Marc Haegeman

I don't want to rain on anybody's parade here, but I can't seem to share this almost unanimous enthusiasm about Ratmansky. His success at Bolshoi was to a great extent conditioned by the stars he worked with: Zakharova, Alexandrova, Osipova. There are no ballerinas of their caliber at ABT presently. Except for Vishneva, but if you saw what Ratmansky "choreographed" for her in Pierrot Lunnaire, you wouldn't be holding your breath waiting for their next effort.

In general, Ratmansky is not about the theatrical, dramatical side of the ballet, but the pure dance (as he understands it). Again, just look at the atrocious Cinderella that he dumped on Mariinsky - for me it's absolutely the worst version of the Prokofiev masterpiece that I have ever seen (and I've seen quite a few).

It's possible that he would be able to contribute to the ABT Fall Season, but full-length "drama ballet" are not really his forte.

A lot of people in Moscow are really happy to see him go, so I've been wondering why everybody seems to be so upbeat about him on this side of the Atlantic.

Is that so? Besides he only goes as artistic director, he remains as choreographer.

Ratmansky never worked with Zakharova. Nor did he hardly ever create anything for individuals within the Bolshoi context: he created for the company. Bright Stream, Bolt, Le Corsaire, Flames of Paris, are all full-length often very theatrical, dramatic company ballets; Card Game is a one-act piece, but also essentially a company ballet. His creation for Vishneva is flawed, simply because Ratmansky had to create a star vehicle for her, which is not his favorite way of working.

Osipova danced Kitri, Gamzatti, In The Upper Room, Giselle, Sylphide... I don't see what that has to do with Ratmansky's success, except that he has an eye for talent (although in her case it's that obvious one really needs to be blind not to acknowledge it and give her the chances.)

all i've seen is a fascinating film, about which alexandra can doubtless say more, of Henning Kronstam's rehearsing his production for a danish tv documentary - Heidi Ryom and Lloyd Riggins dance the leads. i spoke casually and briefly w/ Hubbe about the upcoming production and he seemed to indicate that his staging would be based on Kronstam's but i may have misunderstood him; the conversation was brief and in passing during the intermission of Woetzel's NYCB farewell perf.

That's definitely one of the best documentary films about Giselle ever.

the interventional pas de trois is from the original Taglioni scheme so far as i can tell. it is a magical and mysterious in its way. the last act of LA BAYADERE originally included a similar pas de trois (or pas de deux a trois) when Nikiya comes phantomlike between Gamzatti and Solor in the last act as a Shade only Solor can see. the 'reconstruction' of this trio by Vikharev in his production of the ballet was one of its more memorable highlights: it's all shown in full light and yet one suspends disbelief and understands that only Solor can see this white-clad shadwo, if mem. serves in this act Nikya's Shade is costumed with the sleeve/veils of the ensemble Shades from the Kingdom of the Shades scene.

The Shade pas à trois in the Paris "La Sylphide" wasn't originally there. Yet it was interpolated some ten years after the premiere by Taglioni from his own 3-Act ballet "L'Ombre" created for St. Petersburg.

Nikiya does indeed appear in her Shade costume during the trio with Gamzatti and Solor in the Vikharev reconstruction.

Nanarina, of course the current Paris Sylphide by Lacotte involved a great deal of research, but choreographically it is still in essence a pastiche from the 1970's, while interpretation-wise it doesn't carry the same weight of tradition as the Danish version.

Yes, it's true, most productions abroad are made by Danes, but I guess they feel much more free to experiment when working abroad and with foreign dancers. When Peter Schaufuss made his version of La Sylphide with the RDB som 15 years ago, he met a lot of opposition among both dancers and from parts of the audience too, who thought he was not true to the original. He didn't experiment a lot, but he changed the dress of the sylphs, with more laces, foliage on the skirt and a string of pearls round the neck, a bit like a porcelaine figure from the early 19. century. The Sylph was very bourgeois. In the time after the premiere those extra features "disappeared" one by one, and when Schaufuss left the post as balletmaster, they turned back to the old sets and costumes. He made the same production in Berlin a couple of years ago (I haven't seen it, but it looks like the same from the pictures and the description), and it runs for the third season now and seems to be a succes. A foreign company and a foreign audience are more open, but maybe also less critical because they don't know the original. They can't compare.

They can 't compare, that's true. Moreover in some cases it's really about small things that change. That Zibrova at the end of the ballet briefly lifted three inches of her skirt to reveal a sylph's tutu was something that many of the audience members didn't even notice, let alone that they would question it.

