On October 17, at 7:30 p.m., legendary ballerina Cynthia Gregory will speak to Joel Lobenthal (dance critic of the now sadly defunct NY Sun) at the Barnes & Noble at Lincoln Center. She’ll be promoting a new DVD, Together, of her work with Fernando Bujones.
So, last night I went to the Guggenheim primarily to see this Works & Process combination dance / fashion program, “A Two Part Affair — Ballet and Modern Meet Uptown.” I was really looking forward to it because, unlike the other W & P programs, which are more of a preview of an upcoming show, this was a performance only to be shown at the museum. Two choreographers — one, Pam Tanowitz, from the Modern world; the other, Brian Reeder, from Ballet — collaborated to form a kind of hybrid dance form.
Also exciting was that Jillian Lewis, from Project Runway, did the costumes. She, along with Tanowitz and Reeder, spoke about the production on a panel moderated by dance writer Robert Greskovic (who is actually a pretty funny guy — who knew! — cracking jokes right and left, making fun of himself for being so out of it as to not know who Lewis was 🙂 I probably shouldn’t admit it but neither did I :S — I just don’t watch enough TV…)
Anyway, the program, as its name implied, consisted of two parts: the first danced to Renaissance music; the second to modern composers like Charles Wuorinen (creator of the upcoming operatic version of Brokeback Mountain), Philip Glass, and Lou Harrison. This second part, I far preferred to the first, though to be honest, I thought most of it was pretty eh… pretty, but just nothing that really blew me away, either costume- or choreography-wise.
I feel like we’re currently in the midst of a rather unfortunate period of Minimalism. Choreography consisted mainly of ballerinas tip-toe-ing around, taking very small steps, men and the sole female Modern dancer doing these small side-sweeping steps, sometimes with flexed feet, sometimes pointed. Once in a while there’d be a leg slightly raised and a very small waist-high lift, but overall there was nothing spectacular, nothing the least bit dramatic about the movement. I think choreographers still need to tell a kind of story with the movement, even if it’s not a full narrative but of the Balanchine (“whenever a man and woman are onstage together, there’s a story) variety. I just didn’t see that here — dancers kind of partnered at random with one another, broke into a short solo, but there didn’t seem to be anything to it that you could hook onto.
And the costumes — well, here are some more pictures so you can see for yourselves:
So, as you can see, all of the men’s costumes consisted of pink or blue diaphanous t-shirts and tights with cut-outs that were also see-through in places. The female dancers all wore leotards with exterior underwire bra; the two ballerinas sassy little striped tutus and the Modern woman a lacey thing that wrapped around her neckline feather boa-like. But the tutus and boa were worn only in the first, Renaissance section; they were taken off for the modern.
I mean, Lewis was likely going for sexy– she said she wanted to focus on the body, highlight the human form — but to me, I guess that’s just been done before. Plus, she used such light colors and mundane-looking fabrics, the costumes just kind of almost weren’t even there. And, even including tutus and boa, they just didn’t seem to fit at all in the context of the Renaissance. I then remembered seeing David Hallberg dance earlier at the Guggenheim in a fabulous Christian Lacroix. He left out the delicious candy-apple velvet jacket, but here are some pics he took of himself in the tights. I mean, hello — THIS is what we need to spice up Ballet, I say! I say away with minimalism; bring back Lacroix!
Anyway, I really did appreciate the concept of this program; I think collaborations can be very fruitful and lead to innovation and creativity. Back to the dancing for a moment, I really just think the choreographers needed some more time. There was one point during the second, modern, part where Roman Zhurbin (center, in the bottom picture) held his arms out and each ballerina grabbed on. He lifted, walked slowly around stage carrying the two of them. To me, it was beautifully reminiscent of Balanchine’s Apollo. At center stage was one of the male modern dancers in a kind of Martha Graham-esque pose, body bent over forward, foot flexed back, seeming to carry a non-existent world atop his arched-over shoulders. So, also Apollo-like, yet fundamentally Modern in form. It was like a double-sided Apollo. I feel like they should have gotten rid of everything else, used this stunning moment as a starting point.
I think the rest of it was kind of too hybrid. They didn’t use the Ballet dancers to show the beauty and poetry of the dance form; ballerinas were going on pointe and Zhurbin would point instead of flex his foot at times, but that doesn’t really mean anything. It just looked like a very watered-down form of Ballet. And then both Zhurbin and the female ballet dancers had these very muscular bodies — particularly Zhurbin (aka Ballet god! — never noticed that before; ABT is really under-using him…), and the Modern dancers were more thin, almost a bit scrawny in comparison. But of course there’s a reason for that — Ballet requires great use of the legs, the thigh muscles for those huge jumps and the calves for pointe work. And the upper body is so developed for spectacular overhead lifting. If you don’t show some of that difference in the movement, I think the bodies end up looking a little weirdly unbalanced…
One final thing: writer Claudia La Rocco didn’t see the program, unfortunately, but here’s an interesting discussion she and her commenters started about Ballet’s current kind of identity crisis and how costuming fits into that.
Hmmm, this is turning out to be a bit of a drama. NYTimes chief Sir Alastair weighs in on Alexei Ratmansky’s joining ABT, as does Apollinaire Scherr, who points to this piece of commentary, one of the most interesting in my opinion, by Robert Johnson in the New Jersey Star Ledger.
Johnson is the first critic I’ve read who’s not head over heels in love with the choreographer, but one of his reasons for so being is that he seems to think Ratmansky has somewhat of a Communist streak. He says that during his directorship of the Bolshoi, Ratmansky tried to revive the company, suffering in the wake of Perestroika, by re-staging some successful Soviet-era ballets. Johnson asks what “red eminence” this programming might have. Ratmansky’s own work “Bright Stream,” set to music by Soviet composer Dmitri Shostakovitch, and praised by many dance critics here (the ballet, that is, was praised, not Shostakovitch), Johnson calls “a disingenuous frolic on a Soviet collective farm,” then interprets Ratmansky’s latest “Concerto DSCH” which recently premiered at the New York City Ballet as a mockery of Imperial Russia, with Soviet revival style triumphing.
I unfortunately haven’t seen “Bright Stream” or any of these other Soviet era ballets, but of course am now dying to. I did see “Concerto DSCH” and didn’t interpret it at all the way Johnson does.
But, even if you can attribute these underlying, subconscious politicized ideas to the choreographer, which is a huge if, so what? Can’t someone critique the Imperial period without being considered pro-Stalinist? (Johnson reminds of the bloody atrocities committed by the Soviet regime) Has anyone ever seen Peterhof? It looks just like Versailles. Your first thought is, whoa, look at all this opulence, no wonder there was a rebellion. But in any event, can an aesthetic critique be interpreted as a political critique? I personally think not, but even if so, is this reason for threat? Aren’t we post-Cold War now?
I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, but I found that part of the article a bit shocking in a McCarthyist kind of way. But I do have to say, I applaud Johnson for resisting herd mentality and offering the first real Ratmansky criticism. (He does have more bases for criticism; this is just the one that seemed most prominent to me. And, by reading James Wolcott, Laura Jacobs seems critical as well — I’ve got to get a subscription to the New Criterion!) In the end, I do have to say, with all I’ve read on Ratmansky this past week, Johnson most makes me want to run out and see everything I can by the man…
Oh and, somewhat apropos of the critics jumping on the bandwagon thing, I just want to point people to an interesting discussion, begun by Claudia La Rocco (who is so awesome to comment here 🙂 ) on fans versus critics down in the comments section of this post.
I went back to ABT last night for another Merry Widow with Jose and Julie in the leads. Couldn’t resist! And I’m glad I did; I ended up meeting Roslyn Sulcas, writer from the New York Times, who is really nice and down to earth, and elegantly beautiful.
Anyway, I already wrote a bit about this ballet earlier, and have to get ready for a pre-competition dinner, but I quickly just want to mention a few other tidbits about Jose that make him so great, that I noticed last night. He keeps in character throughout, even when he’s not center stage. I mean, they all do, but Jose really keeps in character. As Julie’s rich widow was dancing with the Pontevedrian men, each man trying to curry her wealthy available favor, Jose was sitting off to the side flirting devilishly with Misty Copeland. And he was really flirting, not just chatting. At one point he raised his eyebrows at her in a way that made me nearly fall out of my seat.
And the way he struts around stage, like a cocky, spoiled, at times drunk, misbehaving boy … it’s not at all balletic, the way other dancers might do, but perfectly in character (and somehow on him, mischievous as it is, becomes so endearing).
I also noticed that when he spots as he’s doing a slow turn, carrying his ballerina in his arms, he looks at each spot on the floor with intent. During his pas de deux with Julie when he was remembering happy times with her in the past, he looked down at each point on the floor like he was lost, forlorn, wondering where they all went. With most dancers they look like they’re doing exactly what they’re doing — spotting so they don’t lose balance. He turns simple technique into art.
I also wanted to point out how fantastic Joseph Phillips was, as leader of the Pontevedrian men, with his spectacular bravura-embellished folk dancing, and Craig Salstein as he sweetly but sadly unsuccessfully vied for Julie’s hand. And Julie as the widow was sweetly flirtatious, her smiles and raised eyebrows infusing her prolonged flexes of the foot into quick, snappingly sharp points, with added sexual meaning.
Anyway, I’m very excited for Giselle next week!
Happy 4th of July, everyone!
Last night’s La Bayadere was ABT‘s best night at the Met yet. They had the largest, most enthusiastic audience, many of whom seemed to be Marcelo fans! He got lots of ‘bravos’ and huge applause throughout, and he sensed early on the crowd was really with him so he kind of took it over the top with the enormous jetes and those interesting running-in-the-air jumps, whatever they’re called. I thought he may throw his back out after he landed a tour jete on one knee and dramatically arched back, his fingers gracing the ground behind him. And when he lands a jete it’s almost earth-shattering because of his size. But of course those huge leaps fit in with the role too since his character here is a warrior. It’s funny; it was like he was on a mission to really deliver – -it seemed his dancing was even fuller-bodied and more theatrical than usual. He’s always my favorite no matter 🙂
Dancers are definitely very sensitive to how the crowd is reacting to what they’re doing — or at least Marcelo and Angel are, which is probably why I like them so. You can read their feelings all over their faces. Or at least you can if you kind of “know” them from seeing them so many times.
And Veronika Part really owns this role. Her expressive wrists, those luscious developes of which she is the queen (lift of the leg at the knee, then slowly unfolding to a full extension), and her gorgeously almost tragically poetic arabesques (back leg lifted). Oh, by the way, Bayadere is set in ancient India, and tells the story of Solor the warrior who falls in love with a temple dancer, Nikiya, but is betrothed to the princess Gamzatti. Veronika (as Nikiya) got loads of applause during her solo curtain calls at the very end of course. This is how the ballet should always be; the crowd going nuts like that.
But Marcelo and Veronika weren’t just great on their own; they were a perfect partnership as well, which to me is really everything, more important than the solo dancing. I really believed they were hopelessly, tragically in love. She was so forlorn, I wanted to cry for her when it was clear she wasn’t going to get her love. And Marcelo as always was the perfect actor, making perfectly clear how truly torn he was between his beloved and his betrothed, especially after the latter’s sexy, seductive whipping fouette sequence, and then how distraught he was on realizing he was in love with Nikiya but had to marry the princess.
Of course this ballet is so beautiful, many come regardless of who’s dancing, just for the story and the poetry of the choreography, particularly the breathtaking Kingdom of the Shades scene (which at first I have to admit I wasn’t so fond of because it’s so slow and there are few men 🙂 ) but has really grown on me with its beauty. This is the part of the ballet where Solor sleeps and dreams of his Nikiya, whose image floods his subconsious by suddenly duplicating itself many many times over, as illustrated by a series of ballerinas all in white, emanating from the mountainside traveling forward in a pattern of lovely arabesques, then taking center stage and bourreeing in place, all in perfect sync, in perfect harmony, reminiscient of a spirit-world, and foreshadowing that this is the only place Solor and Nikiya will be together.
