina. AFH forces you to focus on the stage
I recall everyone detesting Sleeping Beauty because it was "too Colorful" Please make up your minds!

I want to thank everyone for their detailed reviews! Not being able to be in New York for the fall season was killing me, but this is the next best thing (actually the next best thing would be complete videos!). I also enjoyed the video clips on ABT's facebook page.

There's lots of room between too much and not enough. Lots.

Oh, and not sure if SB's screaming palette got a complaint here from me. It was not the worst element of that production.

It wasn't color but the odd used of color. Color can distract from form or it can amplify it.

The program (and every story I've read about Ms. Part) spells her name Veronika (with a K) so it's probably the spelling she prefers.

________
More misc. comments -- I didn't mean to demean your observations about Ms. Part's name YID. However, my own given name is Devorah (I won't even write out the Hebrew), but call myself Deborah because no one "gets" Devorah. Because of this I want my name spelled Deborah
(and not Debra, which it often is). Maybe Ms. Part doesn't care how her first name is spelled in English, but since it's VeroniKA in the program, I follow that lead.

I also agree with another poster -- I am no fan of City Center. Silly too since I spend so much time there seeing dancing.
But the seats are uncomfortable; you are packed in like sardines and the foot and leg space are non-existent (and I'm just a normal size size 8 woman). Finally there seems to be no rake (or is it called an incline?) in the orchestra. If you get behind a tall person you're sunk (or simply can't see).

But it does sound like I'm the only person on this board who actually liked seeing ABT at Avery Fisher. I had a great seat; had no problem seeing anything; had plenty of legroom and could see over my neighbor in front (and he was at least 4 inches taller than my 5 ft. 6).

Gia Kourlas' piece in the Arts section of the NYTimes tomorrow (well, today). The review is well written, thoughtful and interesting. That said, I don't agree with her assessment of Benjamin Millepied's ballet. However, even though we disagree, I found her comments and observations
thought provoking and well put.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/09/arts/dan...t.html?ref=arts

I agree. As I've noted before, Veronika's father is Estonian (and the last name "Part" means "duck" as in the farm animal), and Estonian uses the Latin alphabet, with some practical omissions. For instance, there is no "c", that letter's job being done by "k" and "s". So, although she was born and grew up in St. Petersburg, Veronika does have Estonian roots, and in Estonia her name would definitely be written with a "k". And, of course, that's how she herself spells it in English.

I'm glad the NYT article showed appreciation for Ratmansky's more "high brow" (in the sense of subtle, less gimmicky and less obvious) approach over the two other choreos, and lauded his piece.

What I think the NYT article did not do is to differentiate between the quality of Millepied's piece, which, even though paling in quality against Ratmansky's piece, was still noticeably better than the worse piece of the three from Barton. In providing less-than-favorable assessments of the choreography of Millepied and Barton, the article does not distinguish between the two very much. But maybe the point is that Ratmansky's work is so far superior to the other two, that the level of the other two relative to each other was not important.

"The main draw was three new ballets by the choreographers Aszure Barton, Benjamin Millepied and Alexei Ratmansky. Clearly Mr. Ratmansky, the company’s artist in residence, had the upper hand in his spellbinding “Seven Sonatas".... But for all its attitude and power, “Everything Doesn’t Happen at Once” rarely rises beyond proficient. If the Avery Fisher Hall experiment reveals anything, it’s that a choreographic point of view matters more than ever; “Seven Sonatas” could have been shown in a parking garage, and it still would have made you gasp."

I assume all three choreos knew their new pieces would be presented relative to the other two's new pieces this fall. In such an environment, it must have crossed their minds that they would be evaluated relative to the other two. If I were Ratmansky, I would not have worried so much, but I find it interesting how Barton and Millepied might have viewed having their works presented next to Ratmansky's.

Last night Millepied's piece received a standing ovation. I and the people around me felt it was well deserved. It showcased the wonderful ABT dancers in a way those of us who are ABT regulars rarely get to see. He definetely handles groups of dancers well and that was exciting after the rest of the evening.

Maybe because of the second cast and because Avery Fisher makes it hard to see the lower body,the Ratmatsky seemed merely pleasant in comparison. Although the Barton piece didn't hang together it was great to see Paloma, Misty and the extraordinary men, in her vocabulary.

Looks like the people in the Orchestra had a different opinion of Millipied's "Everything", versus those in the Tiers. It looked more organized from above, where I could see it would appear less organized at eye level.

