24 replies to this topic

[Moonlily]

Quiggin, I don't believe that this is what people here are trying to say. Presumably, and from imagining oneself in a similar position and seeing different dancers or actors, it appears that acting like you are attracted to a person of a gender you are generally not attracted to (whether it is a straight person acting the part of a homosexual lover or a homosexual person acting the part of a straight lover) is more difficult. And that Marcelo Gomes succeeds to be convincing is evidence for him being a great actor for whom such things as gender of the partner don't matter in the moment of acting. It doesn't mean that just because he is gay, he will have to work harder as a general idea. The situation in ballet however is that most relationships in the repertoire he's dancing are between straight couples and if it was hard work to be convincing in a relationship with a partner of the opposite gender you're personally attracted to, that would be a result of that. But then the issue would be with the repertoire of classical ballet and not with people who give their opinion within the given circumstances (i.e. most ballets require this kind of acting). And the way I see Marcelo Gomes, it isn't really 'hard work' for him to be convincing, i.e. he appears so effortless, which makes him that great actually.
It is also not meant as a "how to" in my opinion, but rather stating 'facts' - as if there was a study that found out that in a society with unequal opportunities, African Americans unfortunately at present have to work harder than others to get ahead. And with the acting, the situation is not of that kind in my opinion, unless one wants to challenge the predominance of straight relationships in the repertoire, which would be an entirely different subject.

[Quiggin]

Moonlily:

Quote

I don't believe that this is what people here are trying to say.

What it seems like is that the ideals of masculinity and partnering being presented here are being so truncated that dancers like Nureyev, Baryshnikov, and Ib Andersen would no longer make the grade. Again, you dance with your whole self and you don't have to work harder. If you're authentic, no one cares about your delivery. Look at the huge appeal of Nureyev in a less enlightened time than ours. (Or was it?)

Good actors throw themselves so completely into their work, doing all sorts bits of fine tuning as they go along, that this self-consciousness of am I straight acting enough isn't even a tiny consideration. The act of performing onstage is itself the erotic thing.

Anyway, it seems implied here that for a gay male dancer to dance with female partner is no fun and rather like having to brace up and each one's spinach.

[puppytreats]

Sometimes I think Giselle is a willi and she can fly, as can the sylphs.

[Moonlily]

Quiggin, on 01 October 2012 - 01:00 PM, said:

Moonlily:

Quote

I don't believe that this is what people here are trying to say.

What it seems like is that the ideals of masculinity and partnering being presented here are being so truncated that dancers like Nureyev, Baryshnikov, and Ib Andersen would no longer make the grade. Again, you dance with your whole self and you don't have to work harder. If you're authentic, no one cares about your delivery. Look at the huge appeal of Nureyev in a less enlightened time than ours. (Or was it?)

Good actors throw themselves so completely into their work, doing all sorts bits of fine tuning as they go along, that this self-consciousness of am I straight acting enough isn't even a tiny consideration. The act of performing onstage is itself the erotic thing.

Anyway, it seems implied here that for a gay male dancer to dance with female partner is no fun and rather like having to brace up and each one's spinach.

Most of what you say is what I was trying to put across as well. For someone like Marcelo Gomes, it is not hard work to do all of that, but it seems to be for a lot of other dancers, straight or gay. And the way I understood, that was the underlying point of many other posters here as well. Often we see otherwise okay or good actors/dancers be not so convincing in roles that portray a character with a different sexual orientation from their own. For those who are great however, these things don't matter and they can act the part with a partner of any gender effortlessly.

And when it comes to comparisons with Nureyev, it is also a matter of personal taste, perception etc.

[cubanmiamiboy]

Getting my point clearer. Gomes is my poster boy-(and i  know to others too)- when I need to 1-Show a masculine ballet dancer, and 2-Show that male ballet dancers, included gay ones, doesn't equal sterotyped mannerisms-(a widely accepted idea, we like it or not).   Are there too many out there like him..? Probably, but Gomes is right in the spotlight, being in Dance magazine or The Advocate magazine.  I admire people so willing and able to break such old and damaging steorotypes, and Gomes has done so like nobody I can think of.  Yes, there are two different things being intertwined here, personal and professional issues, and he has done a hell of a job to present a very attractive final product and come across as a winner.

