124 replies to this topic

[alexaa1a]

Helene, on 17 August 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

She dances the Lilac Fairy.  I've seen her. We're anyone to remove SB from the repertoire, they would lose her performance.

She has not danced Lilac Fairy in many years, maybe not since 2005. It is almost a certainty that she will never dance it again.

[Tiara]

Interesting that Lopatkina is brought up at this point in the discussion.  Whether or not she persohally likes the reconstruction Sleeping Beauty, I believe she cannot be blamed for its non-appearance on the Mariinsky schedule.  Also, just because she has not danced Aurora herself does not mean that she would want Sleeping Beauty performances reduced.  She is far too intelligent for that, an upholder of tradition, and knows that Sleeping Beauty is a cornerstone of Mariinsky repertoire and as such, must always be performed.  Furthermore, she must know also that not every ballerina can or should dance every single role - Aurora is not her role and that is why she has never danced it in my opinion, but she has been superlative enough in so many other roles for her reputation as a great dancer to be assured without dancing Aurora.  If she has danced Lilac Fairy in recent years, I would be astonished and have certainly not seen it.

Actually, the Mariinsky needs look no further than Uliana Lopatkina as a replacement for Yuri Fateyev if they want to see the Mariinsky steered back into calm waters and not allowed to sink entirely under the weight of trivial, modern ballets,  a catastrophic situation into which Yuri Fateyev is "leading" the company  - he  is diluting the repertoire with ballets for which Mariinsky dancers were not trained and which are not worthy of this great company.  Lopatkina is a pure Petipa ballerina and inheritor of Vaganova style - a wonderful ballerina who wishes to see tradition upheld, who chooses the ballets she herself performs with intelligence and care and would apply the same discernment to the repertoire of the Mariinsky.  I doubt very much if she would ever have allowed the dreadful Ratmansky ballets to be seen on her home stage, let alone abroad.  I believe as a classical ballerina herself, she would put the emphasis back where it belongs - on the great classical repertoire, the Petipa classics and the great classics of other traditions.  As has also been mentioned above, ballets such as La Fille Mal Gardee and Coppelia would enhance the Mariinsky repertoire in a way far more in harmony with the training of its dancers than the Wheeldon, Forsythe etc ballets we are promised.    This is the mistake Yuri Fateyev has made as he appears to have forgottten that the Mariinsky is *the* great thoroughbred classical company of the world, and not a mongrel of indeterminate parentage with a mish-mash of styles.   He should pay attention to the wishes of the ballet-going public, who wish to see the Mariinsky returned to its former glory and not diluted in style and  repertoire.

[cubanmiamiboy]

Tiara, on 18 August 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

As has also been mentioned above, ballets such as La Fille Mal Gardee and Coppelia would enhance the Mariinsky repertoire

The Mariinsky lost its Fille...? Wow...didn't know that.  When did that happen...?

[alexaa1a]

cubanmiamiboy, on 18 August 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

Tiara, on 18 August 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

As has also been mentioned above, ballets such as La Fille Mal Gardee and Coppelia would enhance the Mariinsky repertoire

The Mariinsky lost its Fille...? Wow...didn't know that.  When did that happen...?

http://en.wikipedia....lle_mal_gardée
This will answer your question and a reconstruction of the original Petipa is possible since the Sergeyev collection in Harvard, has all the information, as was used by Vikharev in Coppelia, Sleeping Beauty, La Bayadere and Raymonda. A reconstruction La Fille would be a great substitute for new dances at Mariinsky.