Reading this thread I'm struck by how differently various people react to the same work. There are such contrasting opinions on all three works. The only thing everyone seems to agree on is the excellent level of dancing. Art is in the eye of the beholder? Thanks to all for your reviews.

dirac's daily links include two more reviews of ABT's opening night, both also stating a preference for Ratmansky's choreography:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/fc8dbc70-b42c-11...144feab49a.html
"After Ratmansky, the evening barrels downhill. Choreographer Aszure Barton, whom Baryshnikov has long championed, adores eccentricity but can only imagine it in libidinal terms.... [Millepied's] Everything Doesn’t Happen at Once looks clueless – and makes me feel that way. Is it a tone poem or a drama? Are the dancers characters or figures in a moving landscape? I couldn’t tell."

http://www.danceviewtimes.com/2009/10/fall-gala.html
"A straightforward title for a straightforward piece; it [Seven Sonatas] was by far the most accomplished and polished of the new pieces.... Aszure Barton's "One of Three" ... was a forgettably jokey piece, though used the music as a background rather than a springboard.... It was basically choreography as doodling, with no development, purpose, or real interest, other than enjoying the fine dancers prance around.... Benjamin Millepied's "Everything Doesn't Happen at Once" was the most ambitious and the most opaque, beginning with its irritatingly vague title.... Beneath the glib and slick surface, there is a truly vulgar depth to his choreography, which seems to exist only for applause.... it was painful to see a dancer as rich and talented as he [Simkin] is used as a party trick."

Thank goodness the professional reviewers so far have seen through the superficiality of Millepied's choreography and evaluated it as it ought to be.

I'm surprised that ABT is taking this program on the road to its tour to China. I guess I shouldn't be surprised though. No scenery transport costs = cheap program to bring on tour.

My sense is that, like the Met the ABT feels pressure to keep at the leading edge of their art. They want to be both a museum of masterpieces and a workshop for new ideas in dance. For one, I am thrilled that they do both, preferring the masterpieces but enjoying the new choreographers for contrast and to see how many ways dance can be a vehicle for beauty and ideas. The new works are not always successful from my point of view and they won't appeal to everyone (what does?), but I suspect that ABT feels a need to be a company with broad appeal, like a university not a college. With their standing in classical dance, they are able to bring new thinking to audiences which might otherwise not be exposed to the new.

The recent bruhaha over the Met Opera's Bondy production of Tosca raises the issue of modernizing classics which is yet another approach to take to introduce new ideas to the genre. This is treacherous territory however and some works lend themselves better to interpretation than others, perhaps related to the libretto. Once you mix it up, you bring in all sorts of cultural messages established for centuries into play opening up all sorts of room for interpretation and response in the audience. Like everything, this will appeal to some and not to others and in the end it may come down to economics. If it helps ticket sales and prestige, it has legs.

As far as dance is concerned, I would imagine new choreography is both fun and challenging for the company and they probably welcome it and makes them better at their classical work too.

I wonder how much new choreography costs relative to the acquisition of access rights to pre-existing choreography, given that the Company has asked dancers to take certain concessions on benefits in the past. Also, I wonder if Ratmansky's residency means that the marginal costs of getting choreography from him in the medium run are lower, because he is paid a fixed amount that is his primary compensation (?)?

I agree that the Fall seasons has opportunities in terms of exploring what ABT's role is in maintaining and advancing the art. Also, given that the more senior principals seem not to be interested in participating in the Fall and stating the obvious, the Fall gives some opportunities for the corps, soloists and the more junior principals (not that some junior principals are not already prominently featured at the Met).

It's a pleasure reading these posts. Thanks to all.

Question: Do any of these new works have the legs to carry them to a future with other companies around the world -- and, if so, where and by whom? Will they gather dust in the back of ABT's storage closet? Or what?

Heading back to Avery Fisher today(mid-Orchestra seat) for the matinee. Hee Seo -- one of my favorite young dancers -- is in this cast of the Ratsmansky ballet (Seven Sonatas). I do think that this ballet is a keeper, and could be performed by other companies as well. This program also includes Murphy and Hallberg (hooray!) performing "Other Dances." And I can't wait to see Millepied's ballet again. As I said here earlier in the week, I very much enjoyed this ballet. That said, I do find it amusing that (often) the audience (at various companies and venues) loves something (as in this ballet), but the critics do not. However, I truly enjoy reading said reviews; occasionally I'll even alter my opinion after considering the critics' analysis. And not to be too sappy but in this terrible time of media cuts (especially arts writers/reporters/editors), we're lucky to still have a lot of coverage here in NYC.

