Danseur Noble

[fandeballet]

I got the idea for this topic from a British dance site. If this is a topic that already has been brought up, I'll understand if it will be closed/moved.

What makes a great danseur noble??? Is it just the way he presents and partners

his ballerina. Or is it the whole package that a dancer can bring.

One dancer that the British site did not mention, and whom I thought of was Ivan Nagy, who danced with ABT until 1977. He was well known for his skills of partnering and how he made any partner look great.

Another dancer that has been talked about as a dansuer noble was Erik Bruhn. But he was a fine dancer himself. An added bonus?! The complete package?!

Other dansuer nobles who are the complete packages to me are Jose Manuel Carreno and Carlos Acosta. The Nacional Ballet de Cuba emphasizes partnering skills , I've heard with 4 years Pas de Duex classes. Could this be taught, inbred or a combination of both

What do you think?

[Mel Johnson]

I don't think we've seen any danseurs nobles since before WWII. In the days of rigid emploi, the danseur noble did not do the showy technical work that we style as bravura these days. He was a courtier-type, dedicated to showing off the ballerina and displaying excellent deportment and aplomb. In the twentieth century, the emphasis was always on the "general-purpose" male dancer, so the danseurs nobles went the way of the danseurs grotesques, and were folded into other emplois, in these cases, the classiques and the caractères, respectively.

[Mashinka]

In the twentieth century, the emphasis was always on the "general-purpose" male dancer, so the danseurs nobles went the way of the danseurs grotesques, and were folded into other emplois, in these cases, the classiques and the caractères, respectively.

That is probably true in the main, but I still think there have been a few 'natural' danseurs noble around that possess the basic temperament even when cast in other kinds of roles. Thomas Edur may be one of the few still surviving.

[Michael]

Probably it is still important to have a category that distinguishes a male dancer of the taller order, and of regular and noble features and who dramatically fits the noble or regal type, from the trickster -- someone who is a Prince to the exclusion of other things. And to apply it to the physical set up and appearance and temperament of the dancer more than to his physical facility --

Remember in this connection that the class was also called "serieux", or serious as well as noble.

To continue to use the term means that at least the idea of this type continues to exist and the linked idea that it is important for some roles to cast someone who fits the bill.

I agree with Mel that there are few people who actually conform to the ideal and few roles that actually continue to require it. But it's still important to retain the concept. Casting that goes in that direction will be better in the ballets that did require it and the concept itself preserves a critical heritage of ballet.

Defined in that manner, I don't think either Acosta or Jose Manuel is really a Noble/Serieux type -- Neither is basically, essentially the Prince, both are too highly flavored, too able to be Puckish, too able to play a demi character lead in Don Q to be regarded as essentially of the other type.

But here's also where the usual verbal confusion starts -- there have been so many discussions of this subject which immediately descend into "he's a noble dancer ... how can you say he isn't noble?" Makes you think that the biggest problem with the class isn't the ambiguity of using this vernacular word which means one thing for the special dance term which means something different

[fandeballet]

What about Nagy and/or Bruhn?

[Mel Johnson]

They tended toward the noble type, but did all sorts of things that no danseur noble would be caught dead doing.

[Gina Ness]

Somehow, I've always thought of the Royal Ballet's Michael Somes as a "danseur noble"...

[Alexandra]

I'd count Somes as a "danseur noble" too. And in the 18th century, danseur nobles would also do character (acting) parts, often of villains -- Gaetan Vestris began his dancing career as a grotesque. The genres were always a bit fluid. Though Auguste Vestris gets into the history books as the genre blender (he could dance all types of roles) one reads of dancers in the early 18th century doing demicaractere as well as noble and serieux. It's height -- though Nagy and Bruhn were not of the textbook stature, at least 5'11 -- but it's also carriage and presentation. And, by Danish employ (I can't resist), the tilt of the nose. (Straight noses, serieux; turned up, demicaractere.)

[Leigh Witchel]

Among current dancers I'd name Kenneth Greve and I think Rupert Pennefather may have the potential to become one. He has the (psychic) weight for it.

I echo Michael's comments about how this subject gets distorted. I had a conversation with a colleague who wrote that a certain dancer deserved to be called a danseur noble. This dancer is less than 5'5". I wrote back saying that we might as well say he deserves to be blond. It's not a title, it's a type.

It extends to other genres, when I mentioned to another colleague that a dancer was everything one could ask for in a demi-caractere dancer, he objected, saying that he thought the dancer could be a soloist or principal. Oy.

[bart]

Questions: which roles choreographed in the 20th and 21st centuries (if any) can be thought of (even if only ideally) as "danseur noble" roles? And who is -- or might be -- the ideal current dancer of such a role?

[Leigh Witchel]

IMO, almost nothing. The genre has been pushed out of choreography by and large - even in roles traditionally allocated to the danseur noble the virtuoso variation has crept in.

The closest things in the Balanchine rep (naming it because it's familiar) are probably the cavalier roles in Diamonds, Emeralds, and possibly the second act divertissement in Midsummer Night's Dream.

In Ashton, perhaps Palemon and the central male part in Symphonic Variations (both Somes roles)? What do Ashton watchers think?

[canbelto]

And, by Danish employ (I can't resist), the tilt of the nose. (Straight noses, serieux; turned up, demicaractere.)

Do you have, uh, any pictures as examples?

I'd count Manuel Legris and Jonathan Cope as danseur nobles.