[Mashinka]

Tiara, on 18 August 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

Actually, the Mariinsky needs look no further than Uliana Lopatkina as a replacement for Yuri Fateyev if they want to see the Mariinsky steered back into calm waters and not allowed to sink entirely under the weight of trivial, modern ballets,  a catastrophic situation into which Yuri Fateyev is "leading" the company  - he  is diluting the repertoire with ballets for which Mariinsky dancers were not trained and which are not worthy of this great company.  Lopatkina is a pure Petipa ballerina and inheritor of Vaganova style - a wonderful ballerina who wishes to see tradition upheld, who chooses the ballets she herself performs with intelligence and care and would apply the same discernment to the repertoire of the Mariinsky.  I doubt very much if she would ever have allowed the dreadful Ratmansky ballets to be seen on her home stage, let alone abroad.  I believe as a classical ballerina herself, she would put the emphasis back where it belongs - on the great classical repertoire, the Petipa classics and the great classics of other traditions.  As has also been mentioned above, ballets such as La Fille Mal Gardee and Coppelia would enhance the Mariinsky repertoire in a way far more in harmony with the training of its dancers than the Wheeldon, Forsythe etc ballets we are promised. This is the mistake Yuri Fateyev has made as he appears to have forgottten that the Mariinsky is *the* great thoroughbred classical company of the world, and not a mongrel of indeterminate parentage with a mish-mash of styles.   He should pay attention to the wishes of the ballet-going public, who wish to see the Mariinsky returned to its former glory and not diluted in style and  repertoire.

I would imagine an arch-conservative, which is what Lopatkina is rumoured to be, would be every bit as bad as Fateev, the one virtue he has is that he doesn’t see the company as a museum and although I believe a number of his repertory choices to be ill-chosen at least he is not preserving the Kirov in aspic.  

It is the bad dancing of a number of featured performers that should be Fateev’s most pressing concern with the likes of Somova and Skorik relieved of principal roles ASAP.

[Cygnet]

I'm sorry that I'm late to this discussion. I won't go over the many demerits of the Fateev regime or his predecessor's (Makhar Vaziev) here. They all can be found in this link and elsewhere on this site. The casting decisions are made by Mr. Fateev and rubber stamped by his Amen Corner, (the stage managers, subordinates i.e. ballet masters and ballet mistresses, and the sycophants of his favorites - people that he wants to promote), who tow his party line. Fateev considers himself a trailblazer - a prescient talent-spotter and strong developer of "future stars," and a (self-styled) Balanchine expert. Fateev's management is quite simply the continuation of his former supervisor's aesthetic and casting policies - on steroids. Also, I'm ITA with those who have posted here lamenting the fallen standards of the company, which is again a direct result of the current and prior management. For example, most of the world's major ensembles are able to cast and match, in technique, temperament and physically the little swans in "Swan Lake." For about five seasons now, Fateev has consistently failed to do this. I hope that these are just the casts that I've seen in this timeline.  Now, this example may be nit-picking - but for this company?  This never used to be thus.  This is something that other directors seem to be able to handle.  It used to be that an aberration like this was unheard of in the Mariinsky.  This is just one example of Fateev's casting the supporting roles; there's no need to review his egregious miscasting of the major roles.

How did it come to this? As I've stated before, one of the main contributing factors is that the Maestro (who appoints the ballet's directors), is focused solely on the opera and the orchestra. For example, the Theatre's site reflects this fact and has evolved in recent years to reflect this fact. The ballet company remains on auto-pilot; and is seen by the Maestro as '... oh yes, they perform here too.' That's the attitude. What we see now is the result of these policies made manifest. I also won't get into the overt favoritism that's been practiced re the "faithful few" over vastly superior dancers; the ongoing snubs, the hiring of non-homogenous dancers, the blatant disrespect and loss of comparatively stellar (and potential) personnel. These subjects have been covered. Former Mariinsky primas who have much to offer re the Mariinsky's tradition (for example Ayupova and Makhalina), are driven to other theatres to coach like the former, or are barred from coaching the next generation like the latter. Dead wood at the top isn't removed (retired), subsequently there's little to no movement in the ranks, and promotions come as frequently as Halley's Comet. I always look to next year's harvest. Sure enough, there is usually a small handful (sometimes, just one) on whose shoulders the company's hopes are pinned. I don't know what the end game will be. I will contend that right now in Russia the epicenter, the creative momentum, and the cutting edge pendulum of classical ballet has swung back to the companies in Moscow, primarily the Bolshoi. That argument may be a topic for another thread.  However, it's a fact that for the last few years the Bolshoi, the Stanislavsky, and the Perm company have taken top ensemble/production honors over the Mariinsky and it's entries (if nominated) re Russia's highest theatrical award, the Golden Mask.  Finally, as for Uliana Lopatkina she doesn't make or influence casting policy, but she does wield great influence with Maestro Gergiev.

[Helene]

Cygnet, on 20 August 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

Fateev considers himself a trailblazer - a prescient talent-spotter and strong developer of "future stars," and a (self-styled) Balanchine expert.

Fateev worked in Seattle on Balanchine stagings, and Francia Russell, one of Balanchine's earliest hand-picked (in the 60's) stagers and one of the ballet's most respected, said very good things about him, and she's not the easiest person in the world to please.

[Cygnet]

Helene, on 20 August 2012 - 02:55 PM, said:

Cygnet, on 20 August 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

Fateev considers himself a trailblazer - a prescient talent-spotter and strong developer of "future stars," and a (self-styled) Balanchine expert.

Fateev worked in Seattle on Balanchine stagings, and Francia Russell, one of Balanchine's earliest hand-picked (in the 60's) stagers and one of the ballet's most respected, said very good things about him, and she's not the easiest person in the world to please.

It's great that Russell said good things about him, but would she have considered, (or agreed) that he was her pedagogical equal re Balanchine style? Balanchine's repertory at the Mariinsky, (which is a short list of works), is in the same shape as the Petipa/Sergeyev repertory. It's the same issue for the entire rep that's on the active schedule - management policy and his casting decisions. We'll see what happens with the new season next month. He neglects in-house rank development and depends on the usual eggs in the basket to deliver the goods. As a result they fall short more often than not, but this doesn't stop him from casting them. The best suited are infrequently cast. A bright spot was the recent premiere of Balanchine's "A Midsummer Night's Dream" during the recent White NIghts Festival. This was thoughtfully and successfully cast. This should be the norm, and I hope this starts a trend. In the meantime, the company's nominal strength is being diluted as other posters have noted. To put this in perspective, POB excels in ecclectic variety and does so masterfully without sacrificing its traditions. The Mariinsky Ballet under Yuri Fateev's leadership doesn't do it nearly as well.

[Helene]

No, I doubt Russell would consider Fateev her equal, but, then again, there aren't that many people on the planet who are.  (Originators of roles who can coach them are another story.)  Nor would she expect the Mariinsky to dance Balanchine in Balanchine style after having so little experience and training in it, and she would know from personal experience, having been one of the first two stagers, along with Suzanne Farrell ("Scotch Symphony"), sent to the Mariinsky to stage Balanchine ballets, in her case, either "Theme and Variations" or "Ballet Imperial."

If he claims expertise, which I wouldn't be aware of, it's not just "self-styled."

[Jayne]

Well, which "dead wood" would you peel away?  Which dancers would you promote?  Which pairings would you substitute?

[cubanmiamiboy]

alexaa1a, on 18 August 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

cubanmiamiboy, on 18 August 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

Tiara, on 18 August 2012 - 03:55 AM, said:

As has also been mentioned above, ballets such as La Fille Mal Gardee and Coppelia would enhance the Mariinsky repertoire

The Mariinsky lost its Fille...? Wow...didn't know that.  When did that happen...?

http://en.wikipedia....mal_gard%C3%A9e
This will answer your question and a reconstruction of the original Petipa is possible since the Sergeyev collection in Harvard, has all the information, as was used by Vikharev in Coppelia, Sleeping Beauty, La Bayadere and Raymonda. A reconstruction La Fille would be a great substitute for new dances at Mariinsky.

What a shame.  it looks as if the Mariinsky did keep the Gorsky after Petipa version in various incarnations up until 1995, being Vinogradov the last soul to care for it.  They DEININITELY need to reclaim what's theirs by all means without getting into another Raymonda-like event.

