Bruce Wall

I so agree about tonight. The Cellist is exactly the kind of work this Company SHOULD be doing, leaving the hardcore purity of balletic classicism to entities now specifically focused on such. This VERY much plays to their strengths and I felt tonight that - in many ways - the second cast was better than the first. Richardson was an instrument of quite a different ilk to Sambe's - the very colour seeming to drain out of his life-blood; becoming ever more wan as this fine dance work progressed. By the end he seemed entirely hollowed; ashen; a spent force. Calvin's height and lithe dramatic prowess enthralled; enveloping the richly detailed prominence - both on the ascendant and in its harrowing reverse - of Magri's heartrending depiction of the title role. I think this is quite the best thing I have seen her do. Brændsrød breathed enhanced detail into his Conductor: It being the most under developed of the three significant ones. Buvoli's maternal instinct too pranced decorously. Marston has judiciously given these two the bones, they've added flesh that sears. I was thoroughly engaged throughout the privilege of this piece. SIDE NOTE: It was heart breaking in the extreme to see the back of the Amphi of this relatively small theatre SO empty. The kind usher on the house right side was asking people to move down. Perhaps the ROH management had run out of friends, associates and their acquaintances to fill these spaces with their heavily discounted offers. It will have been very much their loss. Those who were present unquestionably saw a very fine performance indeed and were notable in the hearty sycophancy of their sonant adulation.

I entirely agree with you, @Fonty. Please don't get me wrong in what I have written. I, too, am going to the Royal Company less and less - JUST LIKE YOU. In absolute fairness, I feel the Company's title should be rebranded given the future looking dedications of its current Director - such as I have heard with my own ears. Will this happen? I doubt it. I have respected both what I heard and seen (in many ways I feel I have no choice) and have moved heaven and earth in terms of my own professional career so that, ultimately, I can achieve the balance you quote; one that we unquestionably share. For ME it is THAT important. I recently said to an authority at State Theater in NYC - If NYCB wasn't here I wouldn't be either!'. I meant it. It is just for this damned 'balance' issue. As I have written previously we can ONLY live in the time we do and I believe I was patient in watching to see if the very real balance with the Royal might modify. It hasn't. You can't make things other than they are in real time with wishing I've found. Perhaps fate will be kinder to you - but certainly in the meantime we all - ALL OF US - have to make provisions based on our own judgements. It seems @Fonty that THIS is EXACTLY what you are I currently doing and from recent ROH marketing reports it seems, sadly, that we are simply falling into line with certain chartered desires.

Such exciting news. Always loved his purity as a dancer which has always been clearly reflected in his choreography. While certainly that would not today suit all companies as defined I'm certain it will - with right - be championed in the American capital. Here is a small segment of a PDD from his first NYCB commission in 2019 - Lineage. Their future looks balletically bright.

Thanks for this, @bridiem - and I'm sure he may well have done. Still @FLOSS was I believe speaking about works that the current Royal Director had brought in/was supporting in terms of his Company's defining future. It was this I sought to comment upon, or certainly intended to in any event. Sorry for the confusion.

@FLOSS I think your definition is a tad out of frame with the current times - certainly in light of the clear defines of the current Director for the Royal in terms of its foreseeable future prospects. I fear mightily that you may always be disappointed under this regime. Certainly I would have been suffering alongside you had I not made certain provisions for my own cultural 'balletic' needs / investments. We can - as I've said elsewhere - only EVER live in the time that we do. I have learned to celebrate the Royal Company for what it IS NOW. I would find it hard to honestly criticise something or someone for not doing that which they never really intended to do/honour in the first place.

Saw this tonight as I want to keep abreast of Royal activities. This is very much a fitting experiment for THESE dancers in THIS company in THIS space at THIS time and it very much falls into line with this Company Director's stated future proforma. I'm not sure how easily it would sit with other dance troupes in the UK and certainly beyond. While I'm not sure it was entirely to my taste I will support the director in terms of further such ventures. He has such a clear picture of what he wants the future of his Company to be and we must do all we can to support him. The Royal dancers - many fine ones too - are now explicitly trained for exactly this kind of work. As towards today's show, at those points when the dancers were required to do contemporary contractions Hayward and Campbell made them look exceedingly easy; they lived through them. There was a struggle however with the placement - not of the feet, but of the voices. Early in their training - when concentrating on ballet certainly and before joining these 'Royal' ranks - both dancers would have been told to 'pull up'. You very much have to do the same when speaking theatrically and clearly no one had worked with them in this regard - or if they did it was sadly unsuccessful. As a result, much of the dialogue - some of it very clever - went flat, certainly when playing against the music deployed. They were also not helped by being given body mics in such a small theatre - a venue fitting to this piece certainly - and, consequently, they were robbed of the control of their own verbal dynamic. You can get around this but again it takes professional skill which obviously here was clearly and understandably lacking. For example, at those points where rising anger was required from both performers each became staccato and sadly slurred their words given the attempted rapidity of enunciation in tandem with the movements. Again, this should have been relatively easy to fix in rehearsal and I'm surprised it wasn't. It certainly appeared as if the performers were themselves unaware. All that being said - and having been able to 'hear through' the narrative in spite OF rather than in support of other artistic contributions in this instance I appreciated the dedication of the two performing artists to their charge. The ROH website said that the run was sold out - and I'm sure it was - but I was surprised at the number of seats which sat empty. I think of all the people on these boards who are struggling to buy tickets. How I wish some of you could have been granted those. A dedicated coterie of Royal fans were present however and did their utmost to cheer their favourites on. Otherwise the response was somewhat muted.

Of course it is. I had the privilege of working with her sister, Suzanne. Such a stunningly talented family.

I must say - and with all due respect - that I disagree - and I realise this is due to decades of watching both Companies. Both have changed certainly; they wouldn't exist if they stood still but I think the Royal has gone on a far greater progression in terms of its core definition than NYCB has. I really think it was Monica Mason who charted the way for the Royal's alteration and the reason it is today SUCH a different company; certainly from that I remember from my own youth. It's funny because Ashton said himself the he could easily have ended up in NYC. I heard him say it myself on a number of occasions. One story goes that it was Ashton who introduced Balanchine to Kirstein. Clearly without the latter there would have/could have been NO NYCB as we know it. Ashton choreographed in NYC BEFORE Balanchine made Serenade. It appears that it was Ashton who suggested to Balanchine that Serenade should be in 'flowing robes'. Indeed, Ashton did two ballets for NYCB early on. One, Illuminations, we saw a segment from in the Fonteyn Gala some years back. The Royal Ballet at that time was much more focused on Ashton as a core inspirational fulcrum. I think a segment of that even lasted into the latter part of the 20th Century. Still, it turned. Turned completely. It is clearly not the case today. I admire Kevin O'Hare because he is taking that progression to its clear/logical end. The Company looks so at home in what he sees as their defining works. It's for this reason I believe that you have the adamant hold of MacMillan. That has I think coloured everything. I think that Mason must have seen a kernel of this in terms of the advancement of McGregor. This is what today's Royal clearly specialises in. I feel that we must learn to be proud of this as the advancement is significant. At NYCB everything - including the audience - is STILL built for Balanchine. I have to say this was VIVIDLY hit home to me last Sunday. I was sitting in E26 in the State Theater's Second Ring. (I wrote about this in my penultimate note in the NYCB season note.) It was the opening ballet, Concerto Barocco; such a glorious ballet. It is to NYCB what, say, Mayerling is to the Royal. Still, they are a world apart. They should be. Nonetheless, on THAT afternoon it was - in a way - different. Certainly I came to realise it had to be. It was 21 year old Mira Nadon who instructed on this occasion. I realised that I had not seen a dancer LIKE THAT for decades. I realised that it was during the so-called 'dance boom' that I last did. That's why I said I found myself believing we were actually watching someone - that oh, so rare someone - who actually is in the 'legend' category. I remember thinking the same watching - for VERY different reasons - Vasiliev (Vladimir not Ivan - as much as I enjoyed the latter) or, for that matter, Fonteyn, who always said that it was in New York that she became an international star. These creatures need space. Nadon's movement with the music was pure magic and it opened your eyes - well, mine anyway - and my mouth in astonishment - like little else does or did around her. I had been lucky to have been introduced to many of these roles with people like Farrell and McBride. Farrell was equally defining. Such pulsates in my memory. When I first saw her I didn't understand - and then, suddenly, I did. What do I mean by that? Often hard it's to say. Still, I will say this - These are dancers whose shadow you will forever see. They live with you. I can't watch the Second Movement of SiC without seeing Farrell dance it in the background or certainly Diamonds. I now long to see Nadon in those roles - and I lust to see the new works that Ratmansky and Peck will create for her. Do I want to see McGregor or Marsden touch her. NO. It wouldn't be appropriate. They have dancers now trained expressly for their work at the Royal. They will define those brilliantly. The Royal has some very fine dancers. Of that there is no question. Would I like to see Naghdi do 4th Movement SiC with NYCB. Yes, of course. She'd be much better - well, more appropriate than Gerrity I know. Will that happen? No. Should it happen. Decidedly NO! If the Royal is to dance Balanchine - and I'm not sure now that they - on the whole - should dance those works created for, say, the State Theater stage - then I think it should be appropriate. Prodigal Son I can see being well up their alley. I'd love to see, as I said, Sambe in the title role with Kaneko as his Siren or - and this may sound surprising - James Hay. I just know he would make it his own. I had forgotten just what an extraordinary - and oh, so witty piece it is. Of course, I remember Baryshnikov and Damian Woetzel in the title role - who could forget - just as I vividly remember Peter Boal in Opus 19: The Dreamer or Agon. Again, who could forget. Still I wouldn't/ didn't want to see their Des Grieux. No,sir. Leave those kinds of things to Muntagirov or to Bracewell. I wouldn't have wanted to see Dowell in 4T's either - but how many times did I see him in Swan Lake or Giselle or A Month in the Country? Oh, so many. With Nadon at NYCB I realised there is now a chance - just a chance mind - for that NYCB magic again. She can lead and inspire much as Farrell did. Her magic is THERE - not HERE. It shouldn't be. Yet to watch the Royal dancers in Woolf Works or Dante or Untitled is to see them breathe. They are at home in that HERE - not THERE. That's what they are NOW built for. As I've said the NYCB dancers would be horrific in it. I really don't think the two should mix; nor should the dedicated MAJOR repertories - as they are - lose sight of their dedicated fulcrums and appropriate spaces. Watching TPC2 with either Peck or Mearns reconfirmed this for me. It NEEDS the space to breathe. Those dancers need to move; carve and shape space in a way they could never do at Covent Garden. Nor would I want to see MacMillan's R&J, his Manon or his Mayerling at State Theater. It would swim and I fear ultimately sink. The rightful artists need their containment for those and they are receiving it in London. Indeed, it now seems the Royal are committed to dancing these works plenteously on a merry-go-round; one every three years. In just the same way NYCB does Balanchine.; only Balanchine lived a little longer and left the world 420 ballets. There is another MAJOR difference - and this is key to Balanchine. THE MUSIC COMES FIRST. It was the same for Robbins - and yes, I DO remember seeing him go VERY BRIGHT RED and jump up and down in rehearsals when a musical phrase was not to his liking or as originally intended. I remember what it felt like being in a lift and Robbins staring with those piercing blue eyes. You might as well have been sawed in half. Once when going backstage through a pass door after a performance at State Theater - only because I had been a docent at that performance - (these things don't happen any more) - and being floors above I could hear every single word Robbins screamed - and I mean SCREAMED - because Yvonne Bouree had gone off a musical cue in Dances at a Gathering. Now she was never my favourite dancer (though she did guest with the Royal, filling in for an injured dancer in DAAG, and I remember thinking her very good in those performances) - but, STILL, I FELT SOOOOOOOOO SORRY FOR HER. This was especially marked because when he was sane Robbins spoke VERY quietly and could be very witty. People like Balanchine and Robbins would not be allowed to function as they did in today's world - (clearly for VERY different reasons) - and in many ways that's a good thing too. Still, bless them for what they left us. Thankfully THAT can still live. But back to the point. The last two times that DAAG has been performed here the piano playing has been - and here I'm being polite - unfortunate. Believe me that pianist wouldn't have wanted to be in Robbins' path. He wouldn't have had his job for very long thereafter. That much I know. Still, that is accepted here. That I promise you would not occur EVEN NOW at NYCB. McGregor - by his own admission - often choreographs independently i.e., 'against' music. This is not something that would swim at NYCB. Still, the Royal do exercise that dynamic SO brilliantly here. It CAN be as thrilling as - well, as Nadon in Concerto Barocco. (Well, no, that's a bit extreme - but you get the idea.) Could I have trained myself to so applaud the latter not having the former in my life. No, I wouldn't have; I couldn't have. Still, that's only because of MY past and I realise all too well that is a relative rarity. Still, we need to live in our present and celebrate our future. There is I SINCERELY believe much to celebrate on both sides. The differences that lie in their dedicated creative spaces should be - but only relatively - cherished.

I so very much enjoyed this double bill. I thought it a wonderfully constructed programme and was even more impressed with the fulsomeness of both works on curated display than I had been when I originally saw them. After a month of 21 pieces of Balanchine a week and watching the NYCB dancers devour the much larger space of the State Theater stage in NYC, it was oh, so sweetly comforting to come back and revel in the Covent Garden confinements. The intimacy of this venue - such a jewel box of an auditorium - (even if the opening up programme did manage to make some of the rest of the venue seem a requiem for the homeless) - feeds into the intimacy of these two works. Both are so stunningly appropriate to today's Royal Company. Zucchetti's classroom work is just so rightly measured for the considerable gifts of these young Company members. Masciari's placement alone was a joy to behold. I found myself so much more involved in The Cellist than I seem to remember having been previously. I think this may have been because I wasn't so put off by the use of so many dancers as simple filler. Now I accept this simply as part of this Company's current ethic. Indeed, now I could see how it actually helped draw the taut strings of the core trio more closely together; allowing each audience member a chance to focus on their magnificent achievements. How wonderful to have a revitalised Lauren Cutherbertson back amongst this number. What a fine English dancer she is. Motherhood - much as it has done certainly for NYCB's Megan Fairchild - seems to have added an extra layer of performance sheen. The detail of her responses was oh, so vivid allowing Sambe's Cello relative periods of peace to literally sing in. So impactful he was - as was Matthew Ball in what is, perhaps, the least clearly defined part of the major three. The deployment of Ball's hands alone honoured with wise humanity those of Barenboim. This is another fine work by Cathy Marsden; one to lean on the shelf against Jane Eyre, Victoria and so, so many others. Certainly, - at least for me - it made the whole programme a substantive feast. Here's hoping the Royal do more Marsden soon. (Certainly I would have loved to see her paean to Mrs. Robinson done for SFB.) Marsden, MacMillan, McGregor, Acosta and Pite are just SO apt for the gifts of THIS Company as it stands defined; as much so as Balanchine, Robbins, Ratmansky and Peck are at NYCB. They shouldn't mix. They solemnise very different idioms; the native expressions of each patois is - at the very least - a world apart. Wheeldon has cleverly cottoned on to this idea and frames entirely different works focused on the specific lights of each. He well knows how to straddle. Certainly he is aware that their separateness IS not just their but OUR strength. It is for this reason he and Peck can survive on that cut-throat Boulevard; Broadway. Each entity is in their rightful place and we should celebrate the wisdom of their fine relative directors in focusing explicitly on such - Kevin here; Wendy and Jonathan in NYC. We should glory in the fact that each has so wholly dedicated themselves towards serving the audience each has - again themselves - framed. They too are VERY different beasts but, blessedly, they both somehow manage to breathe in our frequently troubled times. What would our world be without this clarifying variety. Bless EACH for doing such a fine job on their dedicated course. Long may that be the case for each. Onwards.

How strange, Peter. The matinee audience I saw this piece with clearly revelled in what they took to be its mastery. Indeed, I overheard people during the first interval calling it 'a British masterpiece'. I respect that. As noted, it is not to my taste. I will not be returning. That said, I have a distinct feeling that many from yesterday afternoon's celebration not only WOULD do so but actually WILL. PLUS ÇA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MÊME CHOSE.