Thank you, Marc, for linking to that interview. I was moved by her tribute to Nureyev and intrigued by the list of choreographers she says she preferred at that stage of her career: the "theatrical" classics, (Giselle, R&J, Manon, l'Alresiene, Notre Dame de Paris) and also Robbins, Forsythe, Tharp, Preljocaj. And I loved her emphasis on the unified training of the Paris "ecole," with its emphasis on purity and "no cheating."

It would be wonderful to have the chance to watch her working with dancers on Robbins. Her temperament seems so different -- cooler, more deliberate -- from Verdy, though each is intelligent and quite thoughtful about their art.

You're welcome, Bart. Actually, Guérin's preferences, tastes and emphases were generally shared by most of her generation at the Paris Opera. You might want to check out interviews with Platel, Maurin, Legris, Hilaire etc and they all more or less fit the same artistic profile (not that there's anything wrong with that.)

There is an old Dance View interview with Isabelle Guérin online from late 2000 when she was still dancing with the POB.

Thank for that highly interesting information! It's certainly a very radical interpretation to make Madge an attractive woman, and it makes it more believable that she and James have had some sort of relationship in the past. But somehow I think it blurs the contrasts in the cast: It's a giant step from having Madge played by a man, as she was by the premiere in 1836, to letting her be a young and attractive woman. It makes the psychology very modern and less archetypical, less fairytalelike. In my opinion it narrows down the interpretation instead of broadening it. (Madge was, I must say, also played by female dancers in Bournonville's time, but she was always very witch-like.)

It also takes a lot of weight from the contrast between Effy and the Sylph, when you let in a third "rival". Somehow I could imagine that it makes the dramatic balance topple from being a conflict between the safe, wellknown world, represented by Effy, and the dangerous, but compelling forest world, represented by Madge and the Sylph, to being a conflict between to forces of nature, which leaves Effy a bit lost on the sidelines. Maybe I'm just influenced by the Danish tradition, where a lot of effort is done to make Effy and Gurn real and likable characters and thus representing a true alternative to the Sylph-world.

But it's really interesting to hear about these different interpretations! It shows that the ballet is full of possibilities. Maybe it's easier for not-Danish companies to make these experiments because they are not bound by tradition. And I think it's good so, because it helps highlighting some aspects of the story which might be overlooked in Copenhagen because of the closeness to the subject. But also in Copenhagen I think they are very good at keeping the ballet alive: none of the many performances I have seen of La Sylphide with the RDB have been alike. It seems that the limits of experimenting with the charakters and their psychology are very wide, even in the same production. Only when it comes to the more general setting there are very definite limitations. And it probably has to be so in the house where the Sylph was born and kept alive for 172 years. Like Nikolaj Hübbe said once and I quote from memory: There's no need to add colours to a Rembrandt.

A new book on La Sylphide has been published in Denmark some months ago:

Anne Middelboe Christensen: "Sylfiden findes. En svævebog". It's a terrific book for all lovers of Bournonville's Sylphide, the only problem for most members of this board is that it is in Danish. But if you understand just a little scrap of Danish, the book is a treasurebox full of facts about the history of the ballet and it's interpreters during time, AND some absolutely fantastic black and white stage- and backstagephotos made especially for this book by the photographer Jan Grarup, who normally makes warzone-photos. There are many pictures by other photographers too. The book is worth having for the pictures alone.

You can see some of the photos if you zap around in the homepage for the book: Anne Middelboe Christensen: Sylfiden. En svævebog

The title means something like: "The Sylph exists. A floating book".

The last word "svævebog" is an invention of the author and doesn't exist in Danish, but of course it's an allution to the floating world of the sylphs.

Of course, as you can see Anne, it are Danes (Kobborg, Englund) who initiate and suggest these different interpretations, be it on non-Danish ground. In Kobborg's production staged for the Bolshoi I didn't think though that Effy and Gurn were particularly strong or likeable characters, they seemed to disappear somewhat within sets and costumes, if you know what I mean. I didn't really care what became of them. Yet perhaps that had also something to do with the casting.

Thanks for the hint about the book!

The Raymonda released on DVD? Can't wait to see it Allash's beautiful lines again. I remember that she almost fell after stepping on Jean de Brienne's cape during the pas de deux, he caught her but they missed a lift. I don't remember who danced de Brienne, Filin or Uvarov?

It's the Paris filmed Spartacus with Acosta/Kaptsova/Volchkov/Allash that is due for DVD release.

Maria Allash was absolutely beautiful in Aegina, what a fine dancer she is - I only saw her Raymonda when it was shown live on the web a few years ago.

Ohh, if only that one would make it to a commercial release...

Helene, it's due for DVD release.

Are my Anglo-American ballet roots showing?

Should they be?

At the risk of directing more ire in my direction, there's the matter of Acosta

Trust me, nobody is angry.

