Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

The Petipa Bicentennial (March 11, 2018)


Recommended Posts

The ballet world will soon be celebrating the 200th birthday anniversary of the great Petipa!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marius_Petipa

 

I'm opening this thread for long-term discussion of any festivals, commemorations, new or "revived" reconstructions of his works, exhibits, etc. that may be happening in 2018 to celebrate the choreographer whose works are synonymous with CLASSICAL ballet. Perhaps we'll see an emphasis on Petipa's creations by the big Russian and Western companies? (Mariinsky in Flora's Awakening maybe? It costs nothing to dream.) 

 

The sooner that we plan our travels, the better! :) 

 

Thanks for sharing creditable info, as it comes to light officially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Natalia said:

It costs nothing to dream.

 

Indeed, and I'm hoping that we'll be seeing more conversations in the community about issues of conservation and reconstruction. 

 

On the more concrete side, Pacific Northwest Ballet will be performing Swan Lake in February 2018 -- the official choreographic credit is shared by Kent Stowell and Francia Russell.  Russell restaged several traditional sections of the ballet (I'll have to go find my notes for a comprehensive list) and Stowell reworked other parts based on the historical work.  The sets are a bit heavy-handed, but the dancing has always been very clean and classical -- it's really a great production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Sandik. I'm wondering how many ballet troupes, beside PNWB, thought about the Petipa Bicentennial while planning their 2017/2018 seasons? I've heard of a couple of other companies in the US planning recons...but it's not official until the seasons are announced. Once things are announced, with dates, then folks can begin to make cost-effective travel arrangements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarification -- I'm not sure that the bicentennial was a part of the decision to schedule Swan Lake at PNB, but I have a feeling that, even in today's programming climate, we'll be able to make several of our own "Petipa Tours" without too much difficulty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understood. As much as I would've enjoyed going to another Bournonville Festival, I was a bit happy that it won't be happening in 2018 (as originally hinted at a couple of years ago), so as not to compete with any potential Petipa celebration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I  disagree -- I'm glad to see us look thoughtfully at our heritage, and examine the elements that make up our aesthetic.  It becomes even more important, I think, when we're looking at fundamental things that affect all kinds of developments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A follow-up to the recent Petipa Colloquium in Bordeaux (Oct 2015)  would be fantastic:

 

...only with more performances...maybe a week or two during which we would see live performances of these works under one roof:

 

Zurich SWAN LAKE;

 

La Scala RAYMONDA;

 

Mariinsky new-old Vikharev recons of SB, FLORA, BAYADERE;

 

Bolshoi ESMERALDA, PHARAOH's DAUGHTER, COPPELIA (P's version, after StLeon), CORSAIRE;

 

ABT BEAUTY and other Petipa novelty that may be coming from Ratmansky;

 

Mikhailovsky CAVALRY's HALT;

 

Ekaterinburg's FILLE MAL GARDEE (Vikharev recon but not the Petipa era designs);

 

Munich or POB PAQUITAs;

 

A night of "Petipaniana" excerpts, such as various solos from otherwise lost ballets (CAMARGO, CANDAULE, TALISMAN, CINDERELLA, ZORAYA,  etc), SATANELLA Gnd Pas, "Ocean & Two Pearls" pas de 3, Petipa's additions to GISELLE, Medvedev's recent BLUEBEARD Gnd Pas recon, etc.

 

A new recon of the Pugni/Petipa-after-StLeon version of HUMPBACKED HORSE would be fantastic...or recons of the one-act Hermitage ballets, such as RUSSES d'AMOUR, HARLEQUINADE, THE SEASONS?

 

ps - I don't include DON Q in the above because what we see now on stage is mostly by Gorsky...but it would be great if a scholar would decipher what truly remains of Petipa's original. NUTCRACKER not listed; that was Lev Ivanov.

Edited by Natalia
Added the bit about DON Q being by Gorsky.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A night of "Petipiana" excerpts from works rarely performed or never performed (perhaps bits that are well notated from an otherwise impossible to reconstruct ballet) is a wonderful idea -- and something more than one company could offer its audiences -- maybe with a chestnut or two thrown in for good measure! And samples of his revisions to older ballets given their own due...All recorded please if only for archives. Better still if recorded for public consumption. 