[Tiara]

I have seen Swan Lake more times than I care to remember, as a result of trawling cheap airline sites in order to feed my addiction of visiting the Mariinsky! I love it, and do feel that the little swans, as an iconic part of Swan Lake, is something that the Mariinsky has got right - in one respect. I actually haven't seen it badly danced ever. To me it has always been a perfect example of textbook synchronicity, both of style and execution - something very precious and rarely seen outside the Mariinsky. It is awe-inspiring to see clearly defined footwork, pas de chats all identical, same degree of turnout, heads and arms the same etc etc. All the casts I have seen have been well matched for height as well. I really can't remember any exceptions to this.

However, I actually got out my programmes to look and the casting of little swans does highlight another problem. Of the seven times I have seen it recently, one dancer, Valeria Martinyuk, danced little swans every single time! After that we have lucky Svetlana Ivanova who only danced it six times, Yana Selina who danced it five times, Liza Cheprasova who got so tired of dancing it (but only four times) that she actually left to dance elsewhere! Pretty Lavrinenko danced it twice, and then there are a few others who danced it once - Chmil, Shirinkina, Firsova and Akhmatova! Mainly little swans was danced by the same four dancers with only a few variants. This is ridiculous! These dancers are all small and were well matched, but how many other coryphees and corps de ballet members are there? I need to count! Also, a number of those little swans are actually Second Soloists, and as such should be dancing other roles anyway.

I do think Yuri Fateyev is guilty of chronical laziness and misjudgement in casting and little swans is a prime example. The four bayaderes and grand pas in Bayadere is another - nearly always the same dancers cast with very few variants - but his whole casting "policy" is just appalling. Why does he not rotate his casts and give opportunities to the wealth of talent in the corps? Why is he allowing the casting to stagnate? The entire corps must feel completely demoralized by the lack of opportunities given to them. This attitude of "don't care" is prevalent throughout his casting "strategy." I do wonder what Gergiev is thinking of allowing Fateyev to continue with this madness. Does he not realize that in allowing this stagnation of the best ballet company in the world, he is allowing *himself* to look stupid? He has the best dancers in the world, but, apparently, not the intelligence to use them correctly. A maladjusted chimpanzee would show more discernment in his selection.

[Cygnet]

I've been watching this company for over 30 years. I'm ITA with you: When they're on, they're on. Fortunately, you've seen some well matched quartets. However, in the course of this time I can recall a few that weren't together; it's the law of averages. But this phenomenon has occured moreso in the last few years. There was a group where it looked like the slope from baseline to midpoint. For example, I remember when Golub was placed in the middle next to Novikova on the left end, with Ivanova on her right, for goodness sake -> . I'm ITA with you re stagnant casting. It used to be that little swans and big swans was a showcase for promotional talent. It's become a one or two season assignment for some corps members and soloists that you've mentioned. For example, you're right that Elizaveta Cheprasova was hardly ever seen except as a cygnet - or as Masha in the Chemiakin "Nutcracker," so I can understand why she left.

In retrospect, at least Makhar Vaziev was a good manager: He communicated with his dancers, he was a competent developer, with the glaring exception of his second protegee after Zakharova left for the Bolshoi, (Somova). However, a brace of dancers left during his tenure - Zakharova included. And yet, even he wasn't as singularly successful an administrator and Artistic Director as Oleg Vinogradov: The company was unconscious flawless during Vinogradov's tenure (1977-1994).

Here's something else that may be a factor: The Mariinsky is a repertory company, and along with the opera and orchestra average between 250 - 300 or more performances a year. That said, they perform and tour alot more now than they ever did in the Soviet era. This takes a great toll on the dancers. The problem with a repertory company with that kind of workload, is that unlike the opera, which can change composers and styles on a nightly basis, a variety of diverse ballets staged with that kind of frequency doesn't always fare as well or as seamlessly. There's less rehearsal time, less preparation. This company is in an opera house where they are the poor stepchild to the singers and the muzak. Yet, they're expected to swing from Ratmansky, to Petipa, to Balanchine, to Bournonville, to Wheeldon, Millepied, Forsythe, Fokine, etc. all within a week. Moreover, during the last few years, some under utilized dancers have been assigned to perform in the Mariinsky Orchestra's Concert Hall, in assorted theme based programs when the opera is on the main stage. The concert hall's stage was designed specifically for the Orchestra, not dancers. It's not a suitable venue for ballet. Fortunately, a new theatre is being built as the Mariinsky's second stage across the canal behind the historical opera house.

