Saturday January 31, 2009 matinee - On a strikingly clear but bitterly cold afternoon, Abi Stafford brought a breath of Spring to the FLOWER FESTIVAL pas de deux, dancing with light-hearted charm and precise footwork. She found a nice touch of flirtatiousness, and who wouldn't want to flirt with the Spanish heart-throb Gonzalo Garcia, ever the dashing cavalier? They compliment each other so well. (Abi's headshot by Paul Kolnik).
In LA STRAVAGANZA it was good to see Rachel Rutherford (above) onstage again as the curious waif who gets abducted. Robert Fairchild has assumed Benjamin Millepied's role, and both here and in LIFECASTING today Rob displayed both the technical and physical prowess and the ever-deepening artistry which I feel certain makes him destined to enter the ranks of the principals in the near future. In their complex synchronized duet, Rob and Craig Hall moved fluidly but with an edge; Rob's duet with Rachel seemed almost tender and questioning until - wham! - he starts man-handling her and then spirits her into the shadows. Sean Suozzi made a very effective debut as the third 'Vermeer' boy, and everyone in the cast captured the feeling of this dark and very unusual work perfectly. An extra curtain call for Rachel, Rob and Craig was well-deserved indeed.
The AFTER THE RAIN pas de deux as danced by Wendy Whelan and Sebastien Marcovici (above) again held the audience in an enthralled state; the two dancers and the musicians - Jean Ingraham (violin) and Alan Moverman (piano) - created an intimate, dreamlike atmosphere. In the Spring we will be seeing the complete ballet from which this duet is drawn.
LIFECASTING is not an 'easy' ballet either to watch or - I would imagine - to dance. It calls for the viewer to be attentively engaged at every moment, and today I realized that the more closely you observe it the more you will see. The dancers really have nothing else like this in the repertoire as a frame of reference, but they dance with great control and power. Rob Fairchild's solo work is incredible as are three partnerships: Ashley Bouder with Craig Hall, Maria Kowroski with Amar Ramasar, and Kaitlyn Gilliland with Adrian Danchig-Waring. Sterlin Hyltin, Georgina Pazcoguin, Christian Tworzyanski and Antonio Carmena all look great in this ballet, making me wish the choreographer had given them more to do. The audience today seemed quite receptive to this complex work. (Above photo: Robert Fairchild by Paul Kolnik).
I'd been debating whether to see the final performance of this programme on Tuesday (February 3) and today's THEME AND VARIATIONS sealed the deal: I could not imagine being anywhere else. The whole Company - the grand demi-couples and the superb corps all in their luscious costumes - provided a bejeweled setting for a stellar role debut from Tiler Peck and her equally brilliant cavalier, Joaquin de Luz. Although both Tiler and Joaquin are among the smaller dancers in the Company they are also among the biggest talents and between their technical bravura and their radiant personalities, THEME looked really smashing today. Between the two of them, Tiler and Joaquin must have reeled off a gazillion pirouettes - to say nothing of Tiler's big balance - but it was in the adagio surprisingly where they made their most memorable impression. Dancing in perfect harmony, they seemed to 'sing' the music - like a love duet from some lost Tchaikovsky opera. (Photo: Tiler Peck by Kyle Froman/Vail Festival).
Many of the faithful were on hand this afternoon - including Rhona from Saratoga - and THEME was a real treat. And so was running into Kristin Sloan, who has more exciting films in the works.
Kyle Froman will be ending his career as a New York City Ballet dancer on Sunday February 15th in order to further pursue his already-brilliant career as a photographer.
Kyle was the first recipient of a Rudolf Nureyev Scholarship in 1994. For several years, he and his brother Kurt were NYCB's balletic twins. As a corps dancer, Kyle's repertoire has been vast; in recent seasons he has taken on the role of Drosselmeyer in the Balanchine NUTCRACKER, an acting role that allows the performer considerable interpretive latitude.
Kyle has written about and magnificently photographed an insider's view of a day in a dancer's life in his book IN THE WINGS. He also produced a series of spectacular and highly imaginative photographs of his NYCB colleagues in a booklet titled THE TRUE FOUNDATION for the 2008 Dancers Choice event. He has also photographed the Royal Danish Ballet and MORPHOSES, the Wheeldon Company.
At the special request of Nikolaj Hubbe, former NYCB principal and now artistic director of the Royal Danish, Kyle will be returning to Copenhagen to work on a photographic project documenting that Company's Balanchine repertoire. Meanwhile, we will still hopefully see Kyle onstage with NYCB in the future as he plans to come back for some of his character roles.
Most ballet companies don't make a fuss over departing corps dancers. Over the years, so many dancers have slipped quietly away to dance elsewhere or to pursue other dreams, and we don't know about it until their names don't show up on the roster the following season. But I know several of us will be directing special applause Kyle's way on February 15th.
Pacific Northwest Ballet have announced casting details for their performances of George Balanchine's JEWELS which opens tonight. Dancers well-remembered from their days at New York City Ballet will be appearing: Carla Korbes (photo) will be seen in both DIAMONDS and EMERALDS, Miranda Weese in RUBIES, Sarah Ricard Orza debuting in a leading role in EMERALDS (partnered by Jerome Tisserand) and Seth Orza alternating the pas de trois in EMERALDS with a principal role in the same ballet.
Melissa Barak, formerly of New York City Ballet and now dancing with Los Angeles Ballet, is presently commuting between the two coasts. In New York, she is putting the finishing touches on her new ballet choreographed for New York City Ballet which will premiere on February 17th. In Los Angeles, she is preparing to dance the Siren (photo above) in THE PRODIGAL SON for their Spring season.
The new piece for City Ballet will be Melissa's third work for the Company. She has previously created ballets to the music of Telemann and Shostakovich; the new work is set to Benjamin Britten's Simple Symphony.
In the midst of all this activity, Melissa has very kindly agreed to be interviewed for Oberon's Grove; the interview will appear here as the premiere of her new ballet draws closer.
Wednesday January 28, 2009 - Thank goodness for Ying Huang (photo above) because without her in the role of Amor tonight's performance of Gluck's ORFEO & EURIDICE would have been almost unbearable. I'd been warned about the production (Mark Morris) but I really wanted to see Ying again (her Susanna and Pamina were so lovely) so I figured how bad could it be? It 's not so much bad as just...boring.
There's no point in discussing Morris's trivializing of the opera; his seeming quest to be clever above all else has kept me from seeing any of his work in recent years that I can possibly avoid. His PLATEE at NYC Opera a few years ago was so frivolous - can one die of an overdose of cuteness? Whatever the cash-strapped Met paid for this production was too much; it would take a combined cast of Callas-Tebaldi-Popp with Karsavina and Nijinsky dancing and conducted by Karl Bohm to ever get me to buy another ticket to see it.
The set is utilitarian...three tiers rise above the stage which are peopled by the chorus, each dressed as a famous figure from history. Isn't that clever? Later a stairway appears but no one goes really up or down it so it (Orfeo starts up but goes back down) so it soon flies away. A crenelated metal cavern shows the ascent from Hell in a cutaway. Not bad.
In the opening scene Orfeo in a suit is accompanied in his grieving by 22 dancers in street clothes; these dancers continuously rush to the urn holding Euridice's ashes and lament and withdraw. Rush...lament...withdraw. Rush...lament...withdraw. Gesture to the urn...lament. Etc.
Later the dancers are often present when Orfeo should be alone. At the end of the opera they dance to the suite of tunes Balanchine used so memorably in CHACONNE. But Morris really gives them nothing interesting to do. They wave their arms and romp about endlessly.
Lucky for me that Ying, who I met while I worked at Tower, brought her clear tones and Italianate warmth of expression to the role of Amor. Would that the role was longer so that the ear might have had more to delight in. Her entry, lowered on a wire from high above the stage, is pointlessly risky.
Stephanie Blythe wons raves in many quarters for her Orfeo. Her voice is big, rich and impressive but she sings with unrelenting power, no dynamic variety, no shading of the words. It's a one-color vocal performance. Once or twice a touch of throatiness crept in. In her favor, she was far more pitch-conscious than the last couple of times I heard her. Blythe does not look like a classical hero but the production is so lame that it doesn't matter.
Danielle de Niese looks really striking in her plain white gown. She sang Euridice with a nice feeling for nuance and with urgency of expression, although the voice can turn metallic.