 

I can't work up much enthusiasm for Lacotte, but I suppose if one wanted some "after Petipa" or "homage" programming included it could have a place. Ironically the Macmillan celebration at the Royal and the Robbins' celebration at NYCB rather precludes those companies emphasizing the portion of their reps that most reflects the Petipa legacy, whether directly (in productions of his choreography) or indirectly (meaning works like Ashton's Sylvia or Balanchine's Theme and Variations).

 

i have no idea if it has any intended relation to the bicentenary, but next season Atlanta Ballet is dancing its first 19th-century full length Petipa (or mostly Petipa/after Petipa) ballet other than Nutcracker in some years--at least a decade I should think: Don Quixote. They are also staging Act III of Swan Lake (again not seen for many years). I have mixed feelings about these choices for this company, but will now think of them as my local Petipa bicentenary. Which for all I know may be intended. (Intended or not, I won't be surprised if it turns up in the company's publicity.) 

Edited by Drew
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ratmansky mentioned in an earlier interview there will be a reconstruction at ABT in 2018.

 

And Ratmansky will stage Bayadere in Berlin 17/18 season: http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/kultur/theater/staatsballett-das-sind-die-plaene-der-designierten-intendanten--26811508

 

Will the reconstruction for ABT be Bayadere co-produced with Berlin?  I can't imagine ABT would jettison its iconic 38-year old production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Catherine Pawlik's new "Vaganova Today" blog (link below - scroll down to "News and Rumors" on new Stanislavsky season), the ballet troupe of Moscow's Stanislavsky Theatre will pay tribute to Petipa's 200th with a special program on April 23-24, 2018, featuring guests from Paris POB Academy and the Perm and Stanislavsky Ballets.

 

http://www.vaganovatoday.com/

 

p.s. Lots of other goodies in this Russia-based blog. One to bookmark!

Edited by Natalia
Credit to Catherine Pawlik & her blog.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, mussel said:

Ratmansky mentioned in an earlier interview there will be a reconstruction at ABT in 2018.

 

And Ratmansky will stage Bayadere in Berlin 17/18 season: http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/kultur/theater/staatsballett-das-sind-die-plaene-der-designierten-intendanten--26811508

 

Will the reconstruction for ABT be Bayadere co-produced with Berlin?  I can't imagine ABT would jettison its iconic 38-year old production.

 

I only know about a totally-new (not in ABT rep) Petipa ballet that Ratmansky and his team have been reconstructing. Will PM you. Not BAYADERE, that I've heard, although things can change until it's official.  BTW, the Berlin BAYADERE seems to be for the 2018/19 season.

Edited by Natalia
Correcting the season for the planned Berlin BAYADERE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Ekaterinburg Ballet, Russia, is dedicating its entire 2017/18 season to the Petipa 200th celebration!

 http://m.colta.ru/news/14477 

in addition to existing rep, such as the FILLE MAL GARDEE recon (pictured in the article), novelties include:

 

Nov 17, 2017: Vikharev/Gershenson new recon of complete PAQUITA

 

Mar 15, 2018: Yuri Burlaka's recon of the complete 2-act HARLEQUINADE

 

June 2018: - total rarity! - THE KING's COMMAND, chor by a team led by company A.D. Vyacheslav Samodurov. (Not clear if it'll be a recon or a "rethinking" a-la Lacotte) *Note: this ballet exists in the "Harvard Notes" in the 2-act version of 1900...as "Les Eleves de Dupre." It includes a very famous pdd that Petipa created for Virginia Zucchi & Enrico Cecchetti: "Fisherman & Pearl"...oh, that we may be seeing this gem!

 

July 7, 2018 - a gala of many Petipa gems, incl premiere of Burlaka's NAIAD & FISHERMAN SUITE (ONDINE suite)...a "Petipaniana" extravaganza!

Edited by Natalia
Added bit about Fisherman & Pearl pdd.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Amy. Great list. I'd add the Grand Pas des Fleurs from Esmeralda, Animated Frescoes from Little H H, and Dance of the Hours from the opera Gioconda, which was recon in Japan a few years ago.

 

 The conference in Marseilles could be a winner. Please report dates/details if you find out.

 

I wish that Ekaterinburg would live-stream at least some of their Petipa recon productions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Amy said:

Thanks Natalia; yes I did consider the Grand Pas des fleurs and the La Esmeralda Pas de six, but I don't know if they're notated; I'll need to check. And yes, the Animated Frescoes from Little Humpbacked Horse would be wonderful too. One thing that Ashton said was that Petipa's best passages were his group/corps de ballet dances and sure enough, they really are among his best creations.