[Birdsall]

And my point was that he is a great actor/dancer and when he dances with a woman he probably draws from the natural human feelings of love, passion, etc. So on the one hand, it doesn't matter if he is gay or straight on stage, but my point was that his decision to be "out" as opposed to simply not talking about his sexual orientation might actually contribute to his ability to open up to the audience and female partners on stage. Maybe not, but I suspect his personality from what it looks like on stage is being an open hearted performer and person, not holding anything back or avoiding sharing who he is. You can't do that if you are closed up and putting up walls between yourself and others and have shame or fear. When you are comfortable with who you are in every aspect of your life you become a more interesting person with much more to share with the world.

[dirac]

Quiggin, on 01 October 2012 - 10:26 AM, said:

cubanmiamiboy

Quote

(definitely way over Nureyev, who even being a legend, accounts for not being convincing at times on that matters)

Perhaps Gomes is too discreet for his own good. If you put Nureyev and Gomes in two theaters side by side, Gomes would sell five tickets to tens of thousand for Nureyev. Nureyev danced with his whole being - whatever you think of his technique  - and thrilled everybody. He was the one who broke the mold.

And again this straight-acting advocacy, at least in outline, reads like an entry in a 1950's magazine column addressed to African Americans on how to behave if they want to get  ahead - that they will have to work twice as hard, etc -

To paraphrase Ellen Willis, when Nureyev got it on, he got it on with everybody, and it was an essential part of his special appeal, I think. And it didn't detract from his chemistry with his partners but rather enhanced it. But he did break the mold - he was the product of a certain time and place, very much of the Sixties and Seventies. Completely different atmosphere now and in some ways a more restrictive one, paradoxically.

Quote

Look at the huge appeal of Nureyev in a less enlightened time than ours. (Or was it?)

I saw  this quote from your follow up post after I posted my initial response - we were thinking along the same lines, plainly.

[cubanmiamiboy]

dirac, on 01 October 2012 - 09:37 PM, said:

Quiggin, on 01 October 2012 - 10:26 AM, said:

cubanmiamiboy

Quote

(definitely way over Nureyev, who even being a legend, accounts for not being convincing at times on that matters)

Perhaps Gomes is too discreet for his own good. If you put Nureyev and Gomes in two theaters side by side, Gomes would sell five tickets to tens of thousand for Nureyev. Nureyev danced with his whole being - whatever you think of his technique  - and thrilled everybody. He was the one who broke the mold.

And again this straight-acting advocacy, at least in outline, reads like an entry in a 1950's magazine column addressed to African Americans on how to behave if they want to get  ahead - that they will have to work twice as hard, etc -

To paraphrase Ellen Willis, when Nureyev got it on, he got it on with everybody, and it was an essential part of his special appeal, I think. And it didn't detract from his chemistry with his partners but rather enhanced it. But he did break the mold - he was the product of a certain time and place, very much of the Sixties and Seventies. Completely different atmosphere now and in some ways a more restrictive one, paradoxically.

Quote

Look at the huge appeal of Nureyev in a less enlightened time than ours. (Or was it?)

I saw  this quote from your follow up post after I posted my initial response - we were thinking along the same lines, plainly.

I have always suspected that Nureyev appeal had/has to do more with him as a sole product...not necessarily as a partner.  Then, my assessment could be detrimental after the fact that I, of course, never got to see him danced live, but instead got to know his dancing via recordings, like the Giselle with Seymour or the SL with Fonteyn.  None of those two speak to me, in terms of "The" male partner the way Gomes does.
Gomes for me embodies the idea of that in order to convince society as a masculine ballet dancer you don't always have to write in a book about being either a marginal straight kid vandalizing the streets of Havana or a straight ex boxer youth from the streets of Queens.   Gay guys from quieter streets can do the job as well also.

[lmspear]

There was a documentary of Jock Soto that showed up on PBS a few years ago.  It looked at his background, professional and peronal lives. I'm drawing a blank on the name.  He was another openly gay dancer who was perceived as "masculine" and treasured by his partners.

[abatt]

The documentary on Jock Soto was called Water Flowing Together.  That name is a reference to the name of Soto's Navajo clan.