Finally, Michele Wiles was PERFECT as the princess Gamzatti. Throughout the first two acts she was icy cold bitchiness, which to me, she’s thus far excelled at. Critic Joan Acocella once referred to her as a sunny cheerleader type, but I’ve never seen that in her. I see her more as the spoiled rich girl who will have her way at all costs. She was pure golden-dressed evil when she puts the snake in Nikiya’s bouquet, basically casting a spell on her. Yet, when it’s clear Marcelo’s Solor is in love with Nikiya and is only going through the marriage because he must, you really start to feel sorry for Michele’s princess. She tries hard to maintain her power, but she can’t. She found the vulnerability in the character and made her sympathetic and that’s what makes this a true tragedy — for all.
It was also just such a great night because there were so many people there. I finally got to meet James Wolcott from Vanity Fair, and his wife Laura Jacobs who writes about dance for the New Criterion (and whose book I keep going on about — she writes so beautifully about dance)! I suspected they’d be there because they love Veronika so. I’m so shy, I always feel like such an oaf meeting famous people 🙂 But they’re really nice and it was so cool to finally meet them!
Philip was there too and we hung out during first intermission, with friends and blog readers Susan and Philip’s opera buddy (whose name I keep forgetting…)
Great ballet, favorite dancers, very fun audience, meeting famous writers you admire, chatting with old friends — excellent night all around! I am happy.
I’ve had another full weekend of dance and am quite exhausted. Saturday and Sunday days I went to New York City Ballet for, sadly, my last of their programs celebrating Jerome Robbins. Until this season I’d only seen the very major works by Robbins, so it’s been really educational to see the others, although this season made clear why some of his ballets survived better than others.
Yesterday’s program was all set to Chopin (much of it to piano music) and included the famous DANCES AT A GATHERING, which I thought too slow-moving and long (the man needed an editor, big time!) to sustain my attention and one of my favorites OTHER DANCES, similar to GATHERING but much shorter and to the point. Julie Kent from American Ballet Theater, a favorite of mine, guest-starred in this one, with the very handsome Gonzalo Garcia. They were lovely together, and you can see why Julie is the star she is with the little things she does like holding her hands to her heart while regarding the onstage pianist, indicating hearing a beloved tune she just MUST dance to. And third was the comical, slapsticky THE CONCERT in which Sterling Hyltin and Andrew Veyette (fast becoming a favorite of mine) cracked me up so I nearly laughed out loud (naughty in such quiet atmosphere!!!)
Today’s matinee was the long, but far better (imo) THE GOLDBERG VARIATIONS set to Bach. It was long and similar to GATHERING in that it involved many couples, a combination of solos, duets and ensemble work in which the dancers interracted with each other, but there was so much more variation in the choreography, so many surprises — Andrew Veyette and Amar Ramasar doing handstands-cum-somersaults over each other, Andrew lying down and balancing Amar in the air only by his feet, Amar floating bird like above, boys exiting stage together disregarding girls, girls doing the same, playful wiggles of the behind for Andrew and Wendy Whelan, an astonishing series of turning leaps for Gonzalo and Jared Angle — a lot of great, fast, fun, original choreography during both allegro and slower adagio sections that made you keep your eyes peeled for what was coming next. Even costume changes from 18th Century to contemporary workout ballet garb helped keep your attention.
The second one on for today, entitled BRAHMS/HANDEL I didn’t like so much. It was co-choreographed with Twyla Tharp and it just didn’t seem to go anywhere. It made full use of the company and there was a lot of playfulness, mainly by, again, Andrew Veyette, who at times looked like a frog bouncing from one lillypad to another. He’s so cute. I really like him and I’m realizing it’s only partly because he’s such a great dancer who brings so much to the stage. I think it’s also that he reminds me of my cousin who died a couple of years ago. Just in his lightness of spirit, his ability to be funny, and his youthful enthusiasm and boundless energy, the way he throws himself so into everything he does.
Anyway, I have reviews of some of these programs upcoming, so won’t go on anymore here.
On Saturday night, I saw a small ballet company, Christopher Caines Dance Company, at the Rose Theater in the Jazz At Lincoln Center area of the Time Warner building. It was my first time both seeing this company and in that theater, and, man is that space small! It’s a tiny room, almost a studio, and they had little cocktail tables set up surrounded by chairs, for the audience to sit at. I’d sat in that kind of space for a Flamenco production at Baryshnikov’s Performing Arts Center, but never for a ballet performance. When they first began I thought, oh no, this is far too intimate for ballet, but then, when the program got underway, I began to forget my surroundings and became mesmerized by the dancing in a way I don’t think I’ve ever been before with ballet. It was really cool. Anyway, review coming up!
Finally, I ‘ve managed to upload my pictures of Damian Woetzel’s farewell performance on Wednesday night. I liked best the picture I posted up top because it looks like he and Ethan Stiefel are about to have an intimate moment 🙂 Anyway, here’s the rest of the album. Click on thumbnails for captions. Ethan Stiefel, Paloma Herrera, Gillian Murphy, and Angel Corella were there from American Ballet Theater, and they all, along with all of NYCB went up onstage at the end to join in the confetti storm. Angel and pals sat in the row in front of us (I sat next to Philip and in front of Evan) and I of course I couldn’t stop fixating. I was really nervous and I think it’s because I had just turned in my Angel write-up to HuffPost and then there he was right in front of me. Of course I only said glowing things about him, but it still made me nervous being around him like that. The man is like a human-sized doll, I swear. His skin is like milk, not a single flaw, his hair was gelled up into this almost Elvis-esque do, not a single strand out of place, and his long-lashed eyes, the way they blink open and shut and open and shut … just like a walking baby doll.