I haven't the screening but I saw one of the Spartacus' performance live in Paris, and I think it is worth a look.

I wasn't very keen to go when I bought the ticket but it's definitively something to see as part of ballet's history. And Carlos Acosta is really exceptional.

Spot on, cygneblanc - yet for some people it takes time to grasp that personality and talent does transcend limitations of choreography and stage.

And now that Svetlana Zakharova dances the courtesan, you may really forget that Aegina is ugly .

Oh, I agree. In Aegina I'm guessing that Zakharova has finally a role vulgar enough to suit her.

As for the screening itself, I'll admit that despite all the raves addressed to Acosta, I just couldn't bring myself to cough up $20 for Khachaturian's music, Virsaladze's designs, Grigorovich's thumpingly macho histrionics, the excess of unison dancing and all that running at each other with outstretched arms. As for Aegina and that staff, I've always done my best to blot it out of my memory. Thanks, but I'll watch him in other roles.

Incidentally, is there a Grigorovich variation or pas de deux in which the heroine doesn't wrap her forearm around her head?

Rest assured this DVD doesn't carry any obligation to purchase it.

(Gosh, watching that reminds me just how much I hate everything about this ballet. )

We should cherish this recording for what it is: a truly magnificent performance of the title role.

Spartacus tests to the limit Dickie Buckle's belief that "Ballet must be BEAUTIFUL!" Spatacus is a really ugly ballet, but it IS great.

Volchkov looks like a remarkably beautiful Crassus -- it may work. (It's Aegina who has to be ugly.) And Acosta looks just from this clip ideal for the role -- born for it. His heart is in it.

Ugly in character, yes, not in appearance. And now that Svetlana Zakharova dances the courtesan, you may really forget that Aegina is ugly .

whetherwax asked another question: if not Raymonda, what is the "most demanding role"?

I'd love to hear what people think about this. Maybe, however, we need to resolve a prior question: What does "demanding" or even "exhausting" mean in this context?

Technically difficult bravura dancing, broken up by periods of rest on- or off-stage, might be less exhausting for the dancer in good condition than sustaining a character like Giselle, with all the nuances and subtleties which that role demands.

Olga Chenchikova of the Kirov once mentioned Raymonda as the role demanding most stamina, not only because of the endless variations and dancing, but also because when she is not dancing the positions and the way she stands need to be correct. In other words there are no real periods of rest. By contrast, Kitri leaves a lot more freedom in this respect.

One of Kobborg's idea is that Madge realises that she's got what she has spent so long planning for and that now her life is empty - which would explain her look of regret. I'm sure that Englund has done the 'I was once a Sylph' interpretation before the Royal Ballet production - but she doesn't always do it. I think Kobborg is happy to leave a degree of ambiguity to give the audience the chance to read into it what most resonates with each individual - which is fine by me.

As to the degree others are allowed their own interpretations: I've just been reading a new book by Thomas Lund and Ole Norlyng in which Gudrun Bojesen talks about the experience of dancing the Sylph with Nikolai Hubbe, Mads Blangstrup and Lund: they are all quite different and as it's Hubbe's production and he coached the other two, evidently they're allowed to find their own way through. (And incidentally it's fascinating that Hubbe, who believes the Sylph is only in James's head, makes Bojesen herself believe that she has no existence and is being imagined by him.) Certainly the Royal Ballet's sylphs are all different from each other. The Madges were all coached by Englund and they all do the ending differently, so far as I remember.

The "I was once a Sylph too" interpretation was done by Irina Zibrova in Johan Kobborg's staging for the Bolshoi. In Zibrova's case it was intriguingly apt - being still a rather young woman and not at all ugly or repulsive. She grew very tender at the end and seemed to regret the fatal outcome. Kobborg also sort of suggests a romantic relationship between James and Madge, the double outcast - thrown out of the household and out of his heart.

When Gennady Yanin performed Madge on the second night at the Bolshoi these ideas were wisely left out and he played it in the more traditional way.

(Gosh, watching that reminds me just how much I hate everything about this ballet. )

We should cherish this recording for what it is: a truly magnificent performance of the title role.

Thanks for the review, Marc - I was jumping up and down in my seat waiting to hear how that debut went.

It is often said that these Grigorovich characters are one-dimensional, but one really starts to doubt such statements when true personalities sink their teeth in them.

I like how you said that and I agree totally.

Thanks, Ostrich. Bearing in mind that they filmed Acosta's Spartacus last year, there's very little or no chance at all they will ever film Vasiliev for commercial release.

clips on youtube - search on: bolshoi amsterdam spartak

Some truly 1st class clips. Give a perfect idea of what the performances were like... Long live youtube!