 

Yes, Amy, the Harvard notes include a complete Esmeralda (3 acts, 5 scenes). Yuri Burlaka (& V. Medvedev?) used the notes to some degree for his recent Bolshoi staging. Some ballets were more completely notated than others; some lack full port de bras, so Burlaka had to make educated guesses with  the knowledge of the style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for Devil's Advocate, I think it is easy to say with hindsight that his works have been abused and disrespected, but at the time (when there was no video to freeze his choreography and set it in stone and when the notations were not widely available and many could not even read them) I think people did what they thought was right and attempted to keep his art alive. Probably everyone along the way had great love and respect for Petipa even if they were making changes. Without all of the artists keeping some Petipa ballets in the active repertoire (even if changes were made) there would not be interest in reconstructions, because his works would have been totally forgotten without all the people in between. In my opinion, people and companies made decisions to keep the public happy and to keep their government happy and probably made some mistakes, but they kept his art alive and without that having ever happened we might not have anyone caring about reconstructions. Ballet might have totally died out and no one would care, because they wouldn't know what they are missing and would see dusty notations in some library at Harvard and wonder, "What the heck is this?" I just don't think anything is cut and dry and no one should be hanged or condemned for keeping what he/she thought kept ballet alive at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, what was done is done, and I think it is great to have reconstructions and great to have some variations on a theme as well. I try to enjoy everything.

 

The Sergeyev Swan Lake is known to be his. It is not billed as pure Petipa. Maybe it once was, but now it is called the Sergeyev version by most people and even on the Mariinsky website it says, "Choreography by Marius Petipa and Lev Ivanov (1895)
revised choreography and stage direction: Konstantin Sergeyev (1950)"......the Mariinsky Bayadere credits other choreographers too:   "Choreography by Marius Petipa (1877)
Revised choreography by Vladimir Ponomarev and Vakhtang Chabukiani (1941)
with dances by Konstantin Sergeyev and Nikolai Zubkovsky"

 

I think there is room to have reconstructions and Soviet revisions side-by-side.

 

I saw the reconstructed Sleeping Beauty at ABT and enjoyed it very much, but I also love the Sergeyev version and will always love it.

 

I also think there was a different attitude about "performing arts" before the days of video. Now with video we can capture pretty much the exact way something is to be performed. We can freeze things in time and recreate them. I know in opera in the past there are many operas that were often performed with cuts, arias interpolated, etc. There used to be divas who would simply insert an aria they were sure to get lots of applause for even if it were by a different composer. All kinds of wacky things happened in the performing arts. I think it is great to strive to discover what audiences from the 19th century may have actually seen on stage, but I also think you can't completely erase what went on after.

 

My favorite opera Bellini's Norma would probably disappoint me if I heard it in 1831. Maybe not. I just believe since Maria Callas we expect a very powerful dramatic soprano and a very commanding and heavyweight Norma. Supposedly, that was not how the role was originally sung. Who really knows if Giuditta Pasta was that kind of singer in real life (we only have descriptions of her singing that indicates she was a great actress but had trouble with the high tessitura of the original Casta Diva, so now you have two versions of Casta Diva. She couldn't sing or didn't think she could sing what Bellini originally composed. If I traveled back to 1831 I might be disappointed and want to travel back to the 1950s and hear Callas instead.

 

The performing arts are a living and breathing thing and take on a life of their own, in my opinion. In opera composers would compose a whole new aria for a diva to show off her specific traits and/or hide her flaws. That was normal. If a singer sounded lousy the work sounded lousy to the audience as well.

 

So changing things up was actually a thing that happened in the performing arts. I think videotape has created an obsession with wanting a frozen moment in time recreated again and again. I don't think that is necessarily bad, but I don't think all the ballet professionals who have come and gone since Petipa should be treated like criminals either. Everyone does their best in paying homage to their art. There will always be disagreements about how well they did that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Birdsall said:

I also think there was a different attitude about "performing arts" before the days of video. Now with video we can capture pretty much the exact way something is to be performed.

 

You've put your finger on something here that the notation community has been discussing for many years.

 

A video or film is a record of a performance -- a specific moment in the careers of a particular group of people, with all their skills and deficits.  A score is a record of a work, without the interpretation of the individual.  It is both more and less specific than the performance.