Anyway, I feel like everyone’s already said everything about Damian’s farewell, but it was a wonderful show. First on was FANCY FREE, Robbins’s character-driven classic about three sailors on shore leave trying hilariously unsuccessfully to pick up some girls in a bar. Damian danced the cocky one (also known as the Latin, or Rhumba sailor, but I call him the cocky shithead); Tyler Angle was the romantic, and Joaquin De Luz the short, high-jumping guy who tried to impress with his bag of tricks.
Next on was the Rubies section from Balanchine’s JEWELS, the Russian choreographer’s tribute to American jazz and sass. This one was fun because in this ballet there’s a main couple with lots of virtuosic partnering and alternating solos and the program had listed Ashley Bouder and Joaquin De Luz as that couple. But it was actually danced by three different couples, including, in the middle, Damian, partnering sweet Yvonne Borree. It was a nice surprise, and man, did he give his section some real gusto. At one point he went spinning off into the wings, like, in Sir Alastair’s nice simile (in his wonderfully-descriptive and informative review), “an accelerating tornado.”
And third on, was PRODIGAL SON, based on the Biblical story of a boy who tries to go out into the world on his own, only to return to his loving father beaten and nearly destroyed. So much pathos for his very final performance! I think the whole audience was in tears.
Four dance-dazed and star-struck bloggers during intermission! Thanks to Sarah (second from right) for the photo. Also, there’s an event tomorrow night (Monday) at the Jewish Community Center about Robbins. Some NYCB dancers will be performing and there’s a lecture. I can’t go unfortunately, it sounds really interesting. See Sarah’s post for deets or go here.
Yesterday I finally had the chance to check out the new Twyla Tharp ballet at ABT. Overall, I thought there were exciting parts, and I recognized a lot of elements from her other work, but the sum of the parts didn’t really add up to a compelling whole. I also thought it was very well acted and danced by my favorite 😀 But more on that in a minute. First, let me talk a bit about “Etudes,” which I LOVED, and which was on first.
“Etudes,” by Harald Lander of the Royal Danish Ballet, made in 1948, was a radiant celebration of ballet. It started with very young dancers likely from the Jacqueline Kennedy School of Ballet associated with ABT, then curtains went down and rose again to reveal a set of older dancers warming up at the barre. There were three barres set up in a kind of half-pentagon that opened out toward the audience. The lighting was dark except for a white light shined on their legs. They simply did warm up tendus (points of the toe) to front, out to side, then rondes (circlings of the floor with the leg), then swinging kicks, etc. Basic warm-up vocabulary. But they were all in perfect unison and each set of several dancers pointed, swung, rondeed, etc. in a different direction, making for a mesmerizing effect. At times it looked like a Rockettes routine.
Later, tutued ballerinas, more advanced and ready to learn performance technique, came out and did their own warm-up, the lights making their black puffed-skirts looking almost like upside-down ladies’ wigs from afar. It made for a really cool visual effect. Soon, the barres were taken away and, like in a real class, the floor work began. One set of dancers performed a series of high jumps in place, then began flying across the stage in a diagonal line, doing grand jetes, the men eventually doing barrel turns around its perimeter (my favorite 🙂 ).
A prima ballerina, in my version, Irina Dvorovenko — a role perfect for her- emerged in splendid white tutu accompanied by two men, one (Cory Stearns) her princely danseur noble, the other (Jared Matthews) a more bravura type (who performs high, thrilling jumps, fast turns, etc.) — all three the main ingredients of classical ballet. They danced a perfect pas de trois, and at times from my vantage point in the middle orchestra, Irina looked like a tiny china doll atop a child’s music box. She was sheer perfection and the quintessential classical prima ballerina. I like Cory and Jared but don’t think either has the star power, at least at this point (they are both still young) to be her equal.
At first I thought how much more thrilling the ballet would have been with someone like David Hallberg in the princely role and Angel Corella or Herman Cornejo as the virtouso. And then I realized they all would have completely stolen the show. The focus, in this man-centric company, should be on the ballerina for a change! And Irina is the perfect ballerina for that focus.
Anyway, who ever knew simple classical ballet vocabulary, a celebration of the dance from class to performance, could be so captivating? But it was. And the audience ate it up right along with me and went nuts with applause, so I know it wasn’t just me. A great introduction to the thrill and beauty of the art form for people new to ballet, IMO.
Now, onto the new Tharp. First, I must say I am beyond overjoyed whenever I get to see either Marcelo Gomes or Jose Carreno onstage, and both had major parts in this ballet, so I was basically on ecstasy 🙂 And of course they both danced marvelously, Marcelo, I think, to an extent saving the ballet with his dramatic skills.
Tharp named it “Rabbit and Rogue,” but it could have been named Everything Tharp But the Kitchen Sink. As in her “In the Upper Room,” at times the dancers appeared to emerge right out of the woodwork, the dark back lighting making the back seem wall-less. There was the pretend playful boxing from that ballet, the poor little fellow who humorously gets beat up by his girl from “Baker’s Dozen,” the balletic vocabulary fighting for space with social dance from “Deuce Coupe.” It’s like she just combined several of her ballets into one.
Anyway, from what I can make of the story-line, it’s something like this: Rogue (Marcelo) and Rabbit (Sascha Radetsky) play-fight with each other, over what I’m not entirely sure, but I think it’s who has the better dance style. Rogue is more modern, moves with more angularity, virility, and solid form; Rabbit is more soft and wiggly, moves in more of a jazzy, not-a-care-in-the-world manner. Rogue as danced by Marcelo seemed more competitive (but in a cutely jocular way) with Rabbit than Rabbit did with Rogue; Rabbit seemed to care less about Rogue’s little jabs and taunts. But this could have been because Marcelo is more of an actor than Sascha…
Anyway, a pair called The Rag Couple (the excellent Kristi Boone, and Cory Stearns again — he must have been tired at the end of the day!) dressed in snazzy black, dance a sexy little number composed of swingy, jazzy elements and a little ballet. I guess they are supposed to represent sinners or denizens of the underworld. The corps emerge dressed in black. Marcelo returns (he and Sascha are also dressed in black unitards with a silver stripe down the side) and dances alone but seems to compete with the corps for attention. At one point, he shuffles off the stage into the wings shrugging and extending a hand outward toward the corps as if indicating he’s given up trying to compete with them and they can have our full attention. Of course the way Marcelo does this is hilarious.
