Jump to content


This site uses cookies. By using this site, you agree to accept cookies, unless you've opted out. (US government web page with instructions to opt out: http://www.usa.gov/optout-instructions.shtml)

Petipa version v Sergeyev version?


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#1 EvilNinjaX

EvilNinjaX

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 268 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 11:06 AM

I've just purchased tickets to the Kirov Ballet's SLEEPING BEAUTY in LA and i noticed in the release [link], they mention that this is based on the 1952 revised version by Konstantin Sergeyev.

Can anyone either tell me or direct me to a place where I can learn more about this revision?

thx
-goro-

#2 Hans

Hans

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,104 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 11:12 AM

The Sergeyev version is what the Kirov has been performing for years, so it would probably look more familiar to you than their reconstruction of the 1890's original. Videos of it include performances with Sizova, Lezhnina, and Asylmuratova as well as some others. Don't worry--it's a nice traditional version, you won't get any weird Freudian overtones. My only real complaint about it is the lack of mime.

#3 Joseph

Joseph

    Bronze Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 265 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 11:22 AM

So, do they not do the other version anymore? And if not, what happened? It was such a big deal I thought?

:blink:

#4 Hans

Hans

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,104 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 11:23 AM

Both the Sergeyev version and the reconstruction exist simultaneously in the repertoire. I don't know why they might have chosen to bring one over the other although I imagine that the Sergeyev is easier to tour with.

#5 richard53dog

richard53dog

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 01:59 PM

The Sergeyev version is what the Kirov has been performing for years, so it would probably look more familiar to you than their reconstruction of the 1890's original.  Videos of it include performances with Sizova, Lezhnina, and Asylmuratova as well as some others.  Don't worry--it's a nice traditional version, you won't get any weird Freudian overtones.  My only real complaint about it is the lack of mime.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yes, my biggest problem is the lack of mime. Sleeping Beauty loses a lot by having much of the mime trimmed away.

But I also think the Sergevey's choreography is pretty ordinary looking. I'd really, really like to see the reconstructed version.

Richard

#6 carbro

carbro

    Late Board Registrar

  • Rest in Peace
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,361 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 02:48 PM

Me three on the paucity of mime. Also, hardly anybody attends the christening! Mostly, it's just the fairies. A rather sparse court there! You don't even need dancers there -- just vertical bodies!

#7 Paul Parish

Paul Parish

    Platinum Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,925 posts

Posted 02 August 2005 - 09:37 PM

me three on the "pretty ordinary looking"--

There's way too much merely bourreeing around -- for Lilac in particular, but in the birthday scene, when the whole country should be falling asleep, 'even hte fire on the hearth,' you don't see any of that, there's just lots of bourreeing around....

#8 cargill

cargill

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 645 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 05:46 AM

It is too bad they aren't bringing the reconstructed version. It is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen, and really changes the emphasis. Some of the costumes are a bit bright (the yellow fairy!), but for me, it was so so much more complete and satisfying and alive than the newer version. The prince is a real prince, who is a human visiting a magical realm in the vision scene (so he can't dance), not just some stick in tights jumping around. And the additional mime for the King and Queen was so moving. But some people found it very long (about 4 hours of pure heaven!), and it is probably very expensive to tour.

#9 Hans

Hans

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,104 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 05:53 AM

Mr. Vaziev, if you are reading this, please make the reconstructed Sleeping Beauty and La Bayadère available on DVD!!! (Or at least tour them to DC. :blink: )

#10 Natalia

Natalia

    Rubies Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,398 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 07:24 AM

The 'Soviet' Sleeping Beauty and Bayadere by Konstantin Sergeyev are considered very great & important stagings in and of themselves. Just because we love the Petipa/Vikharev reconstructions of the Tsarist Era doesn't mean that we should not appreciate the creations of the great Soviet-era masters.

We should consider ourselves very fortunate to be seeing both Konstantin Sergeev classics in the US, very soon (Beauty in the fall (California & Detroit) & Bayadere in DC, next summer).

Don't forget - those who poo-poo'ed the fact that the Bolshoi was bringing the Soviet warhorse Spartacus to New York this year ate 'crow' in the end. "Soviet Spartacus" was THE most successful, earliest 'sold out' production at the MET, during the recent tour. Who, among us BalletTalkers, would have predicted that fact?

#11 Hans

Hans

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,104 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 07:30 AM

Spartacus is an original ballet though, not a re-staging of someone else's work.

There are certain things I like about the Sergeyev staging of Sleeping Beauty, such as his choreography for Aurora's variation in Act II. If the production had mime, I'd be pretty happy with it. I do wish Vikharev would fix the problems with the Bluebird pdd in the reconstruction.

#12 Natalia

Natalia

    Rubies Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,398 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 08:21 AM

My point with Spartcus is that a lot of folks tend to dismiss certain works just because they were choreographed (original works) or staged (revisions) by people who happened to work at the Bolshoi & Kirov Theaters during the USSR years.

Some people are blinded by the names Yuri Grigorovich and Konstantin Sergeyev (and many others) just because they are politically incorrect with another, newer group of leaders.

Let's judge the art - not the regime that sponsored the art.

#13 Hans

Hans

    Sapphire Circle

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,104 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 08:24 AM

I agree, Natalia.

#14 Cygnet

Cygnet

    Silver Circle

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 734 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 08:36 AM

I'll be seeing them when they come to L.A. too. I'd be surprised if they bring the boat & panorama for Act 2. When they tour the Sergeyev version they usually don't. The Dorothy Chandler Pavillion is really too small to hold the 1890 production, even with a minimal cast. In fact, I don't think there's a stage in L.A. that could hold it. If they ever bring it, the largest venue that might be able to hold it would be the OC Center for the Perf. Arts.

Petersburgers adore this version, and most of the Kirov dancers and the Vaganova teachers. The Russians loathed the new/old revival and revere Sergeyev's version as holy - authentic Petipa. If you have it, check out Tim Scholl's book. My main concern will be the casting and the level of dancing of the principal casts. I never worry about the corps.

#15 Natalia

Natalia

    Rubies Circle

  • Foreign Correspondent
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,398 posts

Posted 03 August 2005 - 09:38 AM

I'll be seeing them when they come to L.A. too.  I'd be surprised if they bring the boat & panorama for Act 2.  When they tour the Sergeyev version they usually don't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


They take the boat but not the panorama. In fact, they don't tour the Panorama in either version. The Panorama stays-put in the Mariinsky Theater, permanently affixed to rollers. You would have to tear down the Mariinsky Theater to take the Panorama anywhere.

In fact, the Panorama has not been seen even in St Petersburg for a while; it was not used in last winter's series of Soviet Beauties. It appears that it is being repaired. I don't know what will happen to "it" (the canvas & gears) during the 2-3 years when the theater is closed down, beginning one year from now. It could be that The Panorama will be out of commission intil 2008 or 2009. Heaven help us!


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):