Well, unfortunately it isn't possible for me to get there today, so I'm a bit sad now..

Did you go, Marc? If so, how was it? I'm quite curious about Ivan Vasiliev in the role..

Sorry for not replying sooner, Lidewij. I was just finishing my review of it. You can find it here:

The Bolshoi Ballet finds a new Spartacus.

Is the Bolshoi going to release an Osipova/Vasiliev Don Q commercially?

There is always hope

I've just finished re-watching the Kirov Don Quixote (Terekhova, Ruzimatov) and also will be looking again at my copies of:

-- the State Perm Ballet ersion (Ananiashvili Fadeyetchev),

-- the ABT with Harvey and Baryshnikov,

-- and the Austrailian with Nureyev.

I have not seen the Bolshoi version with Nadezhda Pavlova and Gordeev.

Which of these performances do you like best --and which would your recommend to, for instance, someone who could purchase only one? Or are there any other's I've missed that would be worth including in this list? Are there, for instance, new performances in the works for the U.S. market?

None, I'd get Osipova and Vasiliev in the Bolshoi's version, staged by Alexei Fadeyechev.

I will be seeing the Kirov in Costa Mesa, CA in October> Can anyone tell me which Kirov Giselles and Don Q's would be best to see? Would love any opinions/thoughts/advice.

Thanks!

Never buy tickets especially for a dancer when it's the Mariinsky, you will get disappointed because of last-minute cast changes But if one had the choice, I'd recommend (in this order):

October 7, 2008 7:30PM Don Quixote Novikova-Sarafanov

October 8, 2008 7:30PM Don Quixote Vishneva-Fadeev

Novikova and Sarafanov are at this moment the best Don Q couple you may get at the Mariinsky. Tereshkina is about as close to Kitri as Lopatkina is to the Blue Angel. As for Giselle, I'd rather buy that second ticket of Don Quixote instead.

Not entirely sure yet whether I will go to tomorrow's performance; I'll see.

Today's was very impressive in my opinion, but then it was my very first Spartacus, so that could kind of influence my opinion..

Yegor Khromushin did a fine job as Spartacus, his jumps were good, but on practically every pirouette he did, he almost lost his balance when he got to the 4th or 5th turn.. Whereas Crassus (Vladimir Neporozhny)'s turns were all perfectly executed, but his jumps weren't so impressive. Still, he did bring the role very well in my opinion. And he really impressed me with the ugly faces he can make.

About it seeming a strange choice for Khromushin, I really can't tell. I think he brought a convincing Spartacus today; his acting was fine to me, and his technique was okay (just the pirouettes..). Of course, I haven't seen him do anything of the classical repertoire..

Can't really say anything about Anna Antonicheva; she danced very nice, but I haven't seen enough Phrygias to really tell..

And then Maria Alexandrova was absolutely stunning; to me she was perfect as Aegina, and I just couldn't take my eyes off het whenever she was onstage.

There was one other thing I really liked about this performance; Vyacheslav Lopatin as one of the three shepherds. He was smiling constantly and seemed to have so much fun on stage, it really made my day. (The other two were Denis Medvedev and Ruslan Pronin, they were fine too, just didn't seem that enthousiastic to be on stage.)

I was a little annoyed by Antonicheva's tights that were full of makeup from the first lift, but then I had chosen for seats in the front to see the dancer's faces, so it's my own fault, really..

Well, I absolutely loved the ballet and if I ever get the chance to see it again, I certainly will. And this also made me look forward to my October trip to Moscow even more.

Alexandrova was the best part of the whole show, that's for sure. You're right. She commanded the stage like a true ballerina.

Antonicheva was not that bad as Phrygia, she knows the role inside out and was obviously helping Khromushin a great deal in the duets. He did a fine job, he survived the physical hurdles. Now he needs to find what to do with the character. But for a debut in this taxing role, he was really OK.

I can't imagine that you would want to miss tomorrow's performance.... Trust me, you're in for a treat.

I don't think that schedule indicates a lack of interest. It's pretty much what most smaller non-Balanchine companies with only a few yearly seasons do when they acquire a Balanchine ballet.

Exactly. They only have 3 or 4 programs per season. But you could ask yourself, why bother with it then? By performing a Balanchine ballet for 5 times and then drop it, you will never create genuine interest from dancers or public (let alone any amibtion to become a decent Balanchine company) - because in this case neither takes Balanchine for granted.

Marc - how much of the company was hired by Bennetts - or is she working by and large with Denvers' dancers?

Leigh, the majority of today's dancers was already there under Denvers.

Of course there are a few new faces who joined since Bennetts is directing and lest one should forget Denvers muse, Aysem Sunal, thankfully left with her master.