Kazem Abdullah in the pit had everything well under control although I sensed a slight power-struggle between him and Blythe during "Che faro..."
Throughout the evening noisy technical commands intruded, and so did the noisy footfalls of the dancers. It was had to imagine that the same opera company that mounted the exquisite IPHIGENIE EN TAURIDE could so badly botch Gluck's other masterpiece. Speaking of IPHIGENIE, why not a Susan Graham Orfeo? But...she'd deserve a much better production than this.
Part of me longed to rush out of the Met and over to the Koch Theatre where an appealing programme was on offer. But I had promised Ying I would be there and I always try to keep my promises.
How could I have forgotten to mention THIS other exciting news about Kathryn Morgan (Kolnik photo as Juliet, above): she is listed now for Peter Martins' STABAT MATER (replacing Jenifer Ringer) on Sunday afternoon.
Meanwhile Jolene has me green with envy reading her wonderfully detailed write-up of the San Francisco Ballet's opening night. Can you believe Taras Domitro's elevation (above in Helgi Tomasson's PRISM, a copyrighted photo by SFB's Erik Tomasson)?
Another dancer on the rise at San Francisco Ballet is Isaac Hernandez who drew a lot of buzz for his beautiful line and poetic style when he danced in the corps during SFB's City Center visit last Fall. At their recent gala, Isaac danced the Tchaikovsky Pas de Deux with Tina LeBlanc (above in an Erik Tomassons photo). Ms. LeBlanc, the beloved SFB principal ballerina, is reportedly retiring at the end of the current season.
Between the lower-back cramp and the lousy weather, I've decided to lay low today. I still hope to venture out tonight for Gluck's ORFEO at the Met; I've avoided it so far because I don't much like Mark Morris but Ying Huang is singing Amor tonight and I do want to see and hear her in the role.
Meanwhile I am going to have a reading-and-resting day, interspersed with catching up on some YouTube browsing. Check out this one from Kristin Sloan featuring two of NYCB's major charismatics, Georgina Pazcoguin and Adrian Danchig-Waring.
Tuesday January 27, 2009 - This programme at NYC Ballet was one I considered skipping this season. I love MONUMENTUM/MOVEMENTS but I was thinking I might give DANCES AT A GATHERING a rest because it can seem over-long sometimes. I like a good STARS AND STRIPES every now and then but it's not on my Balanchine A-list. However when the casting came out and debuts in GATHERING (Katie Morgan) and STARS (Abi Stafford) were announced, that news plus the chance to see Maria K in M/M and lots of other favorite dancers in all three ballets made the draw irresistible.
But on arriving at the theatre, there were changes. In addition to Kathryn Morgan's debut in GATHERING, Sterling Hyltin and Rebecca Krohn also made debuts in the Robbins ballet replacing Megan Fairchild and Jenifer Ringer respectively. And Sara Mearns debuted in STAR AND STRIPES earlier than expected, partnered by Charles Askegard. Shuffling of dancers will continue this week with a debut on Saturday afternoon of special note: Tiler Peck in THEME AND VARIATIONS opposite Joaquin de Luz.
Maria Kowroski and Charles Askegard (in Paul Kolnik's photo above) appeared in MONUMENTUM/MOVEMENTS, a double-ballet I became intrigued with when I saw Helene Alexopoulos dancing in it. Tonight it was far and away my favorite work on the programme, with Maria at her finest dancing with the excellent Charles Askegard and surrounded by a corps who made the Balanchine work look remarkably fresh and 'new'. Against the deep blue back-panel, the dancers in white move thru the beautiful Balanchine patterns as Maria is alternately tossed to the attentive corps boys or shows off her extension and flexibility as Charles manouevres her into intricate poses. The music, which has a 'old' feeling in MONUMENTUM (derived from Gesualdo), was well-played under Faycal Karoui's baton and the ballet seemed to fascinate the audience who were unusually attentive.
If the audience then became whispery and fidgety during GATHERING it wasn't the fault of the dancers - they were superb - nor of the pianist, Susan Walters who played with nicely nuanced clarity throughout. It's just that GATHERING is too much of a good thing; it's sometimes moving and it includes some cherished passages but it just goes on and on. Despite the high level of dancing one eventually begins to tire of it. It seemed tonight that the Chopin melodies served as a lullabye for some viewers, and a number of audience members did not return for the final STARS AND STRIPES after the intermission.