There was a group of four women, probably aged between about 45 and 80 — perhaps a group of sisters taking their mother to the ballet– sitting behind me and the three younger women loved Etudes but the older woman complained it wasn’t her thing; she liked more of a story. When Marcelo made this action, she laughed and shouted I think a little louder than she meant to, “now, this is more my thing!” Her “daughters” giggled and shushed her.
Later, the corps disappear during one of Marcelo’s and Sasha’s alternating solos, only to emerge (again from the wall-less back, as if straight out of the air) now dressed in shiny silvery white. This entourage is led by Jose Carreno (:)) and Maria Riccetto, dancing a pair of characters the program notes call The Gamelan Couple, who dance beautifully together, their vocabularly all ballet. Except it’s not classical ballet. He keeps doing fish dives with her, but with his butt to the audience so you can only see her legs peeking out from behind him. So it’s backwards. (In a way, perhaps Etudes was an ideal ballet to show before this one, since one esteems the classical, the other questions it a bit). This couple represents to me a heavenly ideal, which reminded me again of “Deuce Coupe,” as if it’s the ballet couple who are pure and the social dancers who are cool and fun but a little wild and perhaps bastardize the form a bit. Maybe. Anyway, eventually a group of four — two women, two men — emerge and try to partner each other, sometimes successfully, sometimes not.
Poor Craig Salstein, reprising his “Baker’s Dozen” role as the hapless little fellow, who tries to dance with his partner, the normally sweet Sarah Lane. He’d rather tango, but she’d rather ballet (if I can use that as a verb), and they fight and the poor little guy ends up getting beat up a bit by his lady. Eventually, he gives in and dances a very off pas de deux with her, throwing her up in the air like a rag doll. It’s hilarious the way Craig does it; only he can pull it off.
Later, Marcelo returns doing his competitive thing, Sascha comes back, does his dance, more ensemble work,, etc. At one point, Craig holds his hands up in the air looking toward the heavens and mimics, “why me, God, why me?” then shakes his head, helplessly. It’s now apparent he’s the angel sent down to earth to teach Marcelo and Sascha how to behave like proper dancers and stop the ridiculous bickering. Apparently part of their coming together is to learn to partner women because they’ve both been dancing alone throughout and suddenly Craig throws Misty Copeland at them, they throw her around a bit between each other, partnering her weirdly, but I guess not dropping her on her head or anything hugely untoward. Eventually, everyone is happy. They have proven they are good partners who can share the spotlight with a woman, like the perfect Jose can with Maria. (I am probably projecting all manner of my own crap into this, but I don’t know what else to make of this ballet, although I have to say, I’m liking it more the more I’m trying to interpret it). In the end, Marcelo and Sascha shake hands and wave to the audience and all is well; angel Craig has saved the day. The score, by Danny Elfman, was riveting; at times I kind of felt like I was in a Danny Elfman movie, the way the ballet created kind of an over-the-top alternative universe / fantasy world.
By the way, on my way to the store for ice cream afterward, I overheard a young woman talking on her cell phone pronounce Misty “kick ass,” which she was, as always.
Reviews have really been mixed. My “colleague” at HuffPost, Patricia Zohn, liked it, Sir Alastair did not, Philip found both good and bad in it. Anyone else?
So Angel quite nicely bookended my trip to Blackpool, which I’ll be writing more about — I’m doing a fuller report of the festival for Explore Dance and will definitely link to it when it’s up. This is ballet month in NY and I just don’t want to get behind on my ballet writing!
I haven’t seen much of Angel and I realize how much I’m missing. He danced Prince Siegfried in ABT‘s Swan Lake last night opposite the legendary Nina Ananiashvili as Odette / Odile. I was really looking forward to Nina’s Swan — and she was very beautiful; had lovely liquid arms which looked like she was moving through water, and at one point when she did a series of turns, fluttering about all the while, she really looked like she was about to fly away. Her beautiful feathery expressiveness made for one of the best Odettes I’ve ever seen. She was also very dramatic and acted the role well. I could see her trying to tell the prince of her plight and I felt her misery.
But as usual with the men of ABT, they stole the show. First Angel, who was the perfect boyish prince at the start not wanting to choose a wife and grow up, then turning into the mature, tragic hero who falls in love with Odette but allows himself to be seduced by her evil counterpart. Angel is one of the most charismatic dancers; he has these enormous powers of projection, he’s able to reach everyone sitting everywhere in that massive opera house. I don’t know how but he does it. And his dancing was, as always, spectacular. He did a series of fouettes / pirouettes and went so fast he was a blur. I’ve never seen that before from anyone. Those turns elicited the only, I felt, genuine moment of applause from the audience, which I’ll get to in a minute.
And then, OMG, BLAINE! Blaine blew me right away! He danced the prince’s friend, who initially gives him the bow and arrow to go swan-hunting, and who has a few solos and pas de trois with the town women. He had such height on his jumps, and his form was sheer perfection. I couldn’t believe it was him. I’ve seen him excel at the more modern work the company does in the fall season, but never really at classical. But last night made me think he’s ready for larger roles. His acting was decent, I still think he needs to work on it a bit more, but his dancing is nothing short of superb.
