Marc Haegeman

Olga Moiseyeva, who coaches among others Asylmuratova, Zakharova, Amosova, and Zhelonkina, is on the record for saying: "We behave like a museum. We try to keep it old-fashioned so that the spirit of the ballet won't be lost. If you don't like the idea of a museum, don't come to us." I particularly like that last sentence.

You made a point there, Eugene. I never thought of it that way. Do you suppose the Russians also bear a grudge against the French? After all, Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812.

Dale, I'm afraid it's really just a rumor ... but, who knows?

Ann, unless I'm mistaken, I feel that so far the West has always been quite pleased to see the Russian companies bring these "old-Soviet influenced" choregraphies. People are still flocking to see the Kirov's "Swan Lake" or "Bayadère", wherever they bring it. As a matter of fact we haven't been seeing much else since they first appeared in the West in the fifties and sixties. And it's not because that now all of the sudden some so-called authentic choreography is dug up that all the rest they produced in the last 80 years or so has become worthless or redundant. Besides, since when is the West so "hungry" to see Balanchine performed by a company which is about as attuned to Balanchine as New York City Ballet is to Yakobson or Zakharov? I haven't seen much proof of that, unless of course you consider the at best condescending tone of many Western critics commenting the Russian way with Balanchine a sign of hunger for more .

In the April Issue of the ‘Dancing Times’ a short article by regular Igor Stupnikov was devoted to the problems occurring at the Maryinsky Theatre last Winter. Stupnikov is mainly summarising an essay which was published in the Moscow ‘Commercial Daily’, wherein it was stated that in December leading soloists of the Kirov Ballet “rebelled” against their director Makhar Vaziev. The initiators are said to be artists of the older generation, foremost Zelensky, Makhalina, and Ruzimatov. Bascially, complaints were voiced against the authoritarian style of the management; the endless tours causing fatigue; the choice of repertoire (too much Balanchine); the favoritism for the youngsters. Valery Gergiev is said to have named three candidates for the succession: Dmitri Bryantsev, chief-choreographer of among others the Stanislavsky Theatre in Moscow; Nikita Dolgushin, former Kirov star and now professor; and Igor Zelensky. Anyway, the conflict has been settled, everything remained the same, and according to Stupnikov the whole affair was unsuccessful because of the lack of a proper leader. Stupnikov comments rather contemptuously: “If anyone would have joined with the opposition, it would be old-timers: the theatre had renounced the Soviet version of “The Sleeping Beauty” on which an entire generation of dancer grew up (...). In doing so, the theatre fell out with nearly the entire population over the age of fifty.” Yet, he has to admit that this whole unhealthy affair, quieted down for now, shook everybody up. And stars are still fleeing or are rumoured to leave the company: Samodurov went to Amsterdam, Ivanchenko and Batalov are said to be looking for a position in a Scandinavian company, and rumours also have it that Diana Vishneva (who according to the article, actively supported the rebels) is going to sign a contract with ABT.

Daria Pavlenko hasn't been doing too well lately. She was indisposed and had to be replaced on all the Kirov tours this year. I hope for all her admirers that she makes it for London.

Thank you for this thoroughly fascinating review, Andrei ! You also saw "Raymonda", I believe...

Oh yes, AntoP, we do read your report from fair Verona. It's moreover interesting to hear that you managed to see Malakhov and Saidakova, two excellent former soloists with the Moscow Classical Ballet. I used to like Saidakova a lot when she was dancing with the Moscow company. She is a graduate from Perm and started working in Berlin sometime in the mid-nineties. You don't consider it a good idea that smaller companies have guest performers? Let me tell you, here in Belgium, we have a small company, which doesn't rely on prestigious guests for the same reason Estelle mentioned. Yet, the level is still depressingly low and we don't get good solo dancing either. At least you got a fantastic leading couple (I'll bet you even got a real orchestra?) Thanks for the review.

Alexandra, I was aware that Natalia Makarova made a lot of impact here in the West, but I didn’t know that they even went as far as to consider her ”the epitome of technique” and “the ideal classical ballerina.” I always thought she was essentially a romantic ballerina, but there we go. (That’s also why some of us have mixed feelings about her “Swan Lake” I suppose.) Part of the problem here in the West is, that for many years we have been treated too much to a one-sided diet of Soviet ballet. The few dancers we knew here, easily became the standard – up to a point that’s understandable. But what I fail to see is why Makarova’s reading of “Swan Lake” has gained such a status and became the typically Soviet interpretation of that ballet. That sounds a bit too limited and over-generalized. “Swan Lake” has never been Makarova’s best role and her Black Swan was always a weak moment (Gennady Smakov, who really cannot be suspected of any feelings of antipathy toward Makarova, devotes a few paragraphs to this particular problem of hers.) Back in Russia there were many other ballerinas (Plisetskaya, Bessmertnova, Osipenko, Evteeva to name but a few) who made the role their own or who gave different readings and provided other insights, that were at least as, if not more fascinating than hers, and surely more complete by technical finish (quite a few of them can be seen on film). By comparison Makarova's Swan can be criticized for lacking grandeur and the proper physicality for the role, while too much dancing is undoubtedly obscured by tics and mannerisms (which I don’t think has ever been a characteristic of Vaganova schooling, emphasizing on the contrary clarity and purity of line.) That this particular reading of “Swan Lake” gained such a reputation in the West is indeed more than just a little puzzling. Re Ulanova, difficult question Alexandra – I’ve never seen a complete “Swan Lake”. But without wanting to cut on her (although her reputation is undoubtedly inflated by myth-making), I always considered Ulanova artistically too much of an outsider to be labelled typical.

One more thing about Makarova in Swan Lake. The trouble with these defecting Soviet dancers like Nureyev and Makarova was that they were soon considered as true representatives, as models of the whole Soviet school, which they were not. And it’s even still working now: Mary considers Makarova’s selfish interpretation of Swan Lake as typically Russian. One can surely argue about her qualities as Odette/Odile and for some she looks mannered and over-stretched because she was technically too weak for it. In any case, and whatever her artistic merits, Makarova was not a typically Soviet swan. Those were still dancing on the banks of the Neva or in the shade of the Kremlin

It’s good that you mention the fairies in “The Sleeping Beauty”, Alexandra, because their variations may count as supreme examples of emploi. They need to be danced by girls who are physically suited, and what’s more, according to Karsavina, they were even tailored to the exact personalities of the dancers who created them. And what happens now, in one of the first casts of the new/old “Sleeping Beauty” at the Maryinsky Theatre last year the second variation in the Prologue (Coulante, which is an allegro variation with many jumps and turns) was danced by Maya Dumchenko, one of the tallest dancers in the company, who is anything but suited for allegro parts. While the third variation (the Breadcrumb Fairy, which is softer and more gentle) was danced by Yulia Kassenkova, who is short and solid, and an ideal allegro dancer. Had they wanted to do it wrong intentionally, they wouldn’t have done it differently. But then again, a lyrical dancer like Dumchenko is cast as Gamzatti and Kitri, so who is still surprised about what they going to find next?

Andrei, you can find a review of the performance on this site: http://www.balletalert.com/reviews/r99/dut...hnationalsl.htm

Fact remains that there was more obvious care of emploi (whatever it's origin) in Russian ballet before than there is now. Andrei, by giving the example of Larissa Lezhnina I only wanted to show that somebody of her generation still recognizes emploi. And besides: she readily admits she is not suited for it, and maybe she never asked for it, but she DOES dance Odette/Odile. That's really clever.

Leigh, I don’t know of you can take the development/career of Soloviev as representative for the whole Soviet conception of emploi and typecasting. Simply because Soloviev was such an exceptional case. It seems that the Kirov never managed to figure out properly what to do with this extraordinary talent of his. In a way he was “tried out” in various kinds of roles. This caused his eternal discomfort and eventually his untimely end (in fact the same can be said about other outstanding talents like Nureyev or Baryshnikov, who have luckily chosen another way to get out of the dead-end street.)

It was in a way surprising to hear Larissa Lezhnina admit freely before she danced the lead in the Dutch National Ballet's "Swan Lake" that she wouldn't be very good in the role, because she is "not a swan." But then again, Larissa Lezhnina belongs definitely to the old school.

The Winter 1999 Issue of "Ballet Review" contains an interesting article (by Joel Lobenthal) on Agrippina Vaganova, the great Russian pedagogue of this century, who formed some of the most famous names in the history of the Kirov and Russian Ballet (Ulanova, Dudinskaya, Shelest, Moiseyeva, Kurgapkina, Kolpakova, Osipenko to name but a few). As is stated Vaganova attached great importance to emploi. Her ballerinas were only doing these roles they were suited to do, by physique, temperament and manner. As is made clear by the example given by one of her pupils, Ninella Kurgapkina, now herself a respected pedagogue for the Kirov Ballet: “She didn’t believe in the same ballerina jumping from ‘Paquita’ one night to ‘Swan Lake’ the next.” Things have certainly changed. In the Kirov Ballet nowadays there seems to be very little trace of care for emploi. Fairies are dancing swans the next day, Kitri is the same ballerina as Odette, and tall girls are selected for brilliant allegro parts. Also among the male dancers princes, toreadors, and slaves are now continually mixed, with often curious but almost always disappointing results. What could be the reasons for this relaxation of the rules of emploi? How is the situation in other companies nowadays? Is there a similar development?

Vasiliev injured his foot in the "Nutcracker" performance at the Bolshoi mentioned by Ari. The only reason why there were two replacements in the second act (Pavlova and Gordeev), was that Maximova refused to dance with another partner than her husband.

Diana Vishneva - "Prima Ballerina" ? Come again ? Prima Ballerina of what - Jeannie ? Shall we say that not everybody is that generous in his appreciation of Vishneva. In London for instance after two Kirov-tours, in which Vishneva featured prominently, some ballet fans consider her nothing but a music-hall performer, who should actually be working hardly in the corps de ballet for quite some years, watching and learning from accomplished artists. But OK, opinions differ and let's be fair and continue the discussion in five or seven years time or so. If she is lucky, she might still be dancing.

Many thanks to all for providing these fascinating impressions about the Kirov's "Beauty." But on top of all these Goldilocks wigs and cute little cherubs, I'd still like to read some more details about how it was actually danced. I suppose that besides these fearful extensions the Aurora's did have some real dance qualities as well ? Also who danced what and how in the supporting roles (the numerous fairies, Blue Bird, Florine, Cinderella etc)? Thanks again (and sorry for those of you who are already focused on "Giselle").

The "Don Quixote"-video Dale mentioned dates from 1987. It's one of those fake live performances, meaning the film was shot without an audience and the applause (together with shots of the audience) was dubbed afterwards. Otherwise it's essential watching, Savoye: it's complete, and it features Terekhova as Kitri, Ruzimatov as Basilio, Asylmuratova as Street Dancer, Makhalina as Queen of the Dryads, Chistyakova for the 4th Act variation. They sure don't make casts like this anymore... It shows an extremely young Yulia Makhalina (before her "physical transformation") in one of her first solo roles. She told me once she did the part almost without any rehearsal time, covering for another dancer who fell ill or got injured. Hope you like her feet, Savoye.

You're probably right, Estelle -- just wishful thinking. The films are shown once or twice on TV and shelved. But like I said in another thread, we balletlovers are only a minority.

Isabelle Guérin can de admired on the recent video of "Notre-Dame de Paris" (by Roland Petit), along with a magnificent male cast: Hilaire, Legris, and Le Riche. Hopefully they'll release the performance of Guérin and Legris in "L'Arlésienne" (also by Petit), recently shown on French TV, on video as well. As for Yulia Makhalina, yes that Kchessinskaya film is a indeed wonderful document, but if we start with those Russian-TV productions the list will be endless and these films are not commercially available anyway (and never will be). The video of "Swan Lake" with Makhalina and Zelensky shows the traditional Sergeyev version, not Vinogradov's.

Paul, the "plinky-plinky music" Cargill mentioned for the final act, is actually Tchaikovsky music as well. None of it was composed by Drigo (best known for his "Le Corsaire" pas de deux), who orchestrated some very little known piano pieces (mainly from Tchaikovsky's opus 72 -- ravishing to hear in their original form, by the way) as part of the rather drastic revision of the ballet (new plot by Modest Tchaikovsky, new choreography by Petipa and - let's not forget him - Ivanov, revision of the music by Drigo) for the Maryinsky in 1895 (indeed like Cargill remarked two years after Tchaikovsky had died), which actually saved the ballet from oblivion yet turned it also completely upside down. It was this 1895 production that became the standard one, but in fact very little of what we see and hear in it is what it should be. The most famous example is the popular Black Swan pas de deux, which is here danced to music originally composed for Act I (nothing to do with Odile; the pas de six Tchaikovsky wrote for the encounter between Odile and the prince at the ball was removed, and sometimes survives in a variation unhappily interpolated in the last Act.) In the Ken Russell film "The Music Lovers" there is a scene in which Tchaikovsky (Richard Chamberlain) is attending a performance of "Swan Lake": the Black Swan pas de deux (with Georgina Parkinson, I believe), quite incorrectly danced to the music from Act I, since it was only staged that way after the composer died. Anyone wishing to see a version of "Swan Lake" more respectful of Tchaikovsky's music should turn to the Vladimir Bourmeister production, which is in the repertory of among others the Paris Opera Ballet. A nice break with familiarity.

Swans danced by girls and led by a ballerina who knows her trade -- preferably Kirov/Sergeyev production. Can somebody tell me please what's wrong with that poor jester? Thanks.

Wonderful question Leigh! Thanks. Just some loose thoughts. "Classical ballet" is a very uncomfortable and vague expression because the term "classical" covers so many meanings. When it's used most people will more or less know what's meant -- more or less. Sometimes, very simplified, it's used as a synonym for ballet or dance with pointe shoes (usually distinct from "contemporary dance"). That's definitely not enough. I guess most people use "classical" (when referring to dance) in the sense of traditional and academic (following the rules), as opposite to modern or experimental (consciously trying to break the rules). Academic dance and well thought-out patterns and structures (the lines of Wilis, Swans and Bayadères; the way the ballet is structured, entrée, adage, variation 1, etc). That's possibly too limited as well. "Classical" can mean to have respect for the tradition and be formalistic, yet some will argue that it's in no way linked to style or period, because "classical" and "classicism" is an attitude, a way of perceiving art. In that sense "classical" is not limited to Petipa and followers, but can also comprise a dance piece that was created yesterday. Moreover, as such "classical" is not "dead" or "museum" art, as it is sometimes considered by its opponents. When is a ballet truly "classical art"? I always felt inclined to answer "When it's based on certain well-defined rules and thus respects tradition (academic dance) even by enriching its vocabulary, and when it has a permanent value for people, a sort of universal meaning." All that Petipa created was "classical" in the way that he used a choreographic vocabulary which is based on classical elements (academic dance, itself based on order, clear structures, harmony etc), yet not all he did gained the status of a "classic." Hopes this makes sense...