Ratmansky's "Seven Sonatas" absolutely would fit into any great classical company, both here and abroad. I can't imagine any artistic director saying "no" to this piece. A wonderful challenge, technically and a wonder to watch. Every viewing brings new depth of pleasure. Kudos to ABT for this one! The Millepied would look good on San Francisco Ballet, or Pacific Northwest, possibly even Miami City could have a go at it. Personally, I think it needs some tweaking, but it has such great energy going for it. The dancers seem to be having a wonderful time. As for the Barton, the less said the better. Ouch! What a dud. Even the costumes aren't worth saving. The men in their black suits look like refugees from the male variation from Paul Taylor's "Cloven Kingdom". If only this ballet had that work's energy and drive. I found myself nostalgic for last season's Stallings piece, also a dud. Well, you can't win them all. For the most part the Avery Fisher experiment has been a winner. It surely gives a new perspective to the company. Off to the matinee!

Last season's Stallings, even though generally dubbed a dud, was very good in my mind, at least when danced by the first team that included Hallberg. I loved it. I hope to see it again, although that seems unlikely given its reception.

Did anyone see the Friday afternoon performance? If so, please comment on the Ratmansky cast.

Lots of empty seats at today's matinee. House went wild -- standing ovation --for Benjamin Millepied's ballet, and especially for Daniil Simkin. I thought Marcelo Gomes and Isabella Boylston were even better today than they were on opening night (and they were terrific then). Kristi Boone, Maria Riccetto, and (again) Blaine Hoven were also especially impressive (all the dancers were really).
I very much enjoyed the second cast for "Seven Sonatas" including Yuriko Kajiya, Sara Lane, Hee Seo, Carlos Lopez, Joseph Phillips and Jared Matthews. The pianist, Barbara Bilach was wonderful too. I still didn't like "One of Three, " despite enjoying the dancers (Blaine Hoven, Craig Salstein, Jared Matthews and Michele Wiles were standouts).
The highlight of the afternoon for me was David Hallberg and Gillian Murphy in Robbins' "Other Dances" (one of my favorite ballets. Have seen
many casts at NYCB perform this piece). They were simply magnificent.

It was also incredibly fun to watch the dancers warm up (in practice clothes too) before each ballet (there was no curtain, and no room in the wings, as has been discussed here already). The audience seemed to love this almost as much as the ballets themselves. It really was a treat.

I was also there, and sadly there were many empty seats. I enjoyed the Ratmansky piece, and think it might be a keeper. The cast danced well. I must say my eye always goes to Sarah Lane because of her beautiful port de bras and the wonderful openness of her upper body. Her partner Joseph Phillips won't be in the corps for long. I wish, however, that Ratmansky did not go with the cliche of the cutesy short person's pas de deux. Yes, play to their strengths of moving quickly (and these 2 did so without ever seeming rushed) but all that looking under the arm cute stuff is - well as I said - a cliche.

One of Three - I can't comment upon it too much because my mind sort of wandered. It didn't seem to have much to do with the music.

Other Dances - the opening duet - matching lines and musicality were glorious. The rest I felt lacking. These are world class dancers who are great, but I was disappointed in some ways. I felt that in Hallberg the "Russianisms" such as the head shaking and folk dance movements seemed plastered on. There was nothing organic or, to my way of thinking, fun about them. Murphy of course showed me steps that I didn't know were in the thing (I've seen it a few times before, including Makarova/Baryshnikov), but she too seemed to be missing a sense of fun. The lifts seemed lacking in the sense of abandon that the music asks for. There is a lift in which she is held sideways, and then drops to his arms and is turned around (a bad description, I hope you know what I mean). It was done well at every stage, but you saw every stage (lift, drop, turn) and so there was no sweep or sense of abandon, it looked cautious to me.

Millepied - I don't think it's a keeper, but I think it shows he could make a keeper. Oddly, for me the pas was the weakest part (I say this because of the discussion of the Boylston/Millepied relationship). My husband told me that this was the section during which he watched the musicians. In the opening movement I liked the way Millepied explored and developed the theme of the angles he had the dancers make. He did this in movements and patterns. Of course the Simkin moments were very, very entertaining. Will this be a problem in casting? Can anyone else do it? Does his understudy have a slightly different version?

I too enjoyed watching the dancers warm up, mark, practice between ballets. I wonder how the dancers felt.

As a comment to my last question. My husband, who was with Dennis Wayne Dancers, said he loved the opportunity to be onstage before an audience before the actual performance (this was part of the D. Wayne thing)

The role is Simkin's but the company has other dancers ready to dance the role. Second cast's Arron Scott's version is different. I only saw the second cast on Friday so can not give details other than what I am told is called an "aerial cartwheel" was replaced by a switch leap.

t

Was the second cast's version in that time only?
Because I'm planning to go to Beijing from Japan & there will be 2times of this program,it's my very concern.
Anyone who know,please tell me about that.

I want to thank everyone for their detailed reviews& sorry for my English.

