Is "Giselle" dead?

[carbro]

Thanks, Ian!

[Marc Haegeman]

Marc, thank you for coming in on this one. I'm curious, would this review be possible in the European papers with which you are familiar? This is really the editors' doing rather than the writer's. American newspapers aren't hiring arts critics these days, and often send someone to review performances/events outside of his or her specialty. I've been told by friends in Copenhagen and Paris that arts criticism is also focused on movies and rock music. In London, this does not seem to be the case. What's your take on the issue?

Alexandra, absolutely, it's possible in European papers. Just check the Dutch, German or French newspapers when they cover ballet performances (if ever they bother). It's even trendy to say things along the lines of: Sleeping Beauties (in plural) are old-fashioned and by definition pointless, long live the Forsythes, they represent the future... etc. London might indeed be an exception. In Belgium newspaper critics are entirely focused on contemporary dance, classical ballet isn't taken serious (it's children's cotton candy delight for Sunday matinees). It's the same tendency: classical ballet has no longer value for us in the 21st century, it's moreover expensive so let's get rid of it. Such ideas are very much alive in the cultural (and political) establishment in Europe, but doesn't necessarily reflect the taste or the preferences of the general public.

The analogy with the Louvre actually comes from étoile Jean-Guillaume Bart of the Paris Opera, when he was pondering about the sad state of classical ballet in France.

[Alexandra]

Hello All,

Ian here from Ballet AZ. Let me put this all to rest. The version we performed was a la Erik Bruhn. There is a wonderful DVD of it with Bruhn/Fracci/Marks that you can watch if you would like to see the mime. Many people have a problem with this DVD but it is the only one, IMO, that truly is emotionally artistic. Anyways...

For those who have seen this DVD, it's a movie, with real horses for the hunt scene, close ups, scenes inside houses, etc -- I mention that only so no one thinks that's the stage version. The production is the old ABT one, set by David Blair, based on the production the Royal Ballet then had (this is the mid-1960s), which was based on the Stepanov notations. It stars Carla Fracci and Erik Bruhn (and I agree that they're wonderful) but there are some oddities in this film, especially in the second act (where the trees circle the Wilis and change from winter to fall and back again) that weren't in the Blair production. Erik Bruhn staged a production for the Royal Danish Ballet for the 1978-79 season. He made two changes to the dramatic elements of the ballet: one adding an old couple to the village, and having Albrecht change clothes in their house (perhaps she's his pensioned-off nanny and that gives him a reason to visit, perhaps he just bribed them to pretend he's their grand-nepthew). Also, the same woman dances Bathilde and Myrtha (and she's listed in the program as Bathilde/Myrtha). The production also includes the mother's mime scene (in which she warns her daughter about the Wilis).

Marc, I've read reviews like that but didn't realize they were pervasive. It puzzles me that there is such hatred of classical ballet. I don't think I've ever read a piece by a critic saying we should only have classical ballet and all the modern dance companies should be wiped off the face of the earth. I doubt anyone thinks that -- I hope not! As for France, I predicted several years ago that there would be problems in the future stemming from their policy of putting all the ballet eggs in the one Paris Opera Ballet basket (not that the company dances that much ballet these days). Many small French dance companies have been turned into contemporary dance companies, which means that this is what most of the population will see. It's only a matter of time before those outside of Paris become totally disengaged from classical ballet, and when that happens, why should we have a company in Paris that should have gone out with the ancien regime?

[Hans]

I wonder what the point of making statements such as "classical ballet is dead and shouldn't be performed" &c is. Obviously it isn't irrelevant or unpopular, as the classics sell quite well, and companies don't dance Petipa and Bournonville to the exclusion of other choreographers (just look at all the mini-NYCB's around the country). The old and new both seem to be doing just fine (even if many productions of the classics leave something to be desired, at least they are still performed) so I really don't understand the reasoning behind saying one or the other ought to go, or that they are mutually exclusive. It is all right to say something inflammatory in the name of "discussion" or "debate," but this particular debate has been going on since Isadora Duncan, and probably long before, and we still have both old and new ballet, so apparently we'd better learn to just live with them.

[bart]

BTW, our rep program coming up in April is two weekends of two different programs. So we are actually doing 6 programs this year!

Thank you, stinger784, for that correction. It's very good news.