I sat next to a man who writes for that website Ballet Co. He was really nice, introduced me to the press room and its free beverage service! (Apollinare would never go in there!) Said they used to have wine but now only sodas. Anyway, we were talking about the best dancers in each role and he said he found Veronika Part to be the best Odette / Odile, which made me all the sadder I had to miss her because of Blackpool. Anyway, I mentioned that I was really sad she was leaving ABT and the writer told me knew about that interview she gave in which she said she was leaving but he was told by ABT people she’s still on, at least for the foreseeable future. I hope hope hope he’s right. Please let him be right, please Veronika, don’t leave!!
So, the dancing last night was excellent, but the production … hmm. I don’t have much to compare these productions to, to be honest. Most of the classical ballets I’ve been introduced to through ABT, so those are the only productions I know and have nothing to compare them to. They seem fine to me — I care much more about breathtaking dancing and moving portrayals than sets and costumes, etc., but I know critics think too many story elements are taken out, which I kind of agree with, but don’t know what needs to be put back in exactly. Sir Alastair in his review of David and Michelle’s Swan kind of mentioned in passing that, though the dancing was stunning, this production lacked the necessary pathos and tragedy. But he didn’t really go into detail as to why.
At Blackpool I was talking with my friend who’s a ballet fan as well, and who is half Viennese, half Japanese, and she said there’s just something lacking in the American ballet. She couldn’t really say what but just that in Europe the productions are so much more grandiose, so much more thrilling, and celebratory of dance. As I was sitting there last night I began to wonder if it’s not the audience interaction with the production — or lack thereof in the case of the US — that she’s reacting to. Sometimes it’s just the noises made by your neighbors that makes you sit up and take notice of something and I feel like oftentimes American audiences are just dead, like they’re just there to be “cultured” and aren’t really engaged. Last night, all throughout Blaine’s breathtaking jumps not one word, not one clap. When the solo or pdd was finished and the dancers stood and bowed before the audience, people politely clapped, but not during the dancing, with the exception of Angel’s vision-blurring turns. And I feel like Angel’s such a star, people clap because he’s Angel and they know whatever he does is deemed “great”; when it’s someone unexpected people are too sleepy to take notice.
I remember when I was in St. Petersburg 10 years ago now, I went to a Swan Lake at the Maryinsky. There wasn’t a moment of silence throughout the entire thing. People were cheering, clapping, literally screaming throughout — even when a dancer wasn’t doing anything particularly spectactular, people were going completely nuts. I remember being just as entertained by the crazed audience as the actual dancing. And in that Born to Be Wild video of Jose Carreno dancing in Cuba, it’s the same thing.
What is it about these formerly Communist countries where people value art so highly? Is it because they’ve been so deprived? I know ticket prices are significantly, significantly cheaper, and there’s inexpensive sparkling wine in the lobby — the ballet is just more of a celebration there.
I don’t know — what do people think: half asleep audiences who don’t know how to appreciate art, or lacking productions, or both? I just know it’s not the dancing.
My review of the movie “Whatever Lola Wants” that I saw at the Tribeca Film Festival is now up. I feel badly for disliking it so. I really wanted to like it…
The filmmaker spoke after the showing and he seemed like such a nice guy, but I had to be honest about my reasons for not liking his movie. I’m sure he got lots of good reviews, even though it is a small film. I wonder if critics always feel badly when they write negative reviews?
Overheard in the ladies’ room at the New York City Ballet tonight, followed by laughter, and “you said it!” and “just a little self-indulgent, wouldn’t you say?!” and “full of every pretentious cliche there is,” and “well, the next one’s a lot better, it’s REAL BALLET, I PROMISE!” The last quote was followed by a chorus of “oh yes”s. I’ve never heard the ladies room that animated. Ever. This was all in response to Jerome Robbins‘ “Watermill.” Poor Mr. Robbins; no wonder the first performance of this ballet in 1972 was greeted with boos.
I initially agreed with the “pretentious” woman, although I felt a bit differently about it after reading eminent dance scholar Deborah Jowitt‘s write-up on the piece in the program notes. Which is one of the functions of great critics and writers — to make the public understand and appreciate a work that seems undecipherable and hence aggravating.
Speaking of dance critics, I sat next to Alastair Macaulay tonight! (For those who don’t know, he is the newish chief dance critic of the NYTimes) It made me unbelievably nervous actually. But I don’t know why. He was very pleasant; he hardly wrote anything at all, and when he did he was very quiet about it and I only knew he was writing because I was trying to pay close attention to what he noticed … although his pen usually seemed to be going when nothing was really happening onstage. Anyway, he was reading a copy of the New York Review of Books and he had a Haruki Murakami book in his bag, which was more overstuffed even than mine.
Back to “Watermill.” Well, here’s what happens: a man (here, the wonderful Nikolaj Hubbe, formerly with NYCB but now directing the Royal Danish Ballet and returning for a guest turn) is onstage wearing a robe. Also onstage are three big wheat stacks and a waterfall and quarter moon in the background. We go through an entire day, the moon slowly filling in to signify approaching night, then disappearing to show daylight, then returning to quarter moon – twilight. And this symbolizes the stages of the man’s life. I think. As the piece begins, Nikolaj looks very slowly at his surroundings, and as a Japanese bamboo flute sounds in the background, he looks around, mesmerized by that sound and longing to find its source, to follow it. He disrobes, now wearing only white underwear. Soon, a group of men bearing colorful lanterns atop long bamboo poles cross the stage; the man doesn’t seem to notice. They are followed by another group of men carrying colorful paper kites cut in the shape of birds and a dancer emerges and performs a very feathery, birdlike, solo. He was actually my favorite part of the whole thing — the “bird / man.” I think he was my favorite because he was the only one who had much movement, or at least non-extreme slow-motion movement. Soon he disappears and a group of warrior-like men bearing what look like spears emerge and taunt Nikolaj, who for the most part resists them. After a while they leave and a woman appears wearing a robe. Nikolaj is very taken with her. She disrobes, wearing a modern black bathing-suit, unwraps her hair which is up in a towel, and brushes her hair. As I said, the entire thing unfolds as if in extreme slow-motion. It must take a full 10-15 minutes for the woman to disrobe, shake her hair out and begin to brush it. Eventually Nikolaj resists her and lies down and falls asleep, while another man emerges and performs a duet with her evocative of copulation. He leaves, she leaves, and a person wearing a lion’s mask comes out and does a frightening dance. Nikolaj sleeps the whole time. Later women come out to harvest the wheat, waking Nikolaj. They give him two long stalks of wheat and he holds them above his head, like spears, like a god, then waving them around, making various shapes with them, symbolizing what I’m not exactly sure. He does this for maybe ten minutes, staring up at the stalks like they hold the key to the meaning of the universe. It keeps going like this, slowly slowly SLOWLY. Even Sir Alastair got shifty in his seat. More people come out, some moving in ways that some in the audience, judging by the sounds around me, thought laughable. And finally the moon goes back to the way it was at the beginning of the piece and we know it’s over. I’d say it got polite applause, along with lots of rolling eyes and angry bathroom talk.
Anyway, according to Jowitt, during the 60s Robbins had become fascinated with Japanese Noh drama, characterized as “ceremonious, slow-moving, poetic plays in which every spare action imprints itself on the viewer’s mind as indelibly as a brushstroke in a master’s calligraphy.” Her explanation made me better appreciate what he was aiming for but something tells me I would have liked a good Noh play better. Robbins’ drama just didn’t make sense to me — I couldn’t even figure out what country or era we were in: Lion man, bird-like man, warrior men, a woman wearing a bathrobe and swimsuit and hair toweled up like something out of the American 50s, people harvesting wheat… I’d love to see a Noh play now but I feel like for the extreme slow-moving actions to leave an indelible imprint, they have to be recognizable. I have to know why he’s waving those wheat stalks around above his head for me not to forget its image.
I mean, let me just contrast this ballet to a short film I recently saw at the Tribeca Film Festival. It was a Spanish-language film called “So Beautiful” and in it a woman in her late sixties / early seventies, overweight, skin sagging, age spots, is at the beach. She brings a picture of herself and a beau in her youth, sets it up on a little table next to her umbrella, pulls a champange glass and a small bottle of champagne out of an ice box along with crackers topped with smoked salmon and cream cheese, pours the champagne, drinks, eats, etc. A young woman approaches her and asks her to watch her bag, which the older woman agrees to do. But time passes, the young woman never returns and the older woman is ready to leave. Eventually, the older woman begins to leaf through the bag, finding typical young woman things — makeup, inexpensive costume jewlery, a condom, some loose change. As the older woman goes through the bag her facial expressions reflect her reminiscing on her own youth. The film is about 15 minutes long, and it has virtually no real “action” except for the two or three seconds it takes the young woman to ask the older woman to watch the bag. But it was unbelievably mesmerizing to watch the older woman’s face register happy memories, even just watching her look out at a fisherman as she eats her salmon crackers and sips her champagne made you think about what she might have been thinking watching that man. It made you think about the aging process, cycles of life, youth and beauty… it nearly made me cry and I have to say it had more impact than I think any of the full-length films I saw.
Maybe it’s silly to compare a movie with a ballet, but I know I wasn’t the only one not enthralled with Robbins here! Plus, Tribeca’s on my mind since today was the last of my films … 🙁 (more about the movies later).
Anyway, the other ballet tonight was Robbins’ “The Four Seasons” which I wrote about here. It’s a cute enough ballet, based on opera with caricatures that symbolize the four seasons, but it’s not my favorite. I just have to say, the nano-second Kathryn Morgan appeared onstage I saw her and couldn’t take my eyes off her, and she didn’t have a lead role here. I wish they’d give her more big roles. This entire NYCB season, which began this week, is devoted to Robbins, so all programs will be Robbins-heavy, which I’m looking forward to, since, tonight’s program aside, I’m a big fan of his.
My crazy life of late has made me late in posting this, but last weekend I went to BAM to see Nina Ananiashvili, a principal ballerina with both the Bolshoi and American Ballet Theater, dance with her newish company, The State Ballet of Georgia, whose artistic directorship she took over in 2004.
The program I saw consisted of four ballets: Balanchine’s “Duo Concertante,” Yuri Possokhov’s “Sagalobeli,” and two by talk-of-the-town Russian choreographer Alexei Ratmansky — “Bizet Variations” and “Dreams About Japan.”
I loved the company’s rendition of “Duo Concertante.” The dancers (in above photo by Jack Vartoogian), were Nino Ogua and Lasha Khozashvili and they danced it with more clarity of intent than I think I’ve seen before. Though it’s a non-story ballet, as are many of Balanchine’s, that doesn’t mean there was no room for interpretation, emotion, drama, and conflict. The dancers interacted with each other — by turns playful, romantic, aggressive, even somewhat violent, and loving, as Ogua would glide Khozashvili across the stage, she’d smile at him flirtatiously, she’d turn and run from him and he’d catch her and sweep her up, she’d place her head sweetly on his shoulder. After they finished a section, they would walk to the musicians — an onstage pianist and violinist, look at them quizzically, and as soon as the music gave them the cue, they would walk back to centerstage, regard each other, and begin dancing again. It was very “dramatic,” in the sense that the dancers were not merely performing steps without expression, like I’ve seen Balachine choreography performed, but they interacted with one another, with the musicians, and with the audience, drawing you in and making you a part of it.
Next was Ratmansky’s “Bizet Variations.” I wasn’t really in love with this one. It was sweet, with the women fluttering around in beautiful blue dresses, Nina as the lead in a purplish hue, and the men romancing them. I thought it was pretty but nothing really substantial.
My favorites were Possokhov’s “Sagalobeli” a beautiful combination of ballet with Georgian folk dance set to bewitching Georgian folk music, and Ratmansky’s “Dreams About Japan,” a stunning melding of classical ballet with Japanese dance, set to mesmerizing, at times frightening, Japanese percussion. Bands in both were, splendidly, live.