[drb]

I don't think we've seen any danseurs nobles since before WWII.  In the days of rigid emploi, the danseur noble did not do the showy technical work that we style as bravura these days.  He was a courtier-type, dedicated to showing off the ballerina and displaying excellent deportment and aplomb.  In the twentieth century, the emphasis was always on the "general-purpose" male dancer, so the danseurs nobles went the way of the danseurs grotesques, and were folded into other emplois, in these cases, the classiques and the caractères, respectively.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are there distinctions between "porteur" and "danseur noble?" To add to my confusion, I've also seen "porteur noble." These must be very carefully defined terms, else how could "danseur noble," taken simply literally, not include, e.g., Erik Bruhn?

Is there a useful, precise reference book on ballet terms for those of us (decidedly) non-scholars of ballet?

[Leigh Witchel]

They're completely different terms. A porteur is simply a partner - when I've heard it used it was most specifically to talk about partners during a period in Paris where the ballerina was so prominent that the male dancer did nothing more than present her.

For precise definitions I defer to Alexandra, who taught me what I know on the genres!

Also, canbelto, as much as I like Legris, I would disagree about him being a danseur noble. I think he has the wrong build for that genre.

[drb]

Leigh Witchel: "They're completely different terms. A porteur is simply a partner... the male dancer did nothing more than present her."

Mel Johnson : " the danseur noble did not do the showy technical work...[he was] dedicated to showing off the ballerina and displaying excellent deportment..."

Help!, Alexandra, I still can't tell the difference! Especially when one throws in "porteur noble."

[Alexandra]

drb, I think people today would call a Siegfried, say, "merely a porteur" but that's because they don't understand what a danseur noble was As Leigh wrote, there was a period in which there were very few male dancers (fashion of the times; long story) and their job was really only to present her.

The danseur noble, as Mel wrote, did not do the showy technical work -- BUT this was not a lack or a weakness. He showed his beautiful lines -- and, yes, his deportment. And he mimed with authority. He danced the "stately measures" rather than quicker steps, but these were considered the more difficult, because they had to be perfect.

[bart]

So, following this definition, which certainly seems to point to a thing of the past, who were the "last of the danseurs nobles", in your opinions?

And, can there ever be another?

[canbelto]

Still confused about the Danish nose thing ... Would Richard Nixon have been a demicharacter?

[Mel Johnson]

Porteur noble would be an oxymoron. "Porteur" is a disparaging term for a male dancer who does nothing but hold up the ballerina. He does no dancing of his own, and the implication is that he can't.

[carbro]

And, by Danish employ (I can't resist), the tilt of the nose. (Straight noses, serieux; turned up, demicaractere.)

Do you have, uh, any pictures as examples?

I'd count Manuel Legris and Jonathan Cope as danseur nobles.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Legris and Cope aren't Danish . Villumsen, Martins and Bruhn (straight) are; ditto Kehlet and Ib Andersen (up-turned).

Peter Schaufuss -- hmm, how to characterize his nose?

[drb]

The danseur noble, as Mel wrote, did not do the showy technical work -- BUT this was not a lack or a weakness. He showed his beautiful lines -- and, yes, his deportment. And he mimed with authority. He danced the "stately measures" rather than quicker steps, but these were considered the more difficult, because they had to be perfect.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Porteur noble would be an oxymoron. "Porteur" is a disparaging term for a male dancer who does nothing but hold up the ballerina. He does no dancing of his own, and the implication is that he can't.

So then I would never call Erik Bruhn (or, say, Dowell) a "porteur", but since he has all the characteristics of a "danseur noble" PLUS additional merits, could I call him a "danseur noble+"? Or must "danseur noble" be confined to historical discussion?

[ViolinConcerto]

Still confused about the Danish nose thing ... Would Richard Nixon have been a demicharacter? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, although I am an absolute newcomer to this area, I'd have to say (based on the earlier discussions) that Richard Nixon would have been a grotesque!

All this makes one wish for little bitty film clips. Someday soon perhaps. I'm going to check on the ABT website (not now tho) -- the dictionary section, and maybe my visual dictionary DVD.

[Mel Johnson]

Yes, probably a grotesque, but they'd have to stop him from saying, "I am NOT a troll!"

[sandik]

The closest things in the Balanchine rep (naming it because it's familiar) are probably the cavalier roles in Diamonds, Emeralds, and possibly the second act divertissement in Midsummer Night's Dream.

If we're looking at male roles that are exclusively partner-oriented, then I would suggest the man in Concerto Barocco (though he is perhaps too vestigial)

If the man can actually dance alone as well as with his partner, how about the male lead in Theme and Variations (especially imagining it with its original casting)

[Leigh Witchel]

The closest things in the Balanchine rep (naming it because it's familiar) are probably the cavalier roles in Diamonds, Emeralds, and possibly the second act divertissement in Midsummer Night's Dream.

If we're looking at male roles that are exclusively partner-oriented, then I would suggest the man in Concerto Barocco (though he is perhaps too vestigial)

If the man can actually dance alone as well as with his partner, how about the male lead in Theme and Variations (especially imagining it with its original casting)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's not the partnering, it's the tempo and the weight. Who knows if I'm right, but I don't think "Theme" is a role for a danseur noble, but for a classique. I'd also say both Bruhn and Dowell were classiques rather than danseurs nobles - Alexandra?

There are great classiques and demi-caractere dancers and lousy danseur nobles. It's a classification, not a quality level, nor is it always the guy playing the lead.