But not being crazy about GATHERING as a ballet doesn't preclude enjoying the work of the dancers and tonight there were many individual highlights as well as an overall youthful glow to the ensembles. Benjamin Millepied's performance - aside from the airy lightness of touch he brings to his jumps and turns - had a sincere and at times almost dreamy quality. He plays so well off the more weighted brilliance of Jared Angle who is just tremendous in this ballet. Memories of Damian and Jock in these roles are unavoidable but Ben and Jared are just as perfect, really. Of all the vast array of dance personalities now at NYC Ballet, Adam Hendrickson always stands out for both the lively and impetuous quality of his dancing and the way he makes bravura passages not just stunt-work but an integral part of his interpretation. Sebastien Marcovici's powerfully sexy and mysterious personality is here stretched to include touches of humour. Completing the very impressive male quintet, Adrian Danchig-Waring debuted as the Boy in Blue with yet another performance that signals the urgent need for him to be promoted. The passage where the girls get tossed about has been restored to its full risky state, with Sterling literally flung into Adrian's hands.
Yvonne Borree's lyrically demure and subtly witty performance of the Girl in Pink gives GATHERING a continuity as new dancers take on the other female roles. Sara Mearns has done the Green girl before and she looks sumptuously flirtatious - she probably didn't expect that her STARS AND STRIPES debut would be happening quite so soon. Rebecca Krohn in Mauve gives that role just what it calls for - a womanly quality and a feeling of serenity - while her high-drifting extension looks so fine. Sterling Hyltin it seems to me steps into each new role - often on rather short notice - and always looks like she was simply meant to be dancing it. Her Girl in Apricot is vivacious with a nice romantic under-current. Kathryn Morgan in her debut as the Girl in Blue has the natural gift of always drawing your eye, even if she is merely walking across the stage. I see a path laid out for her at NYCB and I hope to be there watching every step she takes: a real treasure of a dancer.
In STARS AND STRIPES, Sara Mearns in her debut danced it like we've heard Balanchine wanted it danced: 'like classic grand pas de deux'...Sara was radiant, another feather in her cap. I loved watching Charles Askegard partner her in this, so nonchalant as he effortlessly turned up in the right place at the right time...every time. Erica Pereira and Savannah Lowery were lots of fun leading the regiments - two more contrasted ballerinas would be hard to find - and they both danced so well. Daniel Ulbricht's virtuoso performance was a veritable firecracker, just what STARS needs to cap off an evening and send the audience home smiling.
San Francisco Ballet are opening their season tonight and what should be headlining the programme but the ballet Wei and I most want to see again, Helgi Tomasson's PRISM. And who is scheduled to dance the lead? None other than former NYC Ballet etoile Sofiane Sylve (photo above by Paul Kolnik).
Scrolling down the casting for SFB's opening performances made me nostalgic for their visit here this past Autumn when I fell under the spell of their dancers.
Among the too-numerous-to-mention favorites appearing in the first SFB programmes will be Vanessa Zahorian and Taras Domitro (above, in a recent gala performance).
If man is to live life by his own judgement, then wouldn't people have differing moral codes since they choose different values? In other words, what one person considers to be immoral may not be considered immoral by me. Who is right and who is wrong?
There is no supreme conscious authority in Objectivism whom everyone is allegedly duty-bound (and coerced by force) to please and obey. Furthermore, Objectivism does not demand that everyone live by the same values beyond the three cardinal values of reason, purpose, and self-esteem -- and living by those three values isn't a moral commandment or edict, but a factual identification of what reality demands from man if he wants to sustain and strengthen his life qua man (meaning his existence on earth as a rational being, with no other, non-earthly mode of existence recognized by reason as attainable by man).
There is only one issue in which Objectivism endorses the use of physical force: retaliation against those who initiate (start) its use against others. Beyond the ban on initiation of physical force (enforced by government as man's agent of retaliatory physical force), Objectivist morality and Objectivist political theory leave everyone free to live (or not) as he sees fit, trading with others if he and they are willing and able.
