Marc Haegeman

It's just a detail of course, but Xiomara Reyes danced from 1992 until she joined ABT this season, with the Royal Ballet of Flanders in Belgium, where she eventually became first soloist (by comparison she only danced two years in the youth section of the Cuban Ballet). I always liked her; nice quality of movement and everything, but like so many interesting talents in the Royal Ballet of Flanders, she was just wasted. Last saw her here as Florine in the Blue Bird pas de deux, outclassing about everybody in the cast, including the Aurora. I hope she will be doing fine in ABT.

OK, Lovebird, I understand what you mean and I guess it’s clear to everybody (and before anybody blames Grigorovich of all the plagues that befell the Bolshoi ) that if Giselle didn’t show Maximova at her best, this had nothing at all to do with Grigorovich. Maximova learned the role very early in her career under the guidance of Ulanova and although she danced and developed it throughout her career, basically her witty and mischievous character remained alien to Giselle’s world. Yet, it was much less of a failure than to have her cast as Phrygia in Grigorovich’s "Spartacus" (which is also what Bessmertnova danced - not Aegina).

Three interesting Bolshoi ballerinas and also three different ones. Nadezhda Pavlova is much younger than the other two and studied in Perm (she was born in Ufa), while Maximova and Bessmertnova are Moscow graduates. Both Maximova and Pavlova are soubrettes, the former more comical, the latter more lyrical. Both were in fact in the wrong place in the Bolshoi once dominated by Yuri Grigorovich, although I guess that Pavlova’s career suffered more from this than Maximova’s, who had already made a name for herself before Grigorovich took over. Maximova was the ideal Kitri. She is arguably also a more flexible personality and found in the later stages of her career an outlet for her comical talent with other choreographers like Briantsev. She formed with her husband Vladimir Vasiliev one of the most legendary partnerships in the history of Soviet ballet. There was no repertoire in the Bolshoi that honored Pavlova’s particular gifts and that she still left a mark in the company (and on the international stages on tours) was mainly thanks to the fact she was supported by Bolshoi legend, Marina Semyonova, who prepared all the great classical roles with her. She was an excellent Giselle, Juliet and Nikiya, but she would have been an even greater Coppélia or Lise. While Bessmertnova, married to Grigorovich or not, she is still one of the greatest Russian Romantic ballerinas ever (I'm just being personal when I say that I rank her much higher than Makarova). A tremendous Giselle. However, Grigorovich cast her in almost everything he did, which probably caused more harm than good although it should in no way detract from her real achievements and qualities. Fact is also that the existing (late) videos (with the exception maybe of Bessmertnova’s Giselle with Lavrovsky) convey any of the magic of her live appearances.

Yes, Gudanov was wonderful in "Spectre", a good light jump and a really lovely quality of the arms. It's a difficult thing to bring off, but he certainly did. Interesting to note that Yanin is already in his early thirties.

I agree, Goriacheva is an interesting type of dancer, too. Short, sparkling and swift, a very fluent way of moving. Her variation in "Flames of Paris" every time brought the house down (and for one not even half full, that's quite something). Great virtuoso dancing combined with irresistible girlish charm (Maximova is not far away).

With the London season coming to an end, the discussion about the Bolshoi Ballet has quieted down, but I just wanted to add that I enjoyed watching a few performances of the second and third program at Drury Lane Theatre a lot. In fact, I haven't enjoyed Russian ballet this much in ages. The company is in good shape, the spirit seems to be fine, the soloists (women and men) and corps remain truly first rate, and (no matter what was said about the bits and pieces) the programs were good fun. Among the many memorable moments I’d like to single out the appearances of Anastasia Goriacheva, a young soubrette-type dancer, excellent in "Flower Festival of Genzano", but quite unforgettable in the dazzling "Flames of Paris" pas de deux; Maria Alexandrova, whose steely strength and amazing jumps paid off in the "Don Quixote" and "Le Corsaire" pas de deux; and the stylish Andrei Uvarov, a beautiful danseur noble who never danced better then during this engagement. Director Boris Akimov said they will come back to London in Summer 2002, and this time in full force and to Covent Garden. I sure hope they will.

It's hard to please everybody. When the Bolshoi only brings short pieces and pas de deux to London, they are criticized for not bringing full-length, evening-filling ballets; when the Kirov brings several runs of full-length ballets for four or five weeks in a row they are criticized for having "Swan Lake" and "Beauty" again. When they organize an evening of three Neumeier works, some find they should better do a mixed bill... I always thought that whatever a great company brings, is a unique event, simply because it carries the mark of that company. Ballet would be a rather dull affair if companies would only stick to what was especially made for and only performed by them (We might have a couple of national conflicts on our hand as well, trying to sort out the origin of some of these works, but that’s another matter ). Besides, as the numerous threads on this board about "Giselle" launched by Alexandra have amply proven, there is no such thing as "Giselle", yet there are several different Giselles, and it will take more than a lifetime to ever grow tired of watching this ballet (While after two takes I was already tired of Preljocaj's "Parc", but that’s only personal). I can understand that story ballets are not anyone’s cup of tea, but please don’t tell me that they are all the same.

A.M. They used to tour with Eifman, Petit, Vinogradov, and things like that in the eighties, but that's definitely from another era.

Something like that, yes. We had it back in 1993 too, when Asylmuratova was announced for the Kirov tour in London, months ahead, while she gave birth to her baby in the first week of that tour. As if they didn't know...

That's very true, Ann, but they know what they are doing. And it's not the first time Asylmuratova's name is used for box-office appeal.

Isabelle Guérin of the Paris Opera Ballet comes to mind. She perfectly succeeds in giving her Giselle a contemporary look without appearing iconoclastic or plain pretentious. OK, the scene was partly set by the modern look (without the traditional costumes and headdresses) of the often criticized production the Paris Opera used to have, but it was nonetheless Guérin’s approach and natural flair which made the difference and although I haven’t seen her in it, am quite sure she would make the same impression in the traditional version. All dust and cobwebs were blown away simply by being and yet I don’t think that anybody ever was in doubt that we were watching Giselle. That was made clear from the very beginning by Guérin’s respect of style, theatrical feeling, and unerring sense of drama. (Interesting to note that Guérin was coached by Yvette Chauviré, the French Giselle par excellence, who as she declared let her complete freedom to build her character.) Recently, I watched a similar attempt in the context of the Kirov production by Diana Vishneva. However, in her case her efforts to update Giselle (or whatever she may have meant to) resulted in my view in the loss of the character altogether. Brilliantly danced it may all have been, but everything about this Giselle looked mannered and contrived. There was very little respect of style and she looked cut off from the traditional surroundings of the other characters and the production. Giving Giselle a contemporary look doesn’t mean turning her into Carmen.

A bit in the margin of this thread, but it struck me that in several articles looking ahead at the Kirov tour the name of Altynai Asylmuratova is mentioned. Scheduled months ago to appear just once in London, in the final "Manon", Asylmuratova’s performance is still presented as the major event of the whole engagement. I gather the evening is nearly sold out on the strength of her name, and I hate to disappoint anyone, but according to a very reliable source Altynai Asylmuratova will NOT be in London for this tour.

Isn't this the world turned upside down? There is something I've missed here, but can somebody please explain me why "being too classical" is (in the contect of the Kirov Ballet) all of the sudden a shortcoming?

Michael, as we know Nina Ananiashvili has many engagements outside the Bolshoi, and she is merely fulfilling them. Thanks for some positive sounds from the London front .

I see, Alexandra. Well, it's "new" alright, but I still have to find out about that "improved" part .

Considering the context (the Kirov Ballet), I wouldn't think of it this way.

Interesting to read that Zakharova is already considered "too classical" now

Thanks, Alexandra. According to the complete score a variation of that lost pas de deux is now danced by Albrecht in the beginning of the ballet (after the waltz). The pas de deux comes indeed right after Giselle has been crowned queen of the harvest and before the galop.

We shouldn't forget that the original choregraphy included a second pas de deux for Giselle and Albrecht/Loys (the "pas des vendanges") in the 1st Act, replaced by Petipa with the famous variation and now partly lost (?). It would be interesting to know how this one fitted in the story.

The earlier Bolshoi video with Natalia Bessmertnova and Mikhail Lavrovsky is an interesting document. It dates from the early seventies and is much preferable to the later “Bolshoi at the Bolshoi” film, as it gives a better idea why Bessmertnova was one of the greatest Russian Giselles of the last decades. The old-fashioned filming style and the sets give it somewhat of a postcard-image at times, while the very short skirts of the girls in the 1st look rather funny, but the dancing leaves little or nothing to be desired. Especially the 2nd act is breathtaking. Also some great dancing by Lavrovsky (There is no peasant pas de deux).

I guess we can’t prevent stars of the Bolshoi to appear under the name "Stars of the Bolshoi" . But I understand what you mean, Mussel. We had them too, these small, indifferent Russian or Eastern European touring companies, often led by a few (sometimes former) members of Kirov or Bolshoi, profiteering from the name and fame of the big ones and giving everyone concerned a rough time. But let's not confuse things, that's something completely different we're talking about. This is the real Bolshoi Ballet appearing at Drury Lane Theatre, soloists, corps and orchestra (they even have backdrops). I fail to see why they should be stopped from using the name Bolshoi, simply because they don’t bring full length ballets, and I don't understand what the British press is trying to prove by opposing the two companies (or the tour organizers for that matter) to such extent. The Bolshoi soloists now appearing at Drury Lane are the same they were raving about in 1999: Lunkina, Alexandrova, Antonicheva, Filin, Uvarov... And they are as least as worthwile as those untouchable Kirov favourites. But you are right, Mary, winning and losing makes for better copy and snappier headlines.

Just a short reaction to the article by Debra Craine in The Times (linked by Dirac) looking ahead at the coming Bolshoi and Kirov engagements in London. It’s fine with me that the British press is trying very hard to present this whole thing as a duel between the Russian companies, but what I find less plausible is that between (or in) the lines one can perceive a certain tendency against the Bolshoi. OK, a program 'Stars of'-style with highlights and pas de deux may not be the best way to appreciate a company like the Bolshoi, but is it really necessary to emphasize the negative sides in such a way? Do we need to remind again that under Fadeyechev and Vasiliev the Bolshoi was restoring its classics, was dancing among others "Agon", "Symphony in C" and "Mozartiana", was acquiring contemporary works, was in other words 'broadening its vision' as much as the Kirov? Vasiliev’s "Swan Lake" was a costly mistake, but I really fail to see what 'this critical hostility' during the Bolshoi’s 1999 London stint was about? Aren’t we forgetting that we were seeing a company again in glowing form, full of good spirit and with (old and new) talent aplenty? The Bolshoi has been going through unwelcome and regrettable times, but is that a reason to blame the company for this or to forget about its (near) past? If (heaven forbid!!) similar events should occur at the Mariinsky, Jewels or Manons notwithstanding, the result would be the same: they, too, would be in deep.... Any comments? [ 04-23-2001: Message edited by: Marc Haegeman ]

Because he is a good dancer ;)

Thanks for the quotes, Doug. It's very interesting to note that Théophile Gautier's "Les Beautés de l'Opéra de Paris" from 1844 is already different in many points from the libretto.

Jane, according to Théophile Gautier there was only one daisy in the beginning.