 

This distinction is really easy to recognize in fields that have written scores as a standard tool -- we are very comfortable talking about Beethoven's symphonies as items that are distinct from individual performances.  Likewise, we talk about Shakespeare's Hamlet, as well as talking about Lawrence Olivier's and Kenneth Branagh's. 

 

Dance has a harder time making those distinctions, since so few people read notation.  But as we see more productions that are using the notated tools we have, I'm hopeful that we'll have more conversations about these differences.  The Petipa anniversary is just one place that this can move forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Birdsall on this but understand your frustrations, Amy.    Rethinkings of Petipa can be glorious works of art in and of themselves and the great majority of "Petipa" on view is exactly that - something "AFTER Petipa"...the over-abundance of rice, as Canbelto humorously put it!  

 

However...at this stage in life, I prefer to spend my travel $$$ on reconstructions, be they historically "perfect" or partly perfect (eg, correct steps if not the original Tsarist-era designs).  Yet, in cases when the ONLY versions of rare Petipa  ballets "out there" happen to be intelligent, in-the-manner-of-Petipa rethinkings, as in the case of K. Sergeyev/Dudinskaya's THE SEASONS (Glazunov), or Lacotte's ONDINE or PHARAOH's DAUGHTER, then  I'm all in! Thank goodness that we have those works, with complete music and luxurious 19th-C-style designs! And thank goodness for the 1946 Royal Ballet BEAUTY or Konstantin Sergeyev's versions of the classics - long may they live on their own!

 

My main reason for starting this thread is to learn about any upcoming conferences (such as the one in Marseilles), any interesting reconstructions (as in Ekaterinburg and maybe ABT), or any multi-performance Petipa festivals that may happen (not yet but may be coming) during 2018. In just a couple of days, valuable info has come to light. Keep it coming! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Amy said:

....people from the Soviet ballet who were against Petipa's choreography being changed. However, most of them kept quiet, but one person who didn't keep his opinions on this matter to himself was Yacobson.

 

Yet, for all of Yacobson's flapping about correctness in historical ballets, he gave us of version of Fokine's DYING SWAN/THE SWAN with a black tutu and very different steps. :) But I digress...back to the Petipa 200th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30.04.2017 at 9:56 AM, Birdsall said:

Without all of the artists keeping some Petipa ballets in the active repertoire (even if changes were made) there would not be interest in reconstructions, because his works would have been totally forgotten without all the people in between. In my opinion, people and companies made decisions to keep the public happy and to keep their government happy and probably made some mistakes, but they kept his art alive and without that having ever happened we might not have anyone caring about reconstructions. Ballet might have totally died out and no one would care, because they wouldn't know what they are missing and would see dusty notations in some library at Harvard and wonder, "What the heck is this?" 

 

This is an extremely Kirov-centric view of ballet history. It isn't as though the notations were sitting in a library for 100 years collecting dust. N. Sergeyev was using them to stage the ballets during the 1920s, '30s and '40s, with the productions for the Vic-Wells Ballet having a particularly lasting impact throughout the English-speaking world, even if the company had nothing like the resources needed to produce full reconstructions at the time. Amy has already pointed out that there were people in Soviet Russia with first-hand knowledge of Petipa's choreography, as there were among emigrants in the West. There's good reason to think that K. Sergeyev could have staged Petipa's ballets with far greater accuracy if he had wanted to do it, but unfortunately, the Soviets played fast and loose with the choreographic text.

 

K. Sergeyev's vision scene in Sleeping Beauty, for example, has little in common with the original. I don't know anything about how Grigorovich staged his version of Sleeping Beauty, but despite his alterations--the elimination of the mime, the additional choreography for the Prince and the Lilac Fairy--the overall structure of his vision scene is far closer to Petipa's original than the K. Sergeyev version. I don't know whether Grigorovich was influenced by the Royal Ballet or other Western stagings, or whether he went looking for information on the original staging among people at home, but somehow the same choreographer who ran roughshod over Petipa in Swan Lake, actually rejected some of K. Sergeyev's accretions in Sleeping Beauty.

 

Obviously it's true that the West didn't embrace the entire Petipa canon right away. I'm sure this can largely be explained by some of the music Petipa used. Pugni and Minkus are patently inferior composers, while Glazunov lacks the indelibly "snappy" tunes of Delibes and Tchaikovsky. But the suggestion that the world might have forgotten about Petipa until heavily altered Soviet productions began touring the West in the 1950s is unsound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, volcanohunter said:

 

This is an extremely Kirov-centric view of ballet history. It isn't as though the notations were sitting in a library for 100 years collecting dust. N. Sergeyev was using them to stage the ballets during the 1920s, '30s and '40s, with the productions for the Vic-Wells Ballet having a particularly lasting impact throughout the English-speaking world, even if the company had nothing like the resources needed to produce full reconstructions at the time. Amy has already pointed out that there were people in Soviet Russia with first-hand knowledge of Petipa's choreography, as there were among emigrants in the West. There's good reason to think that K. Sergeyev could have staged Petipa's ballets with far greater accuracy if he had wanted to do it, but unfortunately, the Soviets played fast and loose with the choreographic text.

 

K. Sergeyev's vision scene in Sleeping Beauty, for example, has little in common with the original. I don't know anything about how Grigorovich staged his version of Sleeping Beauty, but despite his alterations--the elimination of the mime, the additional choreography for the Prince and the Lilac Fairy--the overall structure of his vision scene is far closer to Petipa's original than the K. Sergeyev version. I don't know whether Grigorovich was influenced by the Royal Ballet or other Western stagings, or whether he went looking for information on the original staging among people at home, but somehow the same choreographer who ran roughshod over Petipa in Swan Lake, actually rejected some of K. Sergeyev's accretions in Sleeping Beauty.

 

Obviously it's true that the West didn't embrace the entire Petipa canon right away. I'm sure this can largely be explained by some of the music Petipa used. Pugni and Minkus are patently inferior composers, while Glazunov lacks the indelibly "snappy" tunes of Delibes and Tchaikovsky. But the suggestion that the world might have forgotten about Petipa until heavily altered Soviet productions began touring the West in the 1950s is unsound.

 

I think you misinterpreted what I meant. The West did not stick to "pure Petipa" (reconstructions), as you say, either. So my point was that all the choices ALL companies made to produce a Petipa style work helped to keep interest in Petipa alive. If none of these people or companies continued to put together their version of Petipa, Petipa would be lost and the world's culture would have pretty much forgotten about ballet. That was my point. The notations would mean nothing because people stopped trying to produce ballet.

 

I want to repeat what I said above. Reconstructions seem to be a 21st century idea. Video for mass consumption (tapes that we can play at home) began in the 1980s if my memory serves correct. Before that it was not very normal to have a film of a performing art in your home. Only professionals had easy access. Once video became a mass product I think that is what has led the way to the idea of reconstructions.....because families started filming their vacations and having a memory of their vacation exactly the way it was. So little by little as dvds and blurays have made filming better and easier and you can carry it all around you (also music on your phone) there is now this obsession with HAVING the exact experience that may have happened in the 19th century on a ballet stage. That is my theory.

 

Before video I think the performing arts always had a push/pull relationship between tradition and what was known to be correct. Even great conductors argue about whether more rubato should be used or not......singers and conductors argue. Riccardo Muti for a period would not let singers embellish Mozart or bel canto operas even when the style of those operas practically demand embellishment (and singers embellished during those composers' times. Donizetti, Rossini, and Bellini expected their arias to be embellished and sometimes wrote out embellishments for the singers. Sometimes the singer did her own. And sometimes the singer interpolated a whole different aria that she loved by another composer and the composer who watched a completely different aria interpolated into his work could not do anything about it. You have Don Carlos premiered in Paris and the original is in French with 5 acts. The Italians loved their Verdi so much that they condensed it to 4 acts and redid it in Italian. Verdi finally created his own version in hopes that he could re-assert some control over his work, but various versions grew. Today the Italian arias "O don fatal" and "Tu che le vanita" are so famous that we want to hear them in Italian because there is more bite and performance tradition, BUT the french versions are the original and what Verdi originally composed.

 

The performing arts are just that......performances.......by HUMAN BEINGS.......composers had to change arias, write new ones to accomodate singers who couldn't sing the original or who would sound better singing a different one. After all, the composer did want a success and if the impresario hired a famous diva who had wobbly high notes but beautiful pianissimi, why not rewrite the aria and let her show off what she does best, so she will have a success and the work will be a success as a result? If she screeches her way through, she will be humiliated and the work might suffer.

