NPR Punk v. Opera: where does ballet fit in?
Posted 10 January 2003 - 12:22 PM
They mentioned that Opera is the only classic art where the audience demographic is actually getting younger and younger. So why is that? One would think that with the relatively young dancers that make up the art (relative to the older opera singers) ballet would be very attractive to a younger generation. And with the love of atheletes and athletics in our country, why wouldn't a partially physical art do well? In contrast to opera, which incorporates much less movement(except for the vocal cords ).
And the other question comes from the commentator's remark that since Opera deals with such strong and pure emotions, many of these punk people are being drawn to it. (the idea of an individual's fight and struggle against the world was also mentioned) My question is: Since ballet obviously deals with love, hate, desire, joy, jealousy, etc etc, why isn't it attracting the same crowd? (if you want to buy their theory) Is it because it offers a subdued version of these emotions, or is it because ballet is too esoteric, or what?
I would be interested to hear other's observations on the piece or on the mentioned questions. Please understand that I have the utmost respect for opera, so none of this is said in degredation of that art!
Posted 10 January 2003 - 02:33 PM
Posted 10 January 2003 - 02:37 PM
I'm also pressed for time at the moment but would also be interested in hearing comments on this. Good topic, Allegro, and thank you.
Posted 10 January 2003 - 06:03 PM
For what it's worth, I don't have enough experience with Punk Rock to comment... Is it still even being played?
I wish I'd heard the program... How exciting - http://www.npr.org/p.../atc/index.html - my out of date Real Player allows me to listen to yesterday's program!
Posted 11 January 2003 - 07:19 AM
Posted 11 January 2003 - 07:28 AM
I think it's an interesting idea and I'm grateful it's being raised. Is this also the reason that the most popular of the narrative ballets today are "Onegin," "Manon" and "Romeo and Juliet?" (And the second wave of Draculas and Madam Butterflies?)
These ballets are not as rich as operas and the criticism of them from an artistic point of view is that they lack depth -- lack supporting characters, trivialize or sentimentalize raw emotions, etc. Which wouldn't bother a generation that knows opera only through surtitles!
But from an audience point of view, especially to people new to ballet, these are the favorites.
Also, opera is generally popular now. Teens were drawn to ballet in the earliy Nureyev and early Baryshnikov periods to watch cute guys. It could be that simple -- it's chic, everybody's going, it's cool to say "I'm going to the opera." ???
All rank speculations
Posted 11 January 2003 - 10:23 AM
Posted 11 January 2003 - 12:43 PM
I wonder if from a historical perspective, we've always suspected the vitality of the "core" and only believed in the edges as being where creativity lies.
THAT's an interesting thought. Meaning that we, the audience, always either suspect or misunderstand the "core" -- what the artist is trying to do, or how the artist understands the art form -- but will be attracted by something external -- star dancer, great costumes, extreme emotion, etc. That might be the "bait," but I do think many people do make the "switch" -- i.e., finding the core.
Posted 11 January 2003 - 01:20 PM
Posted 12 January 2003 - 03:24 PM
Second, using my own self as an example, I didn't like "tutu ballets" for the longest time. I found them stilted and rather silly. I enjoyed Balanchine's works that were presented with the women in either leotards or flowing chiffon skirts. My appreciation for the classical tutu came over a long period of time and mostly as the result of watching student dancers work themselves up to such roles. Nowadays it's probably the section of a ballet that I most look forward to. But it took time to develop that appreciation.
My many opera-loving friends often cite tutus as a barrier to their enjoying ballet. I don't think any of the ballets Alexandra listed as being considered popular are "tutu ballets", am I right?
Posted 12 January 2003 - 03:50 PM
Posted 13 January 2003 - 07:14 AM
"If it looks easy, it is easy."
But since everyone sings in the shower, perhaps singers are given more credit. After all, who causally attempts foutte e'lair or a double tour as a matter or course?
Posted 13 January 2003 - 01:00 PM
Also, what type of opera is most popular today? Is it the romantic Italian operas of Verdi or the baroque comedies of Mozart? The style of Romeo and Juliet has more with the former, whereas Sleeping Beauty is closer to the latter in terms of its classical, harmonious structure. If you want to see extreme, Romeo and Juliet is the ballet with double suicides, murder, duels, and secret marriage (and it doesn't hurt that the play is very popular). Sleeping Beauty isn't extreme at all except perhaps in the sense of being extremely restrained.
Also, IMO, some of it goes back to the way ballet is taught and performed (perhaps I should say "executed") these days. Ballet dancers think that they dance with their arms and legs; therefore, their movement tends to be superficial, almost arbitrary wavings of the limbs. Opera singers (and modern dancers) know that the torso is where the art must begin. I would even venture to say that classical singing is more of a "full-body" art than ballet is (at least as ballet is currently danced--the way ballet should be danced is something else entirely). It is this that makes the difference, and it is important. One's heart is not located in one's arm or leg, so how is it emotionally expressive to do an arabesque? The gestures of the limbs must be extensions of what occurs in the torso. Based on videos I've seen, this used to be much better understood than it currently is, whether it was a conscious understanding or not. Therefore, I think that it is perhaps the way opera is performed that makes it more appealing to younger people.
Maybe I've been a dancer for too long, but could someone please explain just how the mere sight of a tutu could put someone off? I don't really understand how its presence could be so offensive.
Posted 13 January 2003 - 04:42 PM
Except I'm not sure I can anymore I LIKE tutus now.
I think I found the tutu itself simply silly to behold. No one wears tutus in real life. Historically, no one wore them. I couldn't think of them seriously. If anything, I still think they resemble a science fiction costume more than anything else. As a newcomer to ballet many moons ago, the combination of that absurd-looking garment, along with what I thought were the affectations of pose after pose, was off-putting. I had little background in ballet at that point (unless Sister Mary Baptista's after-school ballet class in first grade counts ;) )
This was in the early 1970's, long before I began taking adult ballet lessons myself and before I had a child who lived for ballet.
Current colleagues of mine at school have told me they think tutus are silly. But in their case, it seems that they relegate the tutu to an old-fashioned world that's out of step (pardon the pun) with the present world. To them, it's the antithesis of feminism.
Posted 16 January 2003 - 07:53 AM
For me, to a certain extent, I enjoy art more if I can somehow identify with it -- either with the joy of movement, the depth of the expression, or perhaps even what I've somehow imagine the art form to be.
Given this need to identify, it is easier, somehow, for me to appreciate corps work and the type of dancing Vagansmom described as liking first. I find tutu dancing to be far more abstract and based on pure, classical (and may we say, more arcane) ballet. Therefore, I think it is harder to appreciate.
True balletomanes might groan -- but this is embodied by the fact that many find the dances of the Sugar Plum Fairy and her cavalier to be the dullest part of the Nutcracker.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
members, guests, anonymous users
Help support Ballet Alert! and Ballet Talk for Dancers year round by using this search box for your amazon.com purchases: