nanushka

From Wiley's Tchaikovsky's Ballets (p. 58): On 26 April 1877 Anna Sobeschchanskaya made her debut as Odette. By that fourth performance new music and choreography had been added to Swan Lake. From the conductor Stepan Ryabov we learn how Sobeschanskaya, distrustful of Reisinger [the choreographer of the 1877 version] and dissatisfied with Tchaikovsky's music, went to Petipa in St. Petersburg and asked the ballet master to create a pas de deux for her. Petipa complied, as he had before when she had complained about Reisinger's dances in Ariadne; for Swan Lake he composed variations to music by Ludwig Minkus. Wiley goes on to quote from P. Pchel'nikov, "Recollections about P. I. Tchaikovsky": Having returned to Moscow, the ballerina informed the Kapellmeister that she had acquired a pas de deux, which she wished to interpolate into the third act of Swan Lake. When news of this found its way to Tchaikovsky, he began to protest energetically, pointing out the embarrassment that he would suffer from the interpolation of someone else's music in his ballet. 'Whether my ballet is good or bad,' he said, 'I alone would like to take responsibility for its music.' After long discussion, Tchaikovsky, promised to write a new pas de deux for the benefit artiste. But then a serious complication arose. The artiste did not want to change the dance composed for her by Petipa, nor did she want to go to Petersburg again. The possibility of calming the storm presented itself only in composing new music for the existing dance. Peter Ilyich took upon himself to resolve the argument in this way. Having requested that Minkus's music be given to him, he promised to write new music which would agree, bar for bar, note for note, with Minkus's music. In a word, he promised to produce a pas de deux, to the music of which it would be possible to perform the dance composed by Petipa, not only without any changes, but even without rehearsals. The music was written very quickly, and in addition pleased the benefit artiste so much that she requested that Tchaikovsky write for her an additional variation, which he did. In the benefit performance both of these numbers enjoyed a noisy success with the public.

Fair enough, aurora. I'll try to stop lighting my hair on fire! It's just frustrating when the most technically deficient dancers end up getting the most performances –– 4 out of 8 9 this year (and only 1 of those was unscheduled).

True. If ABT does not have a roster of dancers who are capable of reliably performing all of the standard steps in Swan Lake of all ballets (arguably their signature piece, performed every single year), then something is not right with the world.

There's a delicacy to them, though, that I'm not sure fits with Odile or the Black Swan coda music; it's much more in the style of that moment in the Tchai Pas music. (Typical Balanchine, to perfectly illuminate the musical effect with his steps.)

Great point. It's easy to forget how much of a difference it must make to have the actual experience of dancing all three of O/O's acts in "real time." That's one really big reason why ABT dancers who do principal roles are really facing a distinct challenge (since they have so few opportunities to do that).

Yes, it was almost as if Sarah's awkward smile from the past got transplanted onto him. I remember seeing her generally lovely first Aurora in 2008 or so, which was marred mostly just by that smile. But of course it doesn't fit here for either Odette or Odile. And she's grown out of it. So Benno apparently got stuck with it!

I do like, though, that Odette gets a nice moment to pose in pathos at the top of the cliff. It seems okay to me that Siegfried gets to show off while Odette gets to be gorgeous for one last moment.

Thankfully, Part never gets greedy: she always sticks to just the basic singles, which is as it should be given that her strengths are not in allegro.

I've never really known whether to count doubles as one or two, but I've leaned toward two; otherwise, definitely yes, 32 becomes impossible.

I completely agree. If you're a Gillian, great; go for it. But if not, just do the classic. It's still impressive. We're not at the circus; we don't require tricks. We want to see good dancing. That should be what's foremost.

I noticed this especially in his face. He shifted abruptly tonight between "working face" and "presentation face." Back and forth, with each supported pirouette. It was very distracting, and he really needs to fix that if he's going to advance.

In total agreement –– with the very significant exception of Veronika Part!

Yes, true; Hammoudi's was quite nice, and probably more dramatically appropriate. But hey, it's Swan Lake, not Hamlet, so I'll admit I'm a sucker for something showy!

I think what Batsuchan describes above (which probably was posted as you were typing) is the clearest description.

And O.M.G. Simkin's leap at the end. That one really deserved the applause it got, no matter how tasteless it is to clap at that moment. He flew into the air, arched his back, and then the angle just completely shifted into a DIVE. Holy smokes!!!

I had a similar reaction, but I think there was less music than it felt like there was. I was so struck with disappointment that I didn't even see the arabesque she held, which ABT Fan mentioned above (and my companion commented on as well)!

Yes, you could tell during the whole rest of the coda that she was upset by what had happened. That's what made it so heartbreaking for me. But she came back and danced a gorgeous Act IV.

Yes, I agree. She was definitely well into the singles, which traditionally (when one does the 1-1-2 progression) start at the halfway mark. I didn't get the sense that she deliberately went left to prevent herself from dropping into the pit; she had plenty of space. I think the traveling was unintentional.

This was a heartbreaking moment for me; I was really pulling for her. She started off with the single-single-double progression that many do, and then when she shifted to all singles at the halfway point I felt that Barker picked up the tempo –– or at least didn't keep it slow enough at the pace she was going (which was indeed a bit slower that usual). It seemed she was straining to keep up and that threw her off. (That may be giving Sarah too much credit; it may have been not at all Barker's fault; but before she stopped I was really wishing he would slow down to match her.)

My quick take, with more details to follow: A superb Odette. And a very nice partnership, which could have very likely been improved with more time to rehearse. A very good Odile, which I hope she'll have the opportunity to develop in future years. Not the overall triumph of her Giselle earlier in the season, but a strong performance. I am going to be on pins and needles until week 8 (most likely), when promotions are announced. I really, really hope this is her year. C'mon Kevin, you've started really doing right by these female dancers; let's keep it up!

WOW! That arabesque she held at stage right just as Siegfried first entered from the wings! Gorgeous! I really tend to favor tall O/Os. (Veronika is my gold standard.) But as has been said on here before, Sarah dances LARGE. A truly breathtaking performance so far. Very curious to see how she handles the evil seductress.

PDT is Gorak, Brandt and Trenary. What a night!

Just a note to clarify that I edited that part of my post before you responded but apparently after you hit "quote," simply because I didn't want to give the impression that I was calling it a semantic point in the demeaning sense. In my profession, semantic points are just as valid as any other sort!

This is an excellent explanation of why the dance world is not a meritocracy (and I suspect that few on here would argue with that!) –– but it does not follow that, if one erroneously believed that "examination and/or demonstrated achievement in the field" were the only factors considered when dancers get promoted, one would be misapplying the term by referring to that as a "meritocracy." The latter is what I understood you to be saying. Again, sorry if I wasn't following your point.

So is your point a semantic one, that it's incorrect to use the term "meritocracy" to refer to a system in which dancers are promoted based on talent and ability, because they are not at the top of the system? The Wikipedia article you cite goes on to state: "Advancement in such a system is based on performance measured through examination and/or demonstrated achievement in the field where it is implemented." This suggests to me that meritocracy is a term referring to the system as a whole ("Advancement in such a system..."), not just to those who end up on top (and are ADs even really on top?). After all, most soloists were once corps; most principals were once soloists, and many ADs were themselves once principals. The whole system, if it's one in which promotion is based on talent and ability, would rightly be referred to as a meritocracy. Is that incorrect? I'm sorry if im being obtuse in not following your point.