Star Dancers in AarhusHubbe,Kobborg,Schandorff and Greve to he
Posted 02 October 2003 - 12:20 AM
Posted 02 October 2003 - 04:44 AM
Sometimes, too, it's not obvious how out of step a piece like that will be until it's taken out of the context in which it was originally seen (in this case, SA) and put down next to something else. Remember how many critics (in London as well as Copenhagen) loved Schaufuss's La Sylphide when they saw it with English National Ballet -- partly because foreigners were doing it as well as you could imagine foreigners doing it -- and it suddenly looked quite different on the stage at the Royal Theatre.
I don't mean to defend the group, just saying what sometimes happens. The Suzanne Farrell Ballet did a modern dance piece last year, made by a choreographer Farrell had worked with in Florida. It may have been fine there, and an interesting process for the dancers, etc, etc., but it did not fit on a program with Divertimento No. 15 -- there was a distinct quality gap!
All that said, if the piece isn't up to standard, I hope people said so. Then maybe you won't have to endure it again.
Posted 02 October 2003 - 01:10 PM
1. If one of the two (choreography/dancing) is poor does it immediately sour the other or is it possible to appreciate the un-tainted element?
2. With regard to programming, I personally enjoy a program that is truly "mixed" with distinct differences between the rep evening. As I have posted re: the RDB triple bill, too much of the same makes for little to remember for me. This evening, the company changed the program due to illness and injury I believe. Originally scheduled: La Sylphide and Etudes, this changed to Vers Un Pays Sage (Maillot) and La Sylphide. I wonder which is the more effective program aesthetically (provided we disregard the details of dancers that are available, time limits, subscription worries etc. etc.)
3. What can be said for "home court advantage"? I suspect that it must be difficult for a foreign company to put on any ballet in its home turf--in the case of La Sylfide even with the Schaufass choreography. Or, to use an example of an extreme case--last season both NYCB and Dance Theatre of Harlem had Serenade in the rep. AND both of these Serenades were performed on the same stage!
Posted 02 October 2003 - 03:40 PM
Posted 03 October 2003 - 12:30 AM
I feel that the star dancers(which was the name of the performance) could have spend their time and mine better. We could have had excepts from Manon, La Sylphide or Duo Consertante with Hubbe and Schandorff, We could even have had Yesterdays with Bendixen and Gad. Even an except from their Hamlet ballet would have been more interesting than the awful drum& Mozart piece and the underrehersed and underperformed Napoli III. I blame the Danish dancers and producer as much or perhaps more than the SA dancers. The should at least have so much respect for Bournonville to insist on a certain standard. A well danced Napoli III is always a joy andd they could have performed on level with the best parts of the programme.
Posted 03 October 2003 - 01:00 AM
Next number was Don Q. with Kobborg and Alina C. She was fantastic and he was good, with out dazzling. He is a dancer, whom I have almost found it difficult to admire mostly due to lack of line. I have seen better from other Danish and international dancer, but she really managed to make a Kitri, that was neither vulgar nor external. Quite a feat.
Johan Kobborg does not lack line, and theres no more to say about that!!
Alina C and Kobborg then did the pas de deux from MacMillan Romeo & Juliet. Again she was the better dancer and actor of them
I think you'll find that almost all of the london critics disagree with you, especially from a dancer/actor perspective! Very rarely does he get a bad review, either for his dancing or his acting!
Back from Aarhus, I hasten to bring my report. It was a night of superb dancing. It was a night of mediocre dancing. It was a night of masterpieces. It was a night of awfull choreography.
So overall you had a good night then!!???
Posted 03 October 2003 - 05:01 AM
And putting on my Board Host Beanie and propellor set, I think it's important to realize that on any ballet discussion board, we're going to see our favorite dancers both praised and criticized. Of course you may disagree, but try and remember this is a discussion, not a debating forum.
Posted 03 October 2003 - 05:09 AM
As so much of the repetoire in Denmark is legacy, it can be very difficult for a dancer, who do not exactly fit the types to get full recognition. As far as the Danish standards goes, Kobborg was forced into the demi caracter role, which he really is not. It has been much easier for dancers like Arne Villumsen, Ib Andersen, Nicolai Hubbe and even a foreign dancer like Lloyd Riggins to build a career here .It is not that he has been underpreciated in Denmark. He has danced a lot of leading roles, but he has never been as dominant and frequent star dancer as he is is with Royal ballet. it has more been like: we know he is good so we muust give him some parts. I my opinion they have failed in buying ballets that could use his potential. A ballet like Asstons Rhapsody would have been a great choice for Kobborg and Thomas Lund. He could so easyly have been a victim of the series of wrong ballet masters. Yes he was a favorite with Peter Schaufuss, but to dance leading roles in bad ballets is not really progressing a dancer. He has also lacked an equal partner i RDB, which he has now. I would say he has a more than equal partner in Alina C To me she is the revelation. He is good and she is great.
Posted 03 October 2003 - 06:28 AM
Effy, I'd probably have much the same feeling that you did after seeing a disappointing program in Arhus, but I think it's what happens with "summer gigs" (even though it's October) that are put together to give dancers work in their off-season. Maybe the SA dancers wanted to try Napoli (?) Not the best reason to make the audience watch it, but often experiments happen outside of major cities to give the dancers a chance without being as harshly scrutinized.
(I would echo Leigh's comments above. People's taste in dancers is very personal, and we want people to be comfortable saying either "I love X" and "I thought she was awful!". It's probably best, when writing, to remember that no matter how awful the dancer was, his or her mother is probably reading the board. Not that anything on THIS thread crossed that line, but just as a general reminder.)
Posted 03 October 2003 - 10:17 AM
Thomas Lund has shared some of the same problems in building a career and a partnership. The frequency is to low between the really good and well chosed part. Now Thomas Lund get Nutcracker and James, where he too lacks the glamour and they still fail to get the works that would really suit him. After Kobborg left he has to wait even longer. When Kobborg was in the company they at least now and again had to chose a suitable ballet. Behind Lund, Morten Eggert has the same problem. To little and too infrequently. On the other hand dancer like Mads Blangstrup and andrew Bpwman, tall classical dancers gets a lot of parts, good partners and stage time because they suit the repetoire and with Kenneth Greve as lead dancer, the focus is on the taller, classical type
Posted 03 October 2003 - 11:40 AM
Posted 05 October 2003 - 11:22 AM
He was stunning, full of character- drawing on (what i felt were) all the right aspects of Flint's psycotic ballet teacher. Very, very scary....... but made me long to see him in macmillan's Mayerling again!!
But this is : :offtopic:
so i'll stop!
Posted 05 October 2003 - 11:30 PM
Regarding the change from Etudes to Un a pays sage, they were forced by injuries to Kenneth Greve and Andrew Bowman, who shares the most diffucult mens solos in Etudes.
Posted 06 October 2003 - 02:02 PM
Posted 07 October 2003 - 03:27 AM
Lloyd Riggens will cover as Odysseus for the first two performances
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: