Amy

What changes are required to the Mariinsky repertoire?

82 posts in this topic

Not so sure about the former Kirov Coppelia (based on that variation). The Bolshoi's production is lovely. Saw it when it was new with Osipova. Totally delicious. Wondered if the Mariinsky might consider doing Ratmansky's Shostakovitch Trilogy based on their relative success with Concerto DSCH. That would certainly go down well in London I think ... and, after all, it was (believe it or not) the Kirov (Mariinsky) who introduced London to JEWELS in 2008!!! Then we had another round of the same with the Bolshoi ... and now, of course, it is part of the Royal Ballet's rep (thankfully) To be fair the RB did have RUBIES first ... but it was removed by the Trust as not being suitable for the British Company. Now - with Osipova and McRae in the drivers seats - it is totally effervescent; the RUBIES that is. Nunez is also lovely in DIAMONDS. . Would love for the RB to have more Ratmansky - certainly those works which are considered his key ones. Got a feeling though that Kevin O'Hare is wanting original works from him though .... but that, of course, leaves BRB .... which is grand .... and ENB ... who, I somehow suspect might not be able to afford it/them .... but then there may be individual patrons who could well be encouraged in that particular direction.

I've seen the filmed performance of the Bolshoi's Coppelia with Osipova - absolutely delicious as you say. :)

You know, it seems the Concerto DSCH by Ratmansky was the most successful part of the London tour, or at least one critic said it was the most exciting part - his Cinderella didn't go down very well with the critics, one called "an anti-climatic end to the tour". I went to see it and I enjoyed the performance thanks to the wonderful dancers, but the production itself really needs to go!

And in terms of this topic, what changes do you think need to be made to the Mariinsky repertoire? What productions would you like to see go and what productions/ballets would you like to see brought in?

Share this post


Link to post

DSCH was the HIGHLIGHT in this London turn .... The audience was united in its ROAR. More KEY Ratmansky please Mariinsky ... and ready to be brought during the next Marrinsky sojourn here in two years' time. (Assume next year may well be the Bolshoi for London if the standard selection is to follow suit.) As towards the CINDERELLA ... perhaps the Mariinsky could share the Austrialian Ratmansky revamp .... Sure they have many productions to trade that the Australians would be appreciative of, say Ashton's Sylvia ... especially given that Company's history with Helpmann. I bet the Mariinsky won't be doing that work THAT often.)

Share this post


Link to post

DSCH was the HIGHLIGHT in this London turn .... The audience was united in its ROAR. More KEY Ratmansky please Mariinsky ... and ready to be brought during the next Marrinsky sojourn here in two years' time. (Assume next year may well be the Bolshoi for London if the standard selection is to follow suit.) As towards the CINDERELLA ... perhaps the Mariinsky could share the Austrialian Ratmansky revamp .... Sure they have many productions to trade that the Australians would be appreciative of, say Ashton's Sylvia ... especially given that Company's history with Helpmann. I bet the Mariinsky won't be doing that work THAT often.)

So you're a Ratmansky fan, are you?

Share this post


Link to post

Well, for the key pieces certainly .... I've never seen NAMOUNA for example ... and from what I've read ....I would be VERY eager to do so.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, for the key pieces certainly .... I've never seen NAMOUNA for example ... and from what I've read ....I would be VERY eager to do so.

I've only seen one of his works and that was Cinderella - people have been calling him the Frederick Ashton of this century, but I've heard that almost all of his full-length ballets are rubbish, like I heard his Anna Karenina is very boring.

Though I have to say, he certainly does a good job when it comes to reconstructing Petipa's ballets - he did a good job reconstructing Le Corsaire with Yuri Burlaka and I'd like to see his upcoming reconstruction of Paquita that he has worked on with Doug Fullington.

Share this post


Link to post

The Bright Stream is not rubbish, audiences love it. I'm a huge Ratmansky fan and like meunier fan I thought DSCH was the highlight of the Kirov's London season. I'll admit Anna Karenina wasn't up to much though, but a difficult subject to make into a ballet, I have somewhere on video an old version by Maya Plisetskaya - now that is boring, I fell asleep watching it.

Share this post


Link to post

The Bright Stream is not rubbish, audiences love it. I'm a huge Ratmansky fan and like meunier fan I thought DSCH was the highlight of the Kirov's London season. I'll admit Anna Karenina wasn't up to much though, but a difficult subject to make into a ballet, I have somewhere on video an old version by Maya Plisetskaya - now that is boring, I fell asleep watching it.

