Crisis at the Kirov Ballet?
Posted 10 December 2003 - 12:59 PM
At least one article justly emphasizes the improbable position the Kirov Ballet has been in within the Mariinsky Theatre since 1995 when artistic director Oleg Vinogradov was ousted: no proper artistic director or choreographer, the unequal and unreal position of the ballet company related to the opera and the orchestra, and last but not least the total subordination to somebody who doesnít understand a thing about ballet. Also stressed is the change in the general attitude toward Makhar Vaziev, who keeps the company going since 1995. Until recently he was even over-generously credited with the achievements of his predecessor, like the so-called discovery of a brilliant new generation of ballerinas or the expansion of the repertory with Western choreographers, now he is blamed for all whatís going wrong with the company: unsuccessful premieres and questionable choice of repertory, unequal level of the performances, even on tours, troubled relationships with invited choreographers and local stars, stressful situations inside the company, etc.
Some articles (in Russian language):
In any case something to be followed. I hope that our Russian posters (Inga, Mikhail, Ö) will join in and give more information about this case.
Posted 10 December 2003 - 02:22 PM
Posted 10 December 2003 - 07:37 PM
Posted 10 December 2003 - 07:55 PM
Posted 10 December 2003 - 10:23 PM
Where did you read Gergiev's remarks, Mel? (Can you read Russian?) I'd be VERY interested t read more.... The Kirov's performances here were not as problemmatic as those in London (where I have it on excellent authority they were dancing works they really did not KNOW), but still, the Fokine was beautifully played by the orchestra but quite upsetting to look at, especially if you saw it more than once.
. Gergiev wrote knowingly about and performed brilliantly the ballet music
Posted 11 December 2003 - 03:31 AM
The article wasn't an interview, but instead, an appreciation, with many of Gergiev's writings on Tchaikovsky excerpted from their Russian originals. I can read Cyrillic, but I can't read Russian.
Posted 13 December 2003 - 07:55 AM
The press write that Kirov suffered from the endless touring that is hard to bear, and it give to the dancers no time to prepare their roles and even premieres is not well prepared. Also the tough style of the management donít give to the dancers to refuse the roles they donít like and so on. One critic think itís the reasons why Zakharova leaved the Kirov for the Bolshoi. May be Zakharovaís departure also was considered as a sign that Kirov have problems.
Posted 13 December 2003 - 08:14 AM
Posted 13 December 2003 - 10:43 AM
1) Moscow critics have a long history of trashing the Kirov.
2) I was in Detroit, and the performances were on the whole fabulous.
Posted 13 December 2003 - 11:44 AM
Posted 15 December 2003 - 10:31 AM
Posted 15 December 2003 - 12:06 PM
Posted 15 December 2003 - 12:47 PM
Besides, Inga's point is that the Kirov Ballet generates a lot less of attention and praise than it used to, take in the mid-nineties. And for reasons described above. It is also the case in London, where the critics really cannot be accused of an anti-Kirov tradition: the embarrassingly unprepared new productions, the absence of many of the established stars, some really poor performances during last's summer season in Covent Garden raised more than a few eyebrows. As Jane Simpson summed it up in her review for Dance View: "It won't take much more of this sort of thing to have us thinking that the Kirov is taking us for a ride."
Nothing of this is really new, but it has become a bit too obvious in the last years. Finally, nobody will question the quality of the dancers (indeed, given the circumstances in which they perform, only for that they would deserve our admiration), it's the way they are treated which has to be reconsidered.
Posted 15 December 2003 - 05:23 PM
There is no point in arguing, but as I said before, when the Kirov was in Detroit artistically they were near the top of their game. Not every soloist was equally good, but the overall standard was extraordinarily high.
Marc, if you had to sit through the performances we see in America by native companies, you would appreciate the difference all the more!
I wasn't in London so I can't comment on what went on there. Most of the reviews suggested that they were in disarray and they well might have been. Certainly the touring schedule is grueling.
Posted 15 December 2003 - 08:03 PM
At the same time, it looks or is really bad when the dancer a company has been pushing for seven years leaves for the rival company.
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. (If it doesn't appear below, your computer's or browser's adblockers may have blocked display):