I am entirely overjoyed that so many people hereabouts - and in 'official' reviews here no less - [WELL DONE!] - are celebrating this programme, highlighting the values of what clearly is meant as the future of British dance. Albeit abstract by virtue of its dark light - (but that oxymoron too has become somewhat of a domestic vernacular tradition I know in a number of national choreographic institutes) - of a cherished musical past. Lachlan Monoghan seemed to clearly combine both entities in his confident vocals rightly generating much delight. I fear this programme was not in its choreographic substance to my taste BUT I'm SO glad I went in order to see the bill SO fill the Wells and on a Thursday matinee too. For me that sight ALONE was more than worth the price of my ticket. Never have I seen that theatre SO FULL over the number of decades I have been happy to have made its acquaintance. The small number of its standing places on the Second Circle were here clearly doubled in their layered throng. May this tradition LONG continue. While I, myself, feel no compulsion to see this particular programme again, I SO hope that it repeats this success throughout the country and often - much, say, in this country's contemporary dance traditions of Adventures in Motion Pictures and certainly the celebratory cheers which greeted the likes of Riverdance in the past. BRB has clearly struck its national dance theatre common denominator. Well done, Carlos! The dedicatory braying here attendant is clearly calling for more. You, Carlos, are vividly fulfilling your own aim towards popular goals. The fashion of this clearly favoured choreographic currency is to the British dance scene TODAY what the recent (and I must say to me at least a happy surprise) commercial success of the NYCB's 'All Balanchine' Fall Season was to its own national choreographic coinage. While they are unquestionably VERY different, both are based on past national achievements and each are equally explicit and proudly native to their own national choreographic cradles as interpreted in current choreographic lights. May the cheers here heard for such prosper long into what vividly is seen as a happy future for this fabric of British dance. Certainly I will be reading your reports about such - 'official' and otherwise - with interest. Enjoy.

My word I do feel old hat reading this. DECADES ago I remember going to a programme called Billboards done by the Joffrey Ballet. It featured the music of Prince. I well remember going to a performance at City Center in NYC with the man himself actually performing with the dance company on the stage. He and they I seem to recall were illuminating and appeared to feed off each other. This was at the same time as the Joffrey were the holders of the Ashton canon in the US. It was a different world. Certainly what Acosta is doing is not new. That said I'm glad it is has proved so popular - surely that was part of its purpose - and I look forward to seeing it today.

Hi Anna, Vis a vis NYCB in the standard season fare (as opposed to The Nutcracker, say, where there are 48 performances this year) the principals mix with the soloists and the corps in the three-ballet programmes - short of, say, when with longer Robbins' works (e.g., Goldberg Variations) where there will be only two. This has always been the way at NYCB. All levels mix and always have. Balanchine was adamant that he didn't want people hanging about as relative set dressing. They always fundamentally dance. Apprentices are always thrown into the deep ends. That's why they are there to see how they fare in terms of the needed stamina. Even in the pieces drawn from Balanchine's Broadway work such as Slaughter on Tenth Avenue (and, say, Robbins' West Side Story Suite) everyone is active. That is simply part of the NYCB ethic. I would say this Fall '23 season was pretty standard in this regard - with, of course, injury, illness, pregnancy, etc., taken into consideration. Here is a study showing exactly how many roles rostered dancers (as opposed to apprentices and corps members without specific itemised assignments) actually danced and in what number of roles during the Fall Season just ended of one full month with seven performances each week - not including special presentations. Mira Nadon alone had five major debuts - but that is not in any way unusual. At the very end of his life Balanchine was throwing 16 year old Darci Kistler into EVERYTHING if memory serves. Even in the NYCB full-lengths there tend to be a greater variety of focused opportunities. Think of Balanchine's Coppelia or Harlequinade - or even in the narrative one-acts, say, e.g., La Sonnambula which, outside of the principals, has a whole segment of delightful divertimenti and are on a bill with two other distinctive ballets. Also, where there are smaller works, say, the Unanswered Question, Ballo, Valse Fantasie or Tarantella for example they are always done with two (sometimes three) ballets in that one act. Hope that helps

You can watch it in the NYPL Lincoln Center in the Jerome Robbins Dance Collection on the third floor any time you may find yourself in NYC. There is no charge.

I'm back now to the UK realities and much work but will always cherish the reality of the 2023 NYCB Fall Season and its many celebrations. I so look forward to returning for the Winter and Spring '24 ones. In the materials noted above there was one special occurrence that was not covered. On 30th September, a day filled with special events (Company class was one) - all entirely free and open to the general pubic - there was one that I found MOST memorable. This was a special circumstance between 5.00 and 6.00 pm called 'Discover NYCB at 75'. It was, again, in the marvel that is the main house of State Theater and in this presentation - made up of Balanchine solos and PDDs - each was introduced by the dancer who chose them. All had to give the reason for their choice and tell the specific reason why it was, in fact, special to them. The insights were often moving and certainly highlighted the dance segment which would follow - not just for the audience but clearly for the performers themselves. You could feel the thrust of their secret incisiveness rebound throughout the orchestra (stalls) and First Ring levels which were completely filled. (The other sectors were not open for this event.) The gloriously exotic Taylor Stanley had chosen the haunting solo from the first movement of Agon. He explained that - to him - the ballet was about freedom and he always thought of his own grandfather who had led a past faction of the UAW (United Automobile Workers) in Lancaster, PA, demanding equal pay for all employees no matter their race. His performance of Balanchine's stunning entreaty that followed did nothing but enhance the courage of his forefather. The extraordinary Chun Wai Chan - what a magical dancer he is - talked about the freedom he too felt in coming to America - having initially lived and trained in China - and how - in preparing for this debut as Apollo to come - he found himself tracing the title role's own discovery of the responsibility of privilege. His opening solo displayed such potently. Megan Fairchild talked about privilege as well - but that of learning from past NYCB stars and now being able to share that same dynamic knowledge both as a NYCB principal and SAB teacher. This was followed by herself and that explosion of balletic energy which is Roman Mejia in the Stars and Stripes third movement PDD. Most moving of all for me in terms of the introductions was Jovani Furlan. You could tell he was nervous when he came out to speak. Clearly it's not something he does often, although his English (he is Brazilian) is truly excellent. He was talking about his own discovery of Jazz through Rubies and its 'foreplay'. The audience laughed at the mention of the latter and he burst out chortling himself in tandem with a deep blush. 'Yes, foreplay' he blurted amidst a sudden flash of that most winning smile. Such was replicated many times over as he and the truly sensational Emma Von Enck giddily astonished yet again in that oh, so vivid PDD. It was - as it had been before - revelatory. Other works featured during the hour session were Symphony in C (third movement) introduced by soloist Sebastian Villarini-Velez; Balanchine's central Nutcracker adagio - introduced by soloist Ashely Hod and danced by her and her husband, NYCB long-standing principal, Andrew Veyette and the Western Symphony 4th Movement PDD chosen and introduced by NYCB principal Unity Phelan and danced by herself and Veyette. What an vivid introduction this would have made for someone who had not attended NYCB before. Finally, I wanted to point out another dancer - among the many great ones - who really stood out for me this season. She didn't have any featured roles that I can think of but always in the corps I found myself drawn to her extraordinary prowess. Her name is Ava Sautter. Something tells me she soon will be going places in this rapidly moving field; i.e., the fast track that is and always has been NYCB. Here you can see a brief clip of her preparing for the soloist role in the 4T's Phlegmatic segment. Thanks so, Mr. B. Once again you enabled miracles. You always knew that your work would be different in our future .... but, as ever, it remains magical in its magnetism. Still it is spellbinding; nay, clairvoyant. As ever you give substance to the balletically mythic and see - irrespective of whatever horror may be prevailing in our immediate surround - that we can STILL be ensorcelled by the succour of such. There are no words of thanks sufficient for such grace. Its instinctive exhilaration remains rhapsodic. It unambiguously remains a paradise of positive stimulation. There is no greater gift.

This is isn't explicitly about the Sarasota/Royal connection - but does relate to Ashton and specifically his Dream - which the Royal Company will dance in June - and is a charming story as related by Jake Roxander of ABT who many saw with ABTII in the LInbury (another connection) brilliantly dance the Stars & Stripes (Balanchine) PDD when they visited. He's now a kind of wunderkind at the main company. I saw him thrill in a demonstration of story ballets at the Guggenheim on 8th October. In any event this is about Ashton and familial connections. Thought a few here might enjoy. https://www.instagram.com/p/CybXuwgA2o3/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA%3D%3D

Today's matinee was a joyous affair - and after there were big cheers behind the curtain. Bolden and Ricardo were promoted to soloist. They SO deserve it. Bolden danced like a principal this afternoon with Nadon in Concerto Barocco. What a masterwork it is. Nadon - WAS EXTRAORDINARY. That girl never fails to surprise. I knew she was good … BUT … NOW! .... NOW she redefines everything (and ANYTHING) she touches. With her Stravinsky Violin Concerto debut last winter - after just the spectre of that first movement alone when understandably the audience wouldn't stop applauding - she went to potentially GREAT in my eyes. This afternoon I came to believe that what we're actually looking at is someone who is in the LEGEND league - Like Farrell, like Fonteyn, like Alonso: Like Nureyev, like Baryshnikov, like Dowell, like Bruhn, like Bujones, etc. It happens so, SO VERY rarely. I'm blessed to have seen a few .... in fact all those mentioned … otherwise I would entirely doubt my senses. What a PRIVILEGE this ENTIRE NYCB Fall Season has been. It both delineated and exemplified the very word: festive. Rightly so.

