Posted 16 April 2003 - 01:14 PM
Posted 16 April 2003 - 01:54 PM
There are some companies, though, who have epaulement as a part of their style. The Kirov still does, at least in Petipa. (Should one intrude epaulement into one's Neumeier repertory? Interesting question....) I haven't seen Paris enough to know whether epaulement is really slipping there. The more contemporary work a company does, though, the more foreign epaulement is goinig to be to the dancers' bodies.
Posted 17 April 2003 - 12:40 AM
The set épaulements are ouvert, croisé, effacé... But what is generally called 'épaulement' for a dancer (and you don't refer to those set positioning of the body in space) is how they use their upper body in their dance. Epaulement comes from 'epaule' (shoulder) so, it's ultimately the use of shoulders in various ports de bras, but it's now agreed that it's the whole upper body movements that a dancer adds to act her/his role...
Posted 17 April 2003 - 02:09 AM
I knew about effacé, croisé etc, but I couldn't really figure out how the shoulders could move in different particular ways...And it still confuses me, but I suppose that's also a bit why it's been extended to the whole upper body.
So this means that someone who has a "stiff" upper body and doesn't use it much has bad épaulement, and someone who uses it to express something, like slightly cambré or slightly to the side or whatever has good épaulement. Is this it, or not, or is there something more?
About Paris, some people say that the dancers have a bad épaulement, but I'm not too sure about what they say (I'm thinking about one person in particular which I won't mention Alexandra ;) , because I think it's the same), and since personally, I was a bit confused by it, I couldn't have looked for it, but I think some still have (I wouldn't try to say how many or how much percentage though!), like Aurélie Dupont, for example.
Posted 17 April 2003 - 02:27 AM
Posted 17 April 2003 - 03:57 AM
Like if a dancer was moving diagonally downstage during a step, she might rotate her spine slightly to move the downstage shoulder back in order to present the body to the audience in a more interesting way.
Posted 17 April 2003 - 01:24 PM
Posted 21 April 2003 - 07:22 PM
Posted 22 April 2003 - 02:54 AM
Even when watching modern dance (I just returned from a program of the Limon Company) they use epaulement. I am not sure what they call it in modern dance but dance is dance and the angles of the body are similar in how it relates to the stage regardless of whether we are discussing modern, ballet or flaminco for that matter. I am sure what we call epaulement in ballet is also used in stage and film work for actors. They just call it something else. They body expressivity is the same in all artistic forms of movement. Perhaps it just has different names.
Posted 22 April 2003 - 03:04 AM
Are you saying that rotation of the spine is not part of good "movement" epaulement beyond the requirements of "position" epaulement? :confused:
(Position epaulement being things like showing the back to the audience in fourth arabesque. Movement epaulement being things like using one's shoulders and upper spine in sissonne - tombe - pas de bourree on the diagonal with half first port de bras)
I'm editing this to add that vrsfanatic and I were writing at the same time, and what I wrote relates directly to the upper posts on this thread and to not to the directions of the body.
Posted 22 April 2003 - 06:58 AM
Posted 22 April 2003 - 04:17 PM
Arabesque is another position, which has nothing to do with epaulement. And , yes, the forth arabesque in Vaganova sistem allow you to twist your shoulders.
When I said, bent in your shoulderblades, I meant to draw the line in the low part of shoulderblades and bent your body over there.
Posted 22 April 2003 - 07:55 PM
Don't the Cecchetti (I think they exist in Vaganova as well, but perhaps not officially) épaulé positions require one to twist the shoulders but not the hips? I tend to prefer not to think of ballet in terms of positions even though it is often described that way, but that discussion could fill another thread. Regardless, I still wouldn't say that a ballet position is "not movement." I realize it sounds like I'm splitting hairs, but I can really see the difference in my students between when I tell them something is a position and when I describe it in terms of "energy."
Posted 22 April 2003 - 10:09 PM
There is a relation between the shoulders and the hips, but it is more of a reference point to which we return between movements -- like having the leg pass through first (reference point) while moving en cloche. If you "hit" first, you stop the continuity of the movement, but you must know where it is and how to get there, and pass through it without resting there. Same principle applies above the waist.
Posted 23 April 2003 - 01:38 AM
(I thought the word epaulement could mean two things. The first being a concrete position/direction of the body and limbs as in "pointe tendue croise devant". The second would be the consept of usage of upper body in dance as in "his great use of epaulement makes his jumps appear higher", but apparently my understanding of the second meaning is faulty somehow. Maybe it isn't called epaulement at all, but something else?)
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases (adblockers may block display):