 

So since the performing arts deal specifically with human beings with human strengths and weaknesses, and it is a COLLABORATIVE effort, everyone comes together to try to put on this living, breathing work of art and make it a success, because afterall, the artists need money, so they want a success. So, probably during the course of the history of performing arts you had people changing things up. Since the original creators used to tolerate or accept or even take part in the changes, once the creator died, the people going on staging the work probably made changes also. They were not intending to CRUSH or DESTROY the original. They were doing what they thought was best to make the work come alive but do it in a way so that they made some money. The pie-in-the-sky idea of pure art and not necessarily wanting a success (which would include money in the pocket) never occurred to artists of the past.

 

So changes happened for a variety of reasons.

 

And now some people want to erase everything that went on and turn the clock back to the 19th century in ballet. As admirable as that may be (and I have enjoyed reconstructions......I saw Ratmansky's Sleeping Beauty at ABT in person and I have many videos of other reconstructions), I am not convinced it is the only path we need to take. In fact, when I saw Ratmansky's Sleeping Beauty at ABT I actually went in thinking the scales would fall from my eyes, and I would see the light and realize how awlful all other Sleeping Beauties were. That didn't happen. I enjoyed it and I loved getting a taste of what may have been what was danced in the 19th century, but I was also very surprised at how much was similar to the Mariisnky/Kirov Sleeping Beauty. I was also surprised at how much of the overall feel was pretty much the same. Yes, some things were taken faster. Some steps were different (especially Prince Desire's) , but overall what was most interesting is that I saw how a work became changed and many of the reconstructed steps had some resemblance to what is traditionally danced. I also wondered if N. Sergeyev had jotted down notations for many different performances of the same ballet, would there be alternate versions even among Sleeping Beauty or Swan Lake notations? In opera it was common to have various texts. Going back to my example above, it is really hard to choose which Don Carlo or Don Carlos (depending on the language) to choose. Even when you decide on the Italian version, then you have to also decide whether to include Act 1, whether to cut the ballet or include it, and which passages that Verdi himself threw out you should use.

 

Basically, performing arts have always been messy and there is not black and white. Attempting to create a black and white "This is the Law of How Sleeping Beauty Must Be Performed" is actually (and yes I am making a leap but I believe it) going against what anyone in the 19th century believed in........the 19th century artists weren't sure their works would even outlive them and they were used to them being changed. I suspect 19th cetnury composers, singers, dancers, choreographers would be shocked at the 21st century idea of preserving a performing art in amber with no wiggle room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Birdsall said:

Petipa would be lost and the world's culture would have pretty much forgotten about ballet. That was my point. The notations would mean nothing because people stopped trying to produce ballet.

 

Well, there would still be Bournonville. :dry: 

 

The loss of Petipa would be an immense tragedy, but it would not necessarily follow that ballet itself would be destroyed. There have been times when Petipa has fallen out of favor and been performed less frequently, but ballet continued to be created and performed nevertheless.

 

I don't agree that "reconstruction" is a 21st-century idea. Historically the Royal Ballet has taken great pride in being guardian of the Petipa-N. Sergeyev legacy, even if certain Ashtonian interpolations are now considered essential elements of the productions. But I can see how the desire for "reconstructing" ballets has taken a cue from the "period" movement in music and the "original practice" movement in theater, both of which emerged in the latter 20th century but don't have any obvious connection to video for mass consumption. It's a recognition that "text" and performance are different things, and sometimes the latter can stray too far.

 

The major difference still lies in the notation. It's less dangerous to mess around with an opera and a play because the original score or text can always been retrieved. You'll hardly ever see a Shakespeare play performed in its entirety, but no one sweats it, because most of us still have our university copy of a Complete Shakespeare standing on a bookshelf. Any cut material could be re-inserted at any time. Even the Don Carlos conundrum isn't really a conundrum, since none of the music is in danger of being lost. (I say, any of the Italian versions sanctioned by Verdi is kosher.) In ballet the choreography and performance tend to be bound together very tightly, so changes in performance style constitute a very real risk to the existence of the original choreography. It bothers me more than I can say that some stagers of ballets will preserve the libretto, the score and even the original designs, but then alter the choreography as they see fit. Somehow the work of dramatists, composers and visual artists are deemed more worthy of preservation than the work of the original choreographers.

 

And you probably know that the reason some composers wrote out their embellishments was because performers tended to take too many liberties on that front, not because the composers wanted more decoration. Quite the contrary. They were trying to maintain some degree of control over their music. Fortunately, it's the composers' notated versions that have come down to us, not the showboating improvisations. Petipa hasn't always been so lucky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...