[Alexandra]

I wonder what the point of making statements such as "classical ballet is dead and shouldn't be performed" &c is. Obviously it isn't irrelevant or unpopular, as the classics sell quite well, and companies don't dance Petipa and Bournonville to the exclusion of other choreographers (just look at all the mini-NYCB's around the country). The old and new both seem to be doing just fine (even if many productions of the classics leave something to be desired, at least they are still performed) so I really don't understand the reasoning behind saying one or the other ought to go, or that they are mutually exclusive. It is all right to say something inflammatory in the name of "discussion" or "debate," but this particular debate has been going on since Isadora Duncan, and probably long before, and we still have both old and new ballet, so apparently we'd better learn to just live with them.

That's the odd thing about the "debate." The classics do sell quite well. But somehow dancers are learning that they don't. I'm told every year by students (ballet students 14 to 18) that companies have to do modern dance because the classics are old and audiences don't like them. Yet that isn't the case. Of course there are people who love modern/postmodern/whateverpostmodernis work, but to sell out a big house for more than an occasional program, it's "Swan Lake." Now, if we could just have a new "Swan Lake"..... [no. Not a new improved old Swan Lake, but a new classical ballet of the same resonance).

[cubanmiamiboy]

Nearly the entire review is devoted to how worthless the writer thinks the work is.

What do you think?

I've read this article several times, and the more i read it, the more outreagously mad do i get. Giselle is one of the few nice things that this world still has to offer to its habitants. It is a gift to the soul, a homage to beauty and a tribute to humanity. This topic touches me in a very personal level because this "worthless" work, as the insensitive, ignorant and probably frustrated dancer/reviewer calls it was, in times of desperation and struggling back in my homeland, a strong spiritual support, and i know that i'm also talking in behalf of thousands of cubans. This story of unconditional love has managed to survive and even thrive through the darkest decades in Cuban history within the NBC, and i know it will likely go on dancing gloriously until our country is finally free. That's the beauty and the glory of the meaningful themes of "Giselle": dancing through the darkness making every gesture matter and keeping hope alive through the cruelest of ordeals . That's why for me Giselle is a sacred thing and also it is for me easy to understand the reasons behind this masterpiece ballet being so beloved and venerated by the Havana audience, and why Alonso's Cuban dancers mean every step they take.

Some talentless people are likely to be dead, sunken into oblivion and totally forgotten into obscurity while Giselle will still be giving its trascendental message of love and hope for those capable to appreciate it...

.

[Paul Parish]

Thank you, Christian, for putting it so clearly -- I'm very moved by what you say. And I believe it, it's the truth.

Giselle is one of those great works of art that shows us what we value, what we live by. As Carbro pointed out, it's still news.

I've always thought of Giselle as a kind of saint's life, the first act showing her passion and death, the seoncd her first miracle.

[Mel Johnson]

The ballet does make a deeply spiritual point, and on the face of it, seems to contradict the anti-clericalism of Gautier and his club of contemporary reformers. It is also highly traditional and scriptural, showing the agency of an active God in frustrating religious "laws" made by humans. Giselle would have been considered, under canon law at the time, to have been either a suicide or unshriven without last rites. In either case, in the country, she would have been buried in unconsecrated ground, away from the church, hence the forest setting.

[Alexandra]

Helene Kaplan wrote a review of this production for danceviewtimes, and I've just added a few photos (all from the dress rehearsal, and all a bit dark, but they give you an idea of the dancing).

"Giselle" — Vividly and Happily Alive

I'll also take this opportunity to say that I wrote a piece about the review for my blog in DanceView Times' Sunday Section:

Piffle Pieces: Camargo in D.C.,"Giselle" in Phoenix, and dance criticism in America

[cubanmiamiboy]

Helene Kaplan wrote a review of this production for danceviewtimes, and I've just added a few photos (all from the dress rehearsal, and all a bit dark, but they give you an idea of the dancing).

"Giselle" — Vividly and Happily Alive

I'll also take this opportunity to say that I wrote a piece about the review for my blog in DanceView Times' Sunday Section:

Piffle Pieces: Camargo in D.C.,"Giselle" in Phoenix, and dance criticism in America

Great job. Thank you, Alexandra.

