Natalia, on Jul 6 2009, 11:05 AM, said:
As Mommy used to say "If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen." The dancers in question are either pros or pre-professional students presenting themselves in competition, where they should expect to be judged by all who see them...not just the panel of official judges. They asked for it. BalletTalkers know about what they write and will not be mere 'Yes Men." Praise and criticism come with the territory of being a professional dancer or an aspirant who presents him/herself in competitions.
Hopefully, Ms Jensen's first year with the Hungarian Ballet company in Budapest has served to tame her because the raw talent was definitely there. In fact, I'd love to hear about her progress in Budapest, if anyone has seen her of late (not just on YouTube).
Catchy phrase. Seems the dancers take the heat often and well, however. I am not at all a fan of competitions myself, nor of huge debates over individual dancers because they often turn suspiciously extremist. Stepping back from the dancer(s) herein named, and looking at the issue you mention about avoiding being YES MEN: If I can suggest, as a reader, I immediately lose interest in criticism that only includes negatives (along with that goes respect for its author). Such criticism is anit-intellectual, uninteresting, and suspect; it undermines itself by displaying the precise kind of weakness that YES MEN behavior displays.
As I read through this dialogue, I was struck by some instances. To analogize, when giving a critique of a piece of art, one almost always starts with or somehow focuses upon what is strong, fresh, or unique.... the qualities that the creation or artist brings to the art world that would not have or could not have yet been fully explored without this fresh piece to consider. IMO, everything and everyone that/who makes it to a certain level has some special quality and value. I find it to be implausible that a dancer with high achievements could be vulgar in her style or presentation; equally implausible that a dancer's collage containing her best moments could have nothing redeeming. I am speaking specifically of dancers who arrive to such a level of proficiency that they are reviewed, discussed, receive scholarships, contracts, etc. Obviously they are doing something right and have some merit and value in their field. I have heard that Ms. Jensen not only got the Budapest contract- but also Boston Ballet, where she is choosing to be this coming season.
In many of these discussions, there is almost a groping for reasons to dismiss someone so completely. It requires creating some sort of dichotomy to be imagined, named and juxtaposed with the dancer in question, such as those that I mentioned in my prior post. There is also a sense of cookie cutter expectations for dancers, but being applied specifically to those who have evolved beyond the cookie cutter level. I am also struck by the idea that Whitney-types must go through the ranks once in a company, since the vast majority do so. Maybe she will and maybe this will be the path that fits her the best and others like her. There is absolutely nothing shameful about going through the ranks. The dancer to whom someone compared Whitney--Alina Semova-- did, according to a movie about her life. But shortly thereafter, this same professional's trajectory swung far off the beaten path of corp de ballet members. Regardless of what happens in the very near future with a pre-pro who some say remind us of Ms. Semova, why would anyone want to pin anything upon any one in any profession in that way?
In countless other professions, people do start out wherever they can, including above entry level at times, based on a myriad of possible credentials or factors. Why would there be value place ahead of time on any possible path as if she and life must be molded to fit any packaged, step-by-step pattern? My point is that there is no reason to say a dancer needs this to happen or needs that to happen in order to become this or that or to acquire these or those traits as a human being. Life is much bigger than that. Life is much bigger than dance. Dance is not the only way to learn whatever it is that people decide must be learned in order to move beyond. These people can learn certain qualities and traits in countless ways through countless roads, and no one can imagine ahead of time what shape the road will take. To try to shape it ahead for her or anyone under the premise of some pre-conceived trait that she may or not have acquired already seems strangely unimaginative.
I am recalling vaguely a post about Ms. Jensen, describing her as a tall, blonde girl with tricks and not much else. I have watched her over the years, and a few things strike me. One, I have often heard it said that longer, taller bodies take more time to get all of the in-between steps in order. But, the silver lining is this: once such a dancer does so, the results are even more impressive and aesthetically fascinating. In listening to debates over her specifically, I have always believed that she would arrive and never imagined that negative predictions about her could come true. The finer details that needed fixed seemed small compared to the feats she always accomplishes as a performer. These refinements would happen; I was certain of it. She has had the privilege of a fine personal coach also. As for Ms. Murawski, she has also continually refined those finer details and made a very wise choice to train at the Kirov in order to do so. I am amazed that she has come as far as she has without the advantage of an elite coach of her own. Kudos to her schools where she trained. No doubt that the Kirov insisted on polishing her technique. But how many tall dancers in this world can one name who dance so well as these do? They are extraordinary. Whether they fit one's taste or not, both young ladies show remarkable potential with prodigious skills & artistry. BTW, I have heard that Ms. Jensen not only got the Budapest contract- but also Boston Ballet, where she has chosen to be this coming season.
Within Dance in general, Ballet specifically, there is a conservative bend, so to speak, in which dancers are expected to be constructed from the outside in. Perhaps that is fitting for early training, when speaking of giving a dancer proper technique, but somewhere along the way, there should be a larger frame of mind when looking at a dancer for critique. In doing so, the critic gains credibility not merely on the surface level, but by becoming a part of that creation. In other words, what critic would bother to write of a completely horrible work-- one that did not somehow attract attention and interest in the first place? That impulse and responsibility to explore that initial cause of intrigue is what turns a critic (and his/her words) into something of interest as well. The best criticism, IMO, is that which looks at something artistic (or someone representing art) with a more complex view, in which nothing its entirety is trashed (or, on the extremely rare occasion when this is done, the critic is brilliant at explaining why this work does not even belong in the canon that it has been placed into by so many of his or her contemporaries-- this is rarely, if ever, done to someone just starting out, mind you: how cruel and shallow-minded that would be!). In other words, a real criticism takes a deeper view because the critic or others saw something very interesting, redeeming, intriguing in the first place-- or it would not have risen to the level of receiving criticism in the first place.
In honest criticism, at least in my own field, the critic goes as deeply as possible in exploring all of the positive attributes and every unique nuance that she or he might notice that perhaps others did not notice in quite the same way... and weaves this together with anything that could be refined, perhaps for a purpose of creating better harmony with the overall spirit of the piece. Or person. When dancers are respected in a similar manner, then the art of ballet will rise to a new, higher level. What bothers me most in listening to ballet fans/critics talk about this wonderfully beautiful, but troubled, art form is the quantity of remarks that are so extreme, trite, or sound-bite oriented. These remarks make the field seem overly personal to outsiders when we hear them. On the other hand, gifted dancers eventually discover that these kinds of statements are usually some of the greatest of compliments anyway.
I believe so deeply in what I said in an earlier post, because when I see potential greatness, I want to urge it in every way. Great spirits inspire and breathe life into all of us: The real superstars are the ones that even the teachers don't understand. They're the ones that transcend what is understood and therefore fall out of bounds.