As director, it's Fateev's responsibility to maintain a standard of excellence and navigate the company through these issues. Perhaps he might do better if the focus were on 1-3 priorities, and not several per week. Vinogradov, and to some extent in the mid 90s Vaziev at the start of his tenure, didn't have this workload. There's one thing about POB, the Royal and ENB as examples: They do modern in blocks of time, and they do classical in blocks of time. They don't change styles overnight in the course of a week like the Mariinsky does. IMO I'd say that during 2011-2012 season the company danced "Giselle," and "La Sylphide" better than anything else - and that includes the Petipa and modern repertory. I don't think this was due to just affinity of style that they've been trained in; but program length and demands on the corps and principals - no matter who they were.

[canbelto]

Fateev is a good coach. His students (Fadeev and Shklyarov) certainly are/were excellent dancers who represent the best of the Mariinsky tradition. I think maybe he has more to offer as a personal coach than administrator?

[alexaa1a]

Berkeley has the full cast information fro October Swan Lake as follows:

Odette, Queen of the Swans/Odile, Odette's Double
Yekaterina Kondaurova (10, 13 mat)
Anastasia Kolegova (11, 14)
Victoria Tereshkina (12)
Alina Somova (13 eve)

Prince Siegfried
Danila Korsuntsev (10, 13 mat)
Yevgeny Ivanchenko (11)
Vladimir Schklyarov (12)
Alexander Sergeev (13 eve)
Maxim Zuzin (14)

The Princess Regent, Siegfried's Mother
Elena Bazhenova

The Prince's Tutor
Andrey Yakovlev (10, 12, 13 eve)
Soslan Kulaev (11, 13 mat, 14)

Friends of the Prince
Maria Shirinkina, Nadezhda Batoeva, Alexander Popov (10)
Ekaterina Ivannikova, Nadezhda Gonchar, Alexander Perish (11)
Irina Golub, Nadezhda Gonchar, Alexander Popov (12, 13 eve)
Ekaterina Ivannikova, Nadezhda Batoeva, Alexander Perish (13 mat)
Irina Golub, Anastasia Nikitina, Alexander Perish (14)

A Jester
Vasily Tkachenko (10, 13 eve)
Alexey Nedviga (12, 14)
Ilya Petrov (11, 13 mat)

Rothbart, an Evil Sorcerer
Konstantin Zverev (10, 13 mat)
Andrey Solovyov (11, 13 eve)
Alexander Romanchikov (12, 14)

Cygnets
Irina Golub, Svetlana Ivanova, Elena Chmil, Maria Shirinkina

Swans
Keenan Kampa, Yuliana Chereshkevich, Victoria Brileva, Yulia Stepanova

Two Swans
Maria Shirinkina, Anastasia Nikitina (10, 11)
Maria Shirinkina, Nadezhda Gonchar (12)
Nadezhda Gonchar, Anastasia Nikitina (13 mat, 14)
Irina Golub, Nadezhda Gonchar (13 eve)

Prince's Brides
Victoria Krasnokutskaya, Keenan Kampa, Ksenia Ostreykovskaya, Victoria Brileva, Alisa Sodoleva, Yuliana Chereshkevich

Spanish Dance
Anastasia Petushkova, Yulia Stepanova, Kamil Yangurazov, Karen Ionessian

Neapolitan Dance
Anna Lavrinenko, Ilya Petrov (10, 13 eve)
Anna Lavrinenko, Vasily Tkachenko (12, 14)
Anna Lavrinenko, Alexey Nedviga (11, 13 mat)

Hungarian Dance
Olga Belik, Boris Zhurilov

Mazurka
Lilia Lishchuk, Ksenia Dubrovina, Lyubov Kozharskaya, Irina Prokofieva, Alexander Beloborodov, Mikhail Degtyarev, Soslan Kulaev, Vadim Belyaev