[Helene]

This isn't directly on topic, but I think it's pertinent. In the December 2007 issue of Opera News, Brian Kellow interviewed mezzo-soprano Alice Coote, who had this to say:

Opera News: People often ask me how you indoctrinate someone into opera. I always say, "Tak them to hear a great performer." Taking them to see Elisir set in a Texas diner isn't automatically going to do it.

Alice Coote: Absolutely not. I think it's a mistake in opera nowadays to try to draw in the people who are never going to be drawn in. I do perceive there's a change, in the sense that we don't trust the work itself as much as we used to do. I am very sad that you can go to the Museum of Modern Art or the Metropolitan Museum, and there is art from the beginning of time -- the greatest art. Our operas are equal works of art, ecept for the fact that they are very much vulnerable, being live performance, subject to live human beings to make it happen. I think it's a shame nowadays that we feel that we have to do someting to change the work itself, rather than trusting it. You know, there's a great Paul Klee or Matisse on the wall of a gallery. And yet, we say, "Oh no, opera can't become a museum." It is a museum. It is a living museum. I thnk we should be proud of it and be truthful to these pieces as far as we can.

If opera, with its scores and nearly a century of recordings is in danger, on how delicate a thread does ballet exist? That danger is all the more reason to breathe life and preserve its masterworks.

[Arizona Native]

Sorry to be adding to this so late in the game ... someone just forwarded me Helene Kaplan's review and this thread ... perhaps Ms. Kaplan could post a link to her review on the Ballet Arizona portion of the board?

I saw both productions and was intrigued and fascinated by the differences in the approaches of the casts, mostly noted by Ms. Kaplan. I would add that I found Natalia Magnicaballi utterly convincing, which took me by surprise: how this dead sexy, mature woman transformed herself into a mere slip of a girl is beyond me. She was fabulous. In the other cast, Astrit Zenjati was on fire, like I've never seen him. This was a beautifully-acted and danced production. It would have been nice to have had a review of the kind suggested by Alexandra. Unfortunately, the Republic reviewer hates ballet. Truly. Always has, always will. He finds it tolerable *if* it has some novelty value for him. Just as one example, last season he called a beautifully-done performance of Coppelia a "warhorse," and as more perfunctorily done in this instance, noted that there was nothing wrong with the dancing. In the future, I for one would really, truly appreciate it if all this commentary could be instead used to generate letters of outrage to the Arizona Republic. We deserve better!!

[bart]

I am in close to total agreement with the statement by Alice Coote, posted by Helene.

I think it's a mistake in opera nowadays to try to draw in the people who are never going to be drawn in. I do perceive there's a change, in the sense that we don't trust the work itself as much as we used to do. I am very sad that you can go to the Museum of Modern Art or the Metropolitan Museum, and there is art from the beginning of time -- the greatest art. Our operas are equal works of art, ecept for the fact that they are very much vulnerable, being live performance, subject to live human beings to make it happen. I think it's a shame nowadays that we feel that we have to do someting to change the work itself, rather than trusting it. You know, there's a great Paul Klee or Matisse on the wall of a gallery. And yet, we say, "Oh no, opera can't become a museum." It is a museum. It is a living museum. I thnk we should be proud of it and be truthful to these pieces as far as we can.

My two main areas of concern:

1)The statement: "I think it's a mistake in opera nowadays [and one hears this about ballet as well] to try to draw in the people who are neaver going to be drawn in." Yes and no. "Never going to be drawn in" can be a self-fulfilling prophecy if you keep producing work that you like regardless of its appeal to others. All art needs new audiences. Passionately, intelligently created and performed classical art can draw and hold new audiences. Conventionally produced opera and ballet aimed at the converted -- of which there is an awful lot -- probably will not bring the newcomers in. And that will be our loss.

2) The statement: "[O]pera ... is a museum. It is a living museum." Absolutely, and the same holds true with the great ballet classics. The problem is with defining, creating, and comnmunicating the elements that make these works come alive There's much disagreement on this. Companies that "do Giselle" because "you have to have a Giselle" but don't have the resources or skill or passion to do it well should possibly ... just possibly ... consider doing something else.

You have to believe deeply in the value of the classical art you perform. And you have to expose your belief on stage. For example, I just saw a young Nutcracker Prince -- 9 or 10 years old -- who performed the mimed story of the battle with the Mouse King in a manner that was so deeply felt, so committed, that every gesture sang out clearly. And the audience knew this was something special. (How often do you hear applause after a mime sequence -- from a 99.9% non-specialist audience?)