Oh yeah, I have heard The Bright Stream is good. Yeah that's the problem with Tolstoy's novels - they're really hard adaptations to pull off, especially if you're going to put the whole thing into two acts! You'd need about 10 acts for his works!

Share this post


Link to post

If I had only seen "Anna Karenina," I would have wondered what the fuss was about, because it reminded me of the criticism of "The Tempest" as not being able to quite decide what kind of ballet it was. It was, though, as far as I can see, his first original full-length ballet, choreographed for Royal Danish Ballet, which performs in a more intimate theater than the Mariinsky does, and, I think, a bit more than he could chew at the time. I don't think editing the story is in insolvable problem -- there's an operatic "War and Peace" that does justice to the bones of the novel -- but the key scene in which Anna shows her hand publicly is a challenge of focus and proximity to understand. It's hard enough for choreographers who present linearly, which Ratmansky does not, because his best is so multi-layered; the "Don Quichot" that was filmed Amsterdam was nothing like seeing it live in Seattle; the camera couldn't pick up more half of what was going on or the life of the piece, whereas the National Ballet of Cuba's, which I saw within a month of Ratmansky's, was masterful in its strictly linear telling and (would be) camera-friendly focus. (It was a very affectionate approach, too, loving all of its characters.) Outside of opera, where everyone stops and sings, the concentrated power of a mob that shuns socially without dynamic physical violence is a near impossibility without a camera, like at the end of the "Dangerous Liaisons" movie or in "Star Trek: The Next Generation" where Worf and his brother are shunned ritually, as each Klingon in the circle turns his back and snaps his arms over his chest in an "X" movement in succession, which was simple, but artful choreography in close-up.

Choreographers don't always get their preferences in whether works are performed. I don't know what his arrangement is in terms of rights -- ie, whether the Mariinsky owns them or had rights for a decade, etc. -- but even if they do hold the rights, he could protest by freezing out the Mariinsky if they continue to perform and tour with "Cinderella." He obviously maintains a relationship with the company in spite of this, just as Balanchine didn't see to freeze out ABT when they continued to perform "Symphonie Concertante" and "Bouree Fantasque," neither of which were choreographed for ABT but were early works for NYCB and dropped from the NYCB rep, unlike "Theme and Variations."

Ratmansky has done so many other stellar works, from originals to reconstructions to heavily re-interpreted traditional ballets, both full-length and short ballets, that dismissing them with a single description, "rubbish," isn't very useful.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey everybody, here's something I'd like your opinions on - does anybody here think that the Mariinsky needs a new Romeo and Juliet?

Share this post


Link to post

Really? You think so? So if both companies need new versions, in your opinion, why is that?

Share this post


Link to post

I think the Macmillan R&J, aside from a few highlights, is mind-numbingly dull. However, they could replace it with the Maillot, which has some excellent moments of theater, but not-so-excellent choreography. However, crowds love both of them, and they sell tickets.

Share this post


Link to post

The Malliot version, who dances in that one?

And of course, the version danced by the Mariinsky was the very first ever version staged - the one in which Galina Ulanova created the role of Juliet and the one staged after Prokofiev finished the score. The British critics called this version "old-schooled", "dated" and "creaky" - does anybody agree with that? Does anybody here feel that maybe this version has long passed its sell-by-date?

Share this post


Link to post

i'd say LEAVE R&J untouched. I love it. I don't like any other version.

Share this post


Link to post

i'd say LEAVE R&J untouched. I love it. I don't like any other version.

Well I enjoyed it myself actually, but I can't help but feel that maybe there's quite a lot of things that could do with a bit of updating...

Share this post


Link to post

Among ballet companies, Pacific Northwest Ballet does the Maillot. Maillot's company, Les Ballets de Monte Carlo, performs and tours it regularly.

A version adapted for film of the Lavrovsky with Ulanova is widely available on DVD, and you can judge for yourself. I love it.

Share this post


Link to post

Ah right, thank you.

Yes I've seen some of that film version - beautiful film! But today, has this version passed its prime?

Share this post


Link to post

And of course, the version danced by the Mariinsky was the very first ever version staged - the one in which Galina Ulanova created the role of Juliet and the one staged after Prokofiev finished the score.