In “Sagalobeli,” the women all wore lovely, flowing beige dresses with snaky patterns on the bodice, and the men kind of Gladiator-style vests with tights and boots. Possokhov, a Russian choreographer who works mainly with San Francisco Ballet, brilliantly combined classical ballet with intriguing folk movement that at times resembled Flamenco, with couples energetically tapping the floor in a kind of conversation with each other, and at times, when women danced alone, a kind of belly dancing. The men-only parts consisted of Russian-looking deep-knee-bent folk dance kicks combined with the male bravura elements of classical ballet — whipping foette turns and giant soaring leaps. It was lovely and the music, a Tbilisi urban folklore performed by the Sagalobeli Ensemble, was just a dream. I didn’t want it to end.
And the Ratmansky — ah, this is the best thing I’ve ever seen by him. I actually liked it. I actually see what critics are going on about now! Though I have a feeling just from what I overheard in the theater that this is the critics’ least favorite of his… Anyway, structured like traditional Kabuki Theater (in which only the most popular dance fragments from various classical plays are presented), Ratmansky used percussion music performed by the Tbilisi Theater of Opera and Ballet and a combination of Japanese traditional dance with ballet to tell four short stories: “Sagi Musume,” in which a young girl mourns her lost love; “Futa Omote,” where the souls of lovers who’ve committed suicide reunite in one evil spirit; “Musume Dojoji,” in which a young monk fails to return the love of a maiden, who tranforms herself into a Fire Snake and avenges him; and “Kagami Jishi,” where a lion’s mask forces anyone who comes into contact with it to dance to exhaustion. Not only are classical ballet steps performed with a Japanese flair — turned out palms, flexed feet, expressive wrists, etc., but somehow because of the beating of the drums, because of the props, but also because of the way in which they are performed — with speed, with sharpness and a rhythm corresponding to the drums rather than the fluidity and mellifluousness of Western classical music — barrel turns, fouettes, pirouettes — traditional ballet language somehow became brilliantly transformed. It was neither ballet nor traditional Japanese dance, but somehow both; and both were enriched by the combination, rather than being oversimplified and belittled, like Asian dance often is when interpreted by a Westerner. It was really stunning, and I hope this is not the last we’ll see of this ballet.
Anyway, for more on Ananiashvili and the company, go here.
Sorry I’m so late in getting this up! Last Monday evening, David Benaym, Editor-In-Chief and co-founder (with Danny Tidwell) of Movmnt Magazine hosted a dance blogger party at his office’s downtown NY headquarters. From left to right in picture above: Tony Schultz from The Winger, Doug Fox from Great Dance, Dea Soares Berrios, a friend of mine and The Winger’s, from Brazil who writes the personal blog Dea Nos Eua about her experiences moving to the U.S., her husband Al Berrios behind her, Taylor Gordon from The Winger and Off Center, me, Evan from Dancing Perfectly Free, David Benaym, and Brian Gibbs from The Winger.
It was a great time! David (pronounced Du-VEED) is extremely animated, and being from France, has a serious accent. People were having all kinds of funny mis-understandings 😀 We had some good discussions about dance and the internet, which companies are the best at using it (NYCBallet and Alvin Ailey, both of whom have YouTube channels), which are the worst (unfortunately my favorite American Ballet Theater was the sad winner in that category), which issues people are afraid to discuss in the blogosphere (dancer eating disorders being a big one), how most bloggers’ personas are so different from the writer’s actual personality (as well as pictures; we all agreed Schultz’s Winger headshot looks nothing like him!), and how we keep in touch with each other on a daily basis through our blogs though we’ve rarely met in person: at one point, David remarked how worried he was about Jolene. We asked why and he said, “Did you see? She said she would not come because she was very very sick and would soon go to hospital.” “Nooooo,” we all — and I mean all — sang out in unison, “that’s Ariel!” (who’s better now, by the way). Then he said, “Ohhh, well then who is Jolene?” Again, we all said in unison, “she’s the one who lives in San Francisco…” — I find it sweet that we all keep up with each other so well via our blogs; we really are a tight community. And finally, we talked about whether bloggers (particularly the snarky ones 🙂 ) should be anonymous (we’re all dying, for example, to know who Danciti is, though some thought anonymity was fine). I know I’m forgetting tons of stuff; we decided through Al’s suggestion, that the next time, we would take minutes or record.
At the end, David gave us little gift bags containing issues of the latest magazine as well as a few back copies, a pair of Movmnt socks (hehe, like they give you on VirginAtlantic for overseas flights), and a copy of his and Danny’s book, “Moving Still.” Since I helped to organize the event, I received a special copy, containing all of the featured dancers’ — including Tidwell’s — autographs 🙂 Even though I don’t agree with David about everything (for example, he thought about 10 posts a week on The Winger was good, otherwise it’s too overwhelming; I think, seriously, the more posts per day the better — my ideal number would be a Gawker-sized 30+ per weekday, although I realize this is never going to happen without a salaried, full-time blogger staff; there needs to be a Nick Denton of dance…) but I have a great deal of admiration for someone who has such an entrepreneurial spirit, who’s such a risk-taker and doesn’t think twice about creating his own path. He not only started his own magazine and wrote two books — his own novel (only available in French) as well as “Moving Still,” but he founded his own publishing companies to produce all of these things.
If you’re near a Barnes & Noble that carries it (one thing I learned from David is that you have to pay a bookstore shitloads of money just to carry your mag, even though they get a big profit from sales anyway?..), the latest issue is available. It includes an article by Taylor about dancer injuries, and two profiles from dancer Matt Murphy on composer Nico Muhly and “Center Stage 2” star Kenny Wormald, amongst other good things of course! Or you can visit their website.
Also, if you’re a dance blogger and near NYC and you want to be included on our email list, send me an email (found on my contact page). I don’t always organize these things but I seem to be the current “maintainer of email addresses.”