Surprisingly, we enjoyed the Millepied piece very much.It,probably, would be even more effective if seen in a bigger space and from an upper seat.Stella was just great in her 2 very different roles.Maria B., Renata, Eric and esp Arron S. were standouts in their solos.
i did not like the AF Hall venue. Surely, the Koch Theatre can squeeze ABT for 2 weeks in the fall?

Bingham, assuming that they are able to continue their performance schedule at something like their past years, the NYCO opens in September and runs to mid November, not much of a gap where the house is dark.

Of course right now the NYCO is in an iffy position, their 2009-10 seasons are much abbreviated. Only the future will show just how long their upcoming seasons will be.

Your English is clear, babclyde.

As of now, casts are not posted for the programs in Beijing, but based on past experience, ABT will change casts between the first and second performances, although perhaps not completely.

You can check here for announcements and, perhaps, changes.

Welcome to BalletTalk. We hope to hear from you after your visit to Beijing. Have a wonderful time!

I saw the program for a second time on the Sat matinee. We had the "second" cast for the Ratmansky ballet. I liked the opening night cast better, with one exception. I preferred Sarah Lane over Xiomara Reyes. Lane was amazing in articulating each and every step of her difficult role. The Ratmansky ballet is a keeper, but I still think it would have been better if a few sections late in the ballet were omitted. I disliked the Barton ballet even more on the second viewing than the first. It is a dud - boring but harmless. I read a few posts above that thought Stallings' Citizen was better that the Barton. For me, Citizen holds the dubious distinction of being one of the worst ballets I've ever seen. I also enjoyed a repeat viewing of the Millipied ballet. I too think it will benefit from a larger stage. Simkin is incredible. I hope they give him a Don Q in the Spring. I enjoyed seeing Other Dances w. Hallberg and Murphy. Perhaps not the best performance of that ballet I have seen, but it was good. I'm sorry I missed Part Gomes in those roles.

I'm still floating on the cloud that Part and Gomes sent me to on Friday night with their Other Dances. I don't like to throw around words like "revelation," but that word does not overstate my experience of that performance.

If you saw Suzanne Farrell dance, you will likely remember some performances where she seemed to be dancing from a place so deeply private that it was almost embarrassing to watch. That was what Part created both in the opening adagio and both of her variations -- and even manage to retain in the upbeat coda -- in Other Dances.

In the adagio, she and Gomes had as strong a connection as they ever shared in Swan Lake. It was an intensely romantic reading, and at a moment when Part held a balance a moment longer than expected, Gomes was right there with her, both deleve-ing from pointe/demi-pointe in perfect synchrony. I also loved how their backs -- epaulement and cambre -- moved as if the same spirit inhabited both bodies.

But the truly magical effect was how, despite my having seen this pas perhaps dozens of times, including by its originators, Makarova and Baryshnikov, Part made me believe she was making it up as she went along. She used the pauses in the choreography to suggest, "What will I do now?", taking a "normal" walking step or two (as choreographed) before breaking again into dance. And through the whole piece, she exulted in the feeling of the movements and of the air around her. It was one of those performances that I don't expect to see repeated, but I implore ABT to give this pair the opportunity to dance OD again in New York. It's a sure bet I'll be in the house.

Gomes was also terrific. Even though I know the gag in the man's first variation, his feigned dizziness made me laugh out loud.

The memory of this performance will surely linger as one of the highlights (unexpectedly) of my ballet-watching career.

Maria Riccetto replaced Isabella Boylston in Some Assembly Required. Riccetto sometimes has trouble filling her space and projecting, and in this respect she seemed to improve. She seemed to enjoy the jazz-inflected movements of the ballet, which despite its happy ending, contained too much of the angry (or mock-angry?) battle-of-the-sexes theme we see so much of these days.

I enjoyed Seven Sonatas more than I had on Opening Night, perhaps because I had a better seat (rear orchestra, center, thanks to the kindness of a stranger ), and perhaps because Sarah Lane, whose progress has been unsteady, displayed her bold and radiant star quality in the role originated by Xiomara Reyes who (according to the program insert) is injured.

carbro, in her "Swan Lake" last June, which I believe you also saw, I would go as far as to say she was actually 'Creating The Ballet', not just performing it or making me believe that she was making it up. I know that statements like this can involve matters of degree and precise definitions, but there was something that she did that for me made the ballet 'Her Creation'.

She may have performed all the steps exactly as choreographed and she may have acted the role exactly as expected, but the 'Essence of the Ballet' was somehow still Hers. Whether it was simply 'nuancing' or actually becoming Odette-Odile, she somehow accomplished this. I have seen her do it before. If she achieves a certain comfort level, she seems to be able to take over the complete reality.

I totally agree with you about the "revelation" that can be found in this brilliant and magnificent lady's performances.


[spelling correction made]