[Mel Johnson]

Speaking up for the museums, I have to tell you how much time museum personnel spend in trying to bring their patrons into closer communion with the work being presented. In an art museum, it's in really bad taste to show the Mona Lisa sitting at a stool in a diner, so the label text has to be a model of correct information and concise presentation. You don't want to have a book on the wall! History museums have a tough job, too, as providing context for artifacts consumes a large part of understanding what they "mean" (if, indeed, artifacts "mean" anything! That's another school of thought.) Museums are living breathing places, too, and we do a lot more than mummy-dusting (although we do that, too, if we've got a mummy!) The trick is a lot like ballet. Don't let them see how you do it, just do it, and let it speak for itself, then let the patrons wonder, "How did they do that?"

[gemnerd]

I read the review of Ballet Arizona's "Giselle" in the Arizona Republic (thanks to dirac's Link) and was surprised to learn that "Giselle" should no longer be performed. Nothing wrong with the production -- if only we could see them in something meaningful!!!! But "Giselle"?

What do you think?

In 'Giselle,' worn-out tale undermines impressive dancing

Hi --

I just wanted to say how much I appreciated Alexandra Tomalonis' analysis of the role of the dance critic. As a former dancer and current dance critic, it always disturbs me when reviewers take such a negative approach to a performance, even while praising the dancers (“the actors were good, but the play was crap”). Though Nilsen explained his point of view thoroughly, it told me more about him and his prejudices than it did about the dance in question.

Especially in markets that don’t have established audiences for the performing arts, it should be considered the reviewer’s job to tell something about a dance work — the plot, the context, why it’s important. Also, without resorting to blatant boosterism, if the local dance critic wants performances to review in the future, the audience needs to be cultivated and grown, or the critic will be without a gig.

My town (Las Vegas) is experiencing this type of growth in the community’s (non-Strip) performing arts. Although not at the level of dance found in San Francisco or New York, our local dance companies are using creative methods (like NBT's recent partnering with Cirque du Soleil dancers) to introduce new audiences to the art form. And our local stuff is getting better. Nevada Ballet Theatre is in its 36th year and has come a long way from being a part-time gig for dancers performing in feather shows on the Las Vegas Strip.

I passed the article on to my editor at the Weekly as he is one of the few that does have a mission to educate the readers. I thought he would enjoy knowing that others feel as he does.

[gemnerd]

The ballet does make a deeply spiritual point, and on the face of it, seems to contradict the anti-clericalism of Gautier and his club of contemporary reformers. It is also highly traditional and scriptural, showing the agency of an active God in frustrating religious "laws" made by humans. Giselle would have been considered, under canon law at the time, to have been either a suicide or unshriven without last rites. In either case, in the country, she would have been buried in unconsecrated ground, away from the church, hence the forest setting.

Another spiritual issue that should be considered in Giselle -- the nature and necessity of forgiveness. Myrtha and the Wilis are unforgiving of their transgressors; therefore, they are doomed to hang out in the forest forever. Albrecht isn't the only one being saved here. Giselle saves herself from an eternity of forest dwelling through her final act of forgiveness.

Contrary to the opinion of the reviewer at the Arizona Republic, Giselle has lasted because it's overriding mythology and spirituality has touched audiences since the ballet's creation, not just because artistic directors have weird and misguided notions of what should be performed. Same with Swan Lake, for that matter. (Swan's notwithstanding, most people, men especially, are terrified of doing the wrong thing and the consequences of the action.)

[bart]

Contrary to the opinion of the reviewer at the Arizona Republic, Giselle has lasted because it's overriding mythology and spirituality has touched audiences since the ballet's creation, not just because artistic directors have weird and misguided notions of what should be performed.

Excellent point, imo. The hard part is producing a work in a way that illuminates its depths. And, for a reviewer, seeing the depths that are there and helping the reader to see them.

Welcome to Ballet Talk, gemnerd. It's good to have on board someone who knows the realities of performance review (and dealing with editors). I hope you'll go to the Welcome forum and introduce yourself, so that othes can welcome you, and that you'll continue to be a part of our ongoing discussions.