In haste - Nadon thrilled - as expected - in Concerto Barocco tonight. Those grandiosely lofty limbs were wings of hope and together they melted into and melded through the music. LaFreniere thrust her appendages through counterpoint and made both sing. Together they were a rare pair of humane instruments blending in where apt with all the girls who were themselves on light tonight. Corps member, Gilbert Bowden III, partnered as if born to the manner born and made the difficult look easy. The air was rife with the ravishment of elation. I have to take my hat off here and confess that I very much enjoyed Anthony Huxley as the Prodigal Son. His very succinct wire-like thrusts at the opening somehow made his relationship with the sisters all that much closer and himself even more vulnerable in the face of corps member Preston Chamblee's towering father; oh so very moving. Sara Mearns gave us her Joan Crawford as the parading Siren tonight - a very witty theatrical animal it was too. Somehow that made the contrite passion of the homecoming all the more telling and that stalk pulled a furrow along its trodden ground. No grand effects here but an extremely moving sincerity was exercised by Huxley. He reminded me for the world of David Threlfall as Smike in the RSC's legendary Nicholas Nickleby production of decades past. You could almost hear the echo of that Northern guttural cry here grit. Then came SiC and on swept Queen Tiler doing what NOBODY else in the world can NOW do better - and certainly MORE musically than she in Balanchine's triumphant First Movement. Tiler's father has been life-threateningly ill. Indeed but one week ago tonight she wrote on her IG that they 'almost lost him'. Last Sunday NYCB altered the running order of the entire programme - putting TPC2 first - in order that Tiler could catch an earlier flight to California to be with her dad. Her performance tonight - as ever toying with the intricate details in its music at speed - was the greatest tribute ANY daughter could offer. Her feet and lips pointed smiles which not only channelled but also broadcast her amour-propre through the gift of confidence which singularly shook hands with every heart in the hall. Of the men in the principal capacities, two were ranked principals; (i) Chan partnering Peck in the First so brilliantly and deploying the magic of his rich balletic largess in the coda segments and (ii) Peter Walker in the Fourth. Alec Knight, a NYCB corps member, made the adagio Second Movement glitter. Here were two beautiful people: He has an Ivor Novello profile and matching quaff and Unity Phelan is every inch Audrey Hepburn. His partnering - as indeed the musical accompaniments which were fittingly luxurious - soared as far in its incisive detail as the deep reverence to the knee she made in that drivingly-deep penche dived. NYCB Corps member Cainan Weber was tossed into the tumult of the third movement and acquitted himself with joy. It's THIS mix which makes a GREAT ballet Company - separating it from those which are much more fixed - often out of understandable need - in their hierarchical definition. That NYCB IS - without hesitation, prevarication or repetition - except where otherwise and professionally apt of course. A final footnote. Tonight was YOUNG PATRONS NIGHT. I don't usually notice - but, my word, THE CLOTHES. The detail of so many of these ladies' dresses - and of many of the men's accoutrements - was entirely breath-taking. I went up to a few just to say so. People don't really dress at the theatre any more - but these youngsters - oh, so handsome ones - certainly did. The air too was redolent with the expense of their perfumes. Happily they packed the place out too as young people have been doing throughout NYCB's Fall Season. If they donate one fifth of what their ravishing apparel cost tonight then NYCB will be set certainly for the Winter. They had after all made a cool $3.5 million off the back of the Fashion Gala alone the week previous.

Half jokingly the other night, I said to some people in the NYCB Patron's Lounge that Mira Nadon (21) and Roman Mejia (23) ALONE are an insurance policy for NYCB. They - even now - have the mantle of stars about them that @OnePigeon references. They seem to transform whatever they touch with a magic that is uniquely their own. Nadon especially has been a special delight and I must confess I really wasn't expecting it. Well, certainly not this quickly! Can't wait for her NY debut tonight in Concerto Barocco. I think I can see it in my mind's eye but then Nadon - BEING Nadon - I NOW know will surprise me. Her debuts have been revelatory as have Mejia's. (He's so lucky to have Tiler Peck to coach him. They are so adorable together - and I use that word advisably - both on and off stage.) Nadon tonight is partnered by Gilbert Bolden III, a corps member, who I have come to really like as well. (In the past I wasn't quite certain - but he has really come on and is SUCH a spectacularly strong partner. Certainly he enchanted as a principal in the West Symphony First Movement - so fiercely balletically classical - (but then that's NYCB's calling). With his colouring a la Tony Curtis and that stunning square-jawed smile of his a la Cary Grant he is - in a word - bedazzling. Plus he's tall. Certainly not as towering as Miriam Miller - NO - but TALL enough to hover over others. Here he is with Sara Mearns in Peck's Rotunda. This is one of the pieces that Alistair Sparling has chosen for the NYCB London showing in March. Sparling I'm sure SO knows HIS London audience. I pray they follow his lead. I'm uncertain that they will - but I'm sure HE knows better. Bolden's slimed down and shaped up since then. He doesn't look so tall in the clip - but you have to remember that Sara, herself, is a big girl. (Question: How many corps members partner principals at, say, the Royal at Covent Garden? I'm trying to think. Happens frequently at NYCB. Tomorrow corps member Alec Knight (an Australian) partners principal Unity Phelan in her SiC 2nd Movement debut. Saw him in rehearsal. He looked fantastic.) Still, it is I think the fact that these dancers DANCE SO MUCH - in so many varieties - AT ALL RANKS - which becomes a point unto itself as @annamk rightly suggests. The people have BEEN flocking in to SEE NYCB. Case in point: It's the COMPANY they CHEER. The concerns you constantly read about 'casting' in some other places doesn't so much prevail here. Indeed you no longer see people thronging around the paper panels with the casting changes. THIS IS NYCB AFTER ALL. (I promise you they did in the days of Baryshnikov, etc.) These have come to see the Company - THAT'S THE STAR - and I promise you that you'll always find something to thrill you in 'dose 'dem ranks. It has been heart-warming in the extreme to see State Theater so FULL. Last Spring I had said to friends who are long-standing core NYCB Volunteers - a group so important to the organisation's smooth running and NYCB's popular interface - [and I'm especially delighted to have been asked if I might re-join the team I first worked with decades ago - even though I DO LIVE IN LONDON NOW!!!] - that I was VERY fearful for the full Balanchine season. I was afraid it simply wouldn't sell. So often in the recent past his bills had the Fourth Ring - and sometimes even the Third Ring - closed off. It was the new balletic works - especially the Peck - understandable in so many instances - which were the BIG sellers. I cannot tell you how happy I am that I was ENTIRELY wrong. Audiences have been thronging in - and - excitingly - they are in the majority young. Moreover, you get the sense that they will keep coming back. Reassuringly so. It doesn't need to be pushed. They've already been sold - the COMPANY sold them. I left my seat in the Second Ring last night and walked up to the Fourth Ring and found a seat there. It was like old home week for me. It was so lovely to see all these young people SO excited at the actual construct of a work like T&V - much as I had been at their age decades ago. Still, there is OVERALL now more forward optimism about here generally I find - i.e., this city certainly - than (understandably) there is just now in the UK - Well, certainly in London. Economic outlooks have so much to do with it. Always have; always will I have come to learn. Concerning THAT I fear any ballet company has very little influence - if any at all. As I've said in the NYCB strand - you can ONLY live in and through your own time. Your choices will ALWAYS be dictated by it be it for the better or worse. Always were; ALWAYS will be.

And, believe you me, Scheherezade, I know it. It makes all the work entirely worthwhile.

Here is a clip from a NYCB feature on CBS' long running Sunday Morning programme. I had to laugh at that small clip from Balanchine's ballet largely set in and around the Pan Am theme song. I remember being at it's opening. It was fantastically bizarre - That's for sure. As far as I recall it was never revived. Balanchine was nothing if not pragmatic. The expanse of the repertory in any/every NYCB seasonal segment astounds. Always. No other Company dances this volume - but that has been true for many decades now. It is definingly a reason to 'love' New York.

What a celebration of the date it was. The gold and silver confetti may have spun out over the SiC cast zealously singing happy birthday after their last call - before all audience members were given their personal slice of celebratory cake in a little plastic box on the way out - but what REALLY marked out tonight - as ever with NYCB - was the dancing. As ever it speaks for itself. Concerto Barocco is such a stunningly crafted work and, boy, did it sing mightily this evening. I watched on the stage screen early this afternoon as Unity Phelan rehearsed the SiC second movement for a performance at the weekend partnered by the glorious Alec Knight, a NYCB corps member. She was as meltingly beautiful there as she was here. I find myself now being fascinated watching this relatively new NYCB principal build her performances. They can start small but soon they reach beyond in a completely natural and spontaneous fashion. Barocco was her case in point this evening. It stung as it sung. This evening Joe Gordon blossomed in Orpheus; so gloriously precise was he in his animation. While I appreciate the historical relevance of the ballet it remains, I fear, far from a favoured Balanchine work for me - but this performance at least broke the doldrums. Laracey - such at vividly dramatic dancer - her Namouna last Spring was oh, so witty - made her Eurydice quake and that stunning arabesque of hers deserves to the preserved in time. Kikta has become one of favourite current NYCB soloists and her lead Fury detonated with a prominence which itself was wickedly delightful.. With that wig in the furious throng of that final segment she reminded me of Vanessa Redgrave in BlowUp. As the lyre raised up at the end - as graced by the figure of Apollo himself - I thought of all the joy which that defining NYCB symbol has reigned over; still continuing to thrive in the hearts of a ever burnishing many. It has been so thrilling to see the house so much fuller than it has sometimes been in recent forays during this entire season - and filled with young people. It is so heartening. As with Orpheus, NYCB strives to reach beyond and, amazingly, it seems the war has at least in part been won. You don't I think need to worry about the future here. It's already bright. Promise. Balanchine - as he himself said - 'choreographed for the future'. The SiC was yet another case in point. It radiated ravishing euphoria from the get go. Sara Mearns again delineated impassioned expression and Roman - well, what is there left to say. Who needs firecrackers when this lad's about? He's a live wire like nobody else's business - jumping higher than a 17 year old Ivan Vasiliev above the rest of that Bolshoi corps - and those one-handed lifts/throws as Jeannette referenced above - NEW TONIGHT - and - count them - three in a row with the ever stunning Emma von Enck (you will want to remember her name too CERTAINLY) at the third movement's completion - didn't just amaze; NO, SIR - they flabbergasted in their predominating ascendancy. He oh, so well deserves that world mantle he's already assumed at - even now - only 23. The finale of that life enriching ballet - delivered oh, so cleanly by all at a properly life affirming pace - reminded me just how lucky I am to be present at such a thrilling event. I have seen the young NYCB corps member, Mckenzie Bernardino Soares, sometimes struggle in his counts - certainly recently in a Glass Pieces rehearsal - but tonight as a soloist in the SiC first movement and then again in the finale his stunning line astonished in the very litheness of its precision. Suddenly he was defining space with a splicing exactitude. I vividly remember last Spring passing him sitting on a block outside of the staircase down towards the State Theater Stage Door. He was reading a book and eating an apple. At the time he was first year NYCB corps. (Talk about challenging!) I was on my way towards the theatre but veered past him, simply pausing to say how much I enjoyed his performances. He looked up at me in sudden amazement as if checking that I wasn't a figment of his own imagining. It may have been a rough day for him as he looked like he was about to cry and - after biting down on his lip - he haltingly said 'I can't tell you how much that means to me'. Well, Mckenzie, tonight you BLAZED. You - and ALL - have every right to be dutifully PROUD. This Fall season has - as I said - been like Christmas every day. I have already boxed up so many cherished memories and they will live as long as I do. Happy Anniversary NYCB. You're still better than the very best in my book ... and then some.

Today is the occasion of what would have been Jerome Robbins' 105th birthday. How wonderful to have it on the actual anniversary date of New York City Ballet itself. Such a meaningful union of minds in so, so very many ways. Happy Birthday, Mr. Robbins.