The first version was performed in Brno on December 30, 1938, with choreography by Ivo Váňa-Psota. Admittedly, we don't know much about the production, but it's fair to say it was very different from Lavrovsky's, which premiered on January 11, 1940, since Juliet didn't dance on pointe.

http://blog.oup.com/2009/01/prokofiev_juliet/

Share this post


Link to post

And of course, the version danced by the Mariinsky was the very first ever version staged - the one in which Galina Ulanova created the role of Juliet and the one staged after Prokofiev finished the score.

The first version was performed in Brno on December 30, 1938, with choreography by Ivo Váňa-Psota. Admittedly, we don't know much about the production, but it's fair to say it was very different from Lavrovsky's, which premiered on January 11, 1940, since Juliet didn't dance on pointe.

http://blog.oup.com/2009/01/prokofiev_juliet/

Oh interesting, never knew that - thank you volcanohunter. :)

And what about you? Do you think maybe the Mariinsky needs a new Romeo and Juliet or their current version just needs some updating?

Share this post


Link to post

In general I don't approve of companies jettisoning their heritage, so while I am not a great fan of Lavrovsky's version, I wouldn`t like to see the Mariinsky drop it. Likewise, I wasn't especially persuaded by Frederick Ashton's version when I saw it, but it is important in having been created outside the influence of Lavrovsky, and I am sorry it has no home today.

However, I didn't see the Mariinsky's recent London performances of Romeo and Juliet, which came in for a fair amount of criticism, so I can't really judge whether it's become too creaky.

Share this post


Link to post

In general I don't approve of companies jettisoning their heritage, so while I am not a great fan of Lavrovsky's version, I wouldn`t like to see the Mariinsky drop it. Likewise, I wasn't especially persuaded by Frederick Ashton's version when I saw it, but it is important in having been created outside the influence of Lavrovsky, and I am sorry it has no home today.

However, I didn't see the Mariinsky's recent London performances of Romeo and Juliet, which came in for a fair amount of criticism, so I can't really judge whether it's become too creaky.

Oh thanks goodness, somebody else who knows ballet companies should not be jettisoning their heritage! Volcanohunter - you are my star! Thank you darling!!!

At least the Royal Ballet is staying true to their heritage whereas the Mariinsky... not so much... People seem to think that the Mariinsky's true heritage is the Soviet-era, but it's actually 19th century Imperial Russia.

Share this post


Link to post

I thought the Lavrosky version (which I saw the Bolshoi dance over a decade ago when they had it in their repertory) had many remarkable qualities it would be a shame to lose. I prefered it to Macmillan's which, like Helene, I find "mind numbingly" dull. If the Mariinsky can keep it alive, then they they should. I agree in that respect, too, with volcanohunter and Amy -- companies shouldn't just jettison their heritage. I do think that some Soviet ballet is part of the Mariinsky's heritage alongside nineteenth-century imperial Russian ballet which hardly comes down to us in un-Soviet-adulterated form.

Putting the original question a little differently: is the Lavrosky's creakiness really inevitable? Maybe, but maybe not with the right dancers and direction and I would want to hope the company could give it the attention it needed.

Atlanta ballet danced Maillot's last year and will dance it again this year. in my opinion, it was a good choice for the company--better than the company's previous R&J (by Michael Pink).

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think the Royal Ballet is staying true to its heritage: Ashton just about shriveled up and died there.

Share this post


Link to post

Coppelia! Hard to believe but the Mariinsky doesn't have Coppelia in the repertoire.

I was about to make the same suggestion! From what I understand they haven't perform this classic ballet in years!! Unbelievable. And base on this youtube video of the Dawn variation I think Mariinsky version of this ballet would be wonderful.

This is the Vinogradov Coppelia choreographed in the early '90's (I have the DVD). Maybe when he left as AD, he took it with him?

Share this post


Link to post

Hello! I'm new here but not shy about sharing my opinions. :happy:

The version danced by the fabulous Irina Shapchits was the first version of that variation I ever saw. Now viewing the version danced by Stashkevich, I'm underwhelmed. It seems pedestrian in contrast, as reconstructions tend to be, imo. The choreographer of the version danced by Shapchits seems to have breathed new life into it.

I love Shapchits, too! But she came in just as the "basketball player" aesthetic was taking hold at MT. Unfortunate. I wonder where she is now (somewhere in the West, I believe).

Share this post


Link to post