There is no "problem" of what to do about non-Objectivists. Objectivists are free to leave them alone and to be left alone by them. If they wish to die, they are free to do so (peacefully). It's their choice (and everyone's choice). The essential moral challenge, according to Objectivism, is what to do about one's own life, given that one is free from coercion by others. One need not be concerned about others beyond respecting their individual rights (including their property) and offering to trade with them (materially and/or non-materially) if one sees value to oneself in doing so and has something of value to them to offer in return. And respecting and sometimes admiring others as fellow rational beings tends to be an important aspect of trading with them efficiently, effectively and repeatedly.
The comments assert that Objectivism somehow uses "retaliation" (in "retaliatory physical force") differently from the usual dictionary definition, and that the usual meaning is "not the concept Objectivism actually wants." The commenter did not offer any references to any actual dictionary definition nor to passages in the Objectivist literature that indicate a different usage.
When I look up "retaliate" in a standard dictionary, I find something like "to return like for like." In the context of retaliatory physical force, this means punishing the wrongdoer, not merely stopping him in the act nor obtaining restitution (if possible) nor deterring future occurrences. Punishment of some kind (commensurate with the perpetrator's initiation of physical force) is exactly what Objectivism means by "retaliatory physical force." In the entry on "Retaliatory Force" in The Ayn Rand Lexicon, a key excerpt from Galt's Speech states:
It is only as retaliation that force may be used and only against the man who starts its use. No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he had the right to choose: his own. He uses force to seize a value; I use it only to destroy destruction.
This is retribution, not merely attempting to stop a force wielder in the act, or to reform him, or even to deter him from similar acts in the future. It is to punish him. If I remember correctly, Ayn Rand was once asked in a Q&A session (possibly in the tape recorded lectures on Objectivism by Leonard Peikoff, before OPAR was published) if she favors "retributive justice." She replied very strongly, "Yes!" I do not see how this is different in principle from the usual, conventional meaning of "retaliate."
Ayn also reiterated this view of retaliation in a very long letter to a philosopher (dated April 29, 1961), later published in Letters of Ayn Rand, pp. 544-563. Topic no. 7 (pp. 558-560) pertains to justice, upholding the principle of punishment rather than mercy or deterrence or rehabilitation:
The law should: a. correct the consequences of the crime in regard to the victim, whenever possible (such as recovering stolen property and returning it to the owner); b. impose restraints on the criminal, such as a jail sentence, not in order to reform him, but in order to make him bear the painful consequences of his action (or their equivalent) which he inflicted on his victims; c. make the punishment proportionate to the crime in the full context of all the legally punishable crimes.
... the severity of the punishment must match the gravity of the crime, in the full context of the penal code. The punishment for pickpocketing cannot be the same as for murder; the punishment for murder cannot be the same as for manslaughter, etc. It is an enormously complex issue, in which one must integrate the whole scale of legally defined crimes and mitigating circumstances, on the one hand—with a proportionately scaled series of punishments, on the other.
... the principle by which a specific argument [about what punishment is deserved] has to be guided is retribution, not reform. The issue of attempting to "reform" criminals is an entirely separate issue and a highly dubious one, even in the case of juvenile delinquents.... When I say "retribution," I mean the point above, namely: the imposition of painful consequences proportionate to the injury caused by the criminal act. The purpose of the law is not to prevent a future offense, but to punish the one actually committed.
Refer also to Ayn Rand's answer to the question, "If a man infringes the rights of another, what is the moral justification of incarceration as punishment, as opposed to monetary retribution?" (Ayn Rand Answers, p. 45.) Her answer emphasizes the need for punishment, not rehabilitation.
I cannot imagine where the commenter could have acquired the idea that Objectivism doesn't endorse retributive retaliation, if that is what the commenter is referring to. The original sources show that Objectivism does endorse it.
As I understand the original Objectivist sources, such as the excerpts in The Ayn Rand Lexicon under the topic of "Retaliatory Force," Objectivism uses "self-defense" and "retaliation" more or less interchangeably, with the latter term being used more often than the former. The first Lexicon excerpt uses both terms, as complementary. The two remaining excerpts use "retaliation."
If you look up what "retaliation" means, it's rather different and not the concept Objectivism actually wants.