[EAW]

While there may still be the potential for genuine emotional expression and impact in Giselle, in performance the ballet is most often a rigid ritual. As Edwin Denby memorably wrote (I'll paraphrase somewhat): when dancers have to pretend to be something they're not, a ballet inevitably degenerates into a charade. In the second act, at least the dancers can, if they are great, move us through their dancing. Am I alone in finding Giselle's coy miming, for example, and that never-convincing mad scene in Act One things to be endured rather than enjoyed?

[Mme. Hermine]

i don't know if you are alone. but i do not share your feelings. others more eloquent than i who are of the same opinion will no doubt elaborate more fully than I can.

[Hans]

Unfortunately, quite a bit of mime has, in my opinion, degenerated to ritual. The dancers, knowing what the gestures mean, half-perform them, thereby robbing them of any meaning for the audience members, who, should it be their first time at that ballet, have no idea what is going on even if they have read the synopsis. I do still find the mad scene convincing when well done, but the poor quality of mime in ballet is something that needs to be addressed.

[tempusfugit]

While there may still be the potential for genuine emotional expression and impact in Giselle, in performance the ballet is most often a rigid ritual. As Edwin Denby memorably wrote (I'll paraphrase somewhat): when dancers have to pretend to be something they're not, a ballet inevitably degenerates into a charade. In the second act, at least the dancers can, if they are great, move us through their dancing. Am I alone in finding Giselle's coy miming, for example, and that never-convincing mad scene in Act One things to be endured rather than enjoyed?

EAW, you are confusing the work of art with the poorformance, as I often refer to it. Giselle's miming is not supposed to be 'coy', nor is the mad scene supposed to be 'never-convincing'...if you have been unfortunate enough to see ballerinas perpetrate such things, you need to see real ballerinas in the role. The work of art , ANY work of art, cannot withstand abominable performances, and it requires very careful insight to perceive the masterpiece under the krill. In the immortal words of Cecile Genhart: 'when you encounter a work of art usually called great and you do not like it, ALWAYS SUSPECT THE PERFORMANCE'.

[bart]

Unfortunately, quite a bit of mime has, in my opinion, degenerated to ritual. The dancers, knowing what the gestures mean, half-perform them, thereby robbing them of any meaning for the audience members, who, should it be their first time at that ballet, have no idea what is going on even if they have read the synopsis.

I added boldface to the part of Hans's post that really struck me.

Extended mime tends to occur in the libretto when the character have experience something that makes them really needs to tell a story. It's the urgency that is missing in the mime of too many Berthe's and Odettes. The performer must project that they are speaking spontaneously, with conviction -- that they almost have no other choice at this point in the story -- not that they are going through an ancient classsroom ritual. Mime is movement with feeling, not "just going through the motions" No matter how accurately this is done.

In this regard, I am in agreement with tempusfugit: when you are underwhelmed or bored by mime sequences -- sequences that HAVE been performed on other occasions in a thrilling and moving manner -- "always suspect the performance."

Why DO dancers sometimes "half-perform" their mime sequences? Why do coaches and ADs permit it?

[EAW]

I've seen dozens of Giselles and many wonderful ballerinas during the past 35 years or so. I can and do distinguish between a role or ballet and its performance. I also have nothing at all against extended mime - just the other day I saw the young Nephew/Prince in Balanchine's "Nutcracker" perform his long mime "story" at the beginning of Act Two with wonderful conviction and amazing musical awareness. I maintain that even the best Giselles, while they can hold us in thrall with their individual charm and abilities, are not believable as bashful peasant girls who die (from what?) after losing their marbles. Those of you who are moved by the ballet, please continue to enjoy it -- I'm just saying that as drama (as opposed to some nice, familiar dance passages) "Giselle" went dead for me some time ago.

[bart]

EAW. Is it the suddenness of Giselle's descent into madness that is the main problem?

Here I can certainly see your point. This kind of thing was common in opera of the period two. (Elvira in Puritani goes in and out of madness several times.) I know that it is a convention of the period and I admit that I tend to accept it as such.

So what would make this more dramatically effective?

Perhaps those Giselles who project a certain manic fragility in their First Act gaiety -- a little too much intensity, perhaps, something subtley off kilter -- are more effective as they collapse into madness than are those who really do appear to be happy peasants.

If the dancer (as opposed to the character) remembers that she is supposed to have a heart condition and actually plays it like that when when the story line calls for it, she might prepare the way for her sudden death at the end of the act.