Thank you, Jeanette for your review. I agree it was wonderful to see and hear Serenade again with its home Company. It is to NYCB what, say, MacMillian's Concerto is to the Royal. One might almost long to say - Symphonic Variations - but those days have, quite obviously, long passed for that ensemble given the clear reality of repertory choices/propagation. When the majestic gold of the State Theater curtain rises unto that bath of blue it always comes as an oasis. Suddenly, you too know where you are. Last night Sara Mearns again exercised her personalised genius; the catch of the moment now being her stock in trade. We watch as her soul thinks. Her heart embraces the light of its mystery in stunning tandem with the musical undulations and we all profit. Indiana Woodward too as the Russian Girl was an ardent whirlwind of joy. Her smiles burst forth in, through and around her fervent turns. The parts all became whole to the stirringly fervent strains of the last movement; glistening as a monumental pillar of tenderness; a monolith of vitality. A word for the rapturous Mary Thomas Mackinnon, a NYCB corps members. As the curtain rose last night she was in the very centre of that fantastical pack. Most often just now she is to one side. During these past few weeks I have found myself seeking her out. There is an air in her placement that seems to sing. I have a feeling special things - much as for Quinn Starner - will be coming her way. They will be well deserved. Theme and Variations - even when standing alone without the Balanchine's build-up in TSN3 - is, as ever, nobility personified. The grandeur in its sublime steps by right should ennoble via the bright pageant of the music's magnificence. Of course, I'm cursed with the very real memory of those halcyon ABT days where we watched agape at the supremacy of Baryshnikov and Kirkland; at the preeminent power of Bujones and Gregory in this work's fullest tow. The sky's heights can only reach so high but, still, Megan Fairchild is oh, so witty in the husbanding of her resources. You know she knows it and that is part of the exciting thrill of her execution. What set NYCB's presentation last night apart certainly for me was the ascendant stimulation of the corps. The silence of their completions was thunderous. I can hear in my ear even now the fantastical pounding of the pointe shoes into the Metropolitan Opera's floor as Kirkland swept in to literally stun in her two extraordinary variations. It was I always thought the leading ballast to her bombardment of brilliance. But NO. REPEATEDLY in NYCB rehearsals you hear - no matter the ballet - the ballet masters say that this was - definingly - NOT WHAT BALANCHINE WANTED. Where there was to be sound it will have been choreographed into the work. (I have to say it is wonderful to see Justin Peck carry on this tradition.) Last night the girls did the same steps in those forward group forays but they were - unlike my echoes of long ago - silent; The majesty of the music was entirely predominant and you could feel the air shift as Fairchild grandly curved forward. Balanchine clearly knew what he was doing to achieve substantive effect on the music's behalf. So too with the men supporting Anthony Huxley. Their precision was literally stunning because of its monumental hush. Gone here was the cacophony of thundering thuds that can so often interrupt the flow at so many other addresses. For Balanchine - and consequently for us ALL - the opulence of this music was - nay IS - primary. Here it was the resounding sumptuousness of the music's glare that lifted us all in the ripe communion of Tchaikovsky's illustrious splendour. THAT, Balanchine instructs, is the true effulgence of its display. How I wish that could ALWAYS be true. Surely no audience deserves less. Once heard; never forgotten.

I heartily agree with you, OnePigeon. I won't substantially go into the subject here as I have covered it at length in another strand. That said, I would VERY much feel exactly the same way about McGregor - indeed DID - as you do prior to finding a way to achieve an appropriate balance for my own good in terms of the balletic idiom which, at least for me, is core. I see the Royal entity - as defined in terms of its forward thrust by its much respected leader - very much as 'dance theatre'. That is a very noble aim no question but it is not, I fear, my primary preference which, as you specified, is the balletic idiom and always has been. I see NYCB now as my 'home/core company' for this reason and the Royal very much as a fascinating sidelight, so worthy in its own (re?)-focused goals. As such I can - in all honesty - NOW jump enthusiastically onboard the McGregor, Pite, etc., bandwagon. There is so much good there and the Royal company is now so excellently trained at heart to answer such GLORIOUSLY. As I said in another posting: Would you want to see NYCB do McGregor or MacMillan? CAN YOU IMAGINE IT???? I'm sure you'll agree NOT. That company just is not fit for it. They would look wholly out of sorts. Similarly I don't now think you'll be seeing established Peck or Ratmansky being done for the Royal Company as defined. For similar reasons it (the lightness of touch for example) NOW - completely understandably - would not suit either their current ensemble or the audience now built for such. Vis a vis the MacMillan extension. I think you can see - through late MacMillan certainly - with its frequent and certainly much hailed (i) employment of dramatic contortions, (ii) actual physical - in some places some might almost say brutal - contractions embodied and certainly (iii) the hyper-extensions - so significantly persistent as to be commonplace therein - as being a very natural progression to McGregor's contemporary conversation/output with the Royal today*. That is what I now see as seeding the current 'Royal' heritage, and - if you believe the internal rhetoric - it appears to thrive. I may be very wrong but I have a feeling MacMillan would have very much applauded such. I used to share a bus frequently with MacMillan himself and Maria Tallchief - the M4 - as we all lived in the same section of NYC at one time. Oddly we didn't talk hugely about ballet I seem to recall. If I remember correctly it was largely about property, city issues or the weather. There was always a lot of laughter I remember. How I wish I could wind back the clock, jump onboard with a token as we used to use then and actually ask him. *Certainly this would not be the case with the Ashton canon but the time for that work to be at heart of the Royal's FUTURE inspiration has I fear LONG passed. But all this is a world away from the joy of NYCB - which is the primary thrust of this strand. Queen Tiler again ruled supreme today in TPC2 and the whole Apollo ensemble - that with Chan and Nadon - was transcendent in their dramatic triumph. Chan at times seemed to be channelling an adolescent Yul Brenner's aura while Nadon - as so often in her radiance - was very much a very young Elizabeth Taylor - who she does, in fact, resemble come to think of it. Certainly the central PDD was revelatory - as much to the two young charges as their audience. We peeked into their private world. The latter wailed their congratulations well into the next segment's music. It was whole heartedly a very natural response.