[...] from Shechter’s Uprising on her blog Dancing Perfectly Free. For the first post, click here; for the second, click [...]

As you know I had a lot of comments immediately following this performance. A week later, however, and my mind is drawing a huge blank. I think this is indicative of the lack of impression this program left on me. :-) One of my co-workers had a very interesting take on Wheeldon's work, calling it extremely sexist. It's not something I thought of at the time, but looking back I can see what he meant. The women throughout the program weren't allowed to do much, but were rather lifted and contorted into positions by the male dancers, nothing more than human props. Molnar's piece was awful. I felt like she was trying to emulate "In The Upper Room," which as we both know, should just be left alone. From the repetitive music, to the jittery movement, I kept wanting the piece to evolve and take me to another plane. Alas, no one should try to re-create a masterpiece. I actually liked Commedia the best, I think. I'm not sure why, because it certainly wasn't very compelling. It was a welcome break from the serious and somber program that lead into it however - at least the show ended lightly. 15 years old. My gosh!

Thanks for summarizing! It was a special event -- I loved that Ms. Acocella contributed the clips she did, and I also, as you say, enjoyed whenever Mr. Ratmansky's more soft-spoken presentation-style made it through the sieve of Ms. Acocella's much more spirited one. (They were both terrific -- him being thoughtful, her being very evidently enamored of her subject.) A few more tidbits I remembered, and a question... Mr. Ratmansky spoke about the way that he chooses a dancer. Usually he will watch class to choose a dancer, though he acknowledges what you see in class can be very different from what you see on stage. He said that, after all his experience, he can tell so much of a dancer's character through just his or her first movements. The minute a dancer presents him or herself on stage, he can see who they are. He also said that if he is choreographing a new piece, he will prefer to work with a dancer with a sensibility similar to his own; whereas if he is working with an established piece, it is not as necessary for the personalities to be so compatible, because then the dance is less involved in creating the movement along with him. He also spoke about the way he prepares a piece of choreography. First he spends a very long time with the music. He will listen to it over and over again, sometimes with the score of notes in front of him, until he can imagine all the steps in advance. Ms. Acocella and Mr. Ratmansky spoke also of the use of different facial expressions in ballet. To a Russian audience member, a very high form of praise is to describe the dancer as "artistic." Ms. Acocella recalled having heard this description used repeatedly after one Russian ballet she attended. What she finally discerned the meaning to be was that the dancer had expressed a part of his or herself in the dance -- something Balanchine would have shunned (she quoted him as having instructed his dancers, "I want you to dance with your feet, and not with your face.") In Russia, the aesthetic of the ballet is considered to be enhanced when the dancer emotes -- facially, and physically -- imbuing the dance with the dancer's own "artistic" skills. I loved also when Ms. Acocella did draw out (even to her own surprise!) one of the choices that has made Mr. Ratamansky's tenure at the Bolshoi particularly contentious -- for the big story ballets that audiences of the Bolshoi company demand, with Spartacus as the most popular, Mr. Ratamansky has cast leading roles from dancers outside of the company! Namely, he cast Carlos Acosta (Houston City Ballet) as Spartacus. Understandably, this must have provoked aghast discomfort from the dancers under "life contracts" with the Bolshoi. When asked about the changing perceptions of more modern dance styles within Russia, Mr. Ratamansky highlighted that for Russians, the stage of the Bolshoi is like a "church." There is however, something of which Mr. Ratamansky is very proud, a new crop of young dancers that have come out of the changes he has brought to the repertoire. Lastly, I found it very interesting when Ms. Acocella questioned Mr. Ratamansky if his staging of "Bolt" (a ballet from the '20s in Russia which portrays a sea of orange-clad dancers simultaneously as machines and representative of the "Soviet man", if this ballet were in any way ironic or satirical. Mr. Ratamansky replied that no -- it has been 20 years since the perestroika (economic restructuring within Russia under Gorbachev), and that there was now no reason to be angry. Instead to Mr. Ratamansky -- The Bolt represented a particular and essential Soviet aesthetic for a certain kind of ballet. It was essential to him to preserve this style. (He seemed to balance the very political role of curating traditional Russian ballet -- a revered staple of Russian nationalism, culture and pride -- along with pushing and stretching Russian ballet to continue in its excellence -- to introduce competitors like Carlos Acosta wherever he saw performance quality could be enhanced; whenever he had the opportunity to challenge the resident elite of the Bolshoi company. Bravo! On both counts -- preservation and teaching. Lastly -- my question! Did Ratmansky say that Balanchine was the first to create the off-balance stance in ballet? I wasn't sure if he was crediting a specific ballet, or a choreographer. Though, I almost recall instead that he said it came from Mikhail Fokin?

Wow -- that does look really exhilarating! Thanks for posting the video -- this is one of the two FFD dates that I unfortunately didn't see.

[...] week, I wrote at length about the excerpt from Hofesh Shechter’s Uprising that I saw during the Fall for Dance [...]

Tap into Peace was electrifying. At last a tap piece that lets tap dancers tap instead of trying to gloss off of ballet, modern, or jazz. Great melding of contemporary music, social themes, and movement. Wish they didn't have to dance on a marley floor so we could HEAR them. Thanks to Fall for Dance for recognizing modern tap as an emerging legitimate form of dance! The audience gave this piece the most enthusiastic reception by far. We want more great tap!

The Pite piece sounds great. Can't wait to see her "Ten Duets" again at Cedar Lake!

Hey Evan, I'm so sorry I can't make it to this one - I hope you will give us a full report. I was, however, able to attend the opening "Crossing the Line" panel. Were you there? What did you think if so? Here are my thoughts, along with some tangents about class in the American arts: http://blogs.wnyc.org/culture/2008/09/18/the-fine-art-of-panels/

This sounds excellent. Unfortunately I have to go out of town this weekend, but please write about this if you are able to go.

I know what you mean - an Obama ballet might be the kind of thing that is at its best as a glorious theoretical ... but there is safety in numbers, right? Maybe we could all plan a field trip ...