Mathilde K

I was talking about «La bayadère» on July 12, not the performance that was broadcast.

Finally it has been announced. I have been worrying for the last several days why the change has not been announced yet. In a characteristic move Fateev took away Stepanova's own «Swan Lake» from her. It is obvious that that was going to be a hit after her «Lake» with Parish. According to what I heard London critics are literally anxious to see Stepanova on stage. In London you will see 33 of those Swans on stage at once. A few days ago I was able to buy a lonely returned ticket for the Parish (and as I already knew, Stepanova) «Swan Lake». A God sent gift.

Today's performance was being broadcast. I saw the recording of the first «La bayadère»: indeed, everything as you wrote, in one word — a disaster. Now you know what kind of artistic "tastes" the Acting Director has. Signing up Bondareva is another proof of this.

Thank you for the reminder: I should have written "with a corps de ballet girl dancing «Swan Lake» who is not a baby ballerina fresh out of school (Stepanova began her 6th year in the company, and still a corps de ballet member despite her outstanding promise)."

It is not destroying my "sense of otherworldliness of ballet dancers", it is destroying their capabilty to become great artists. Happening to have close ties to the world of ballet going back to around 1980 I can attest that the great ballerinas I knew were extraordinary, profound human beings. There are still some. Up to this day I regularly meet truly extraordinary, serious youths at some full time ballet schools in Europe, the kind of which I never encounter elsewhere even though it is my job to work with and mentor "outstanding" youths. Many of the best don't even use ineternet. Their parents tell me they have no time or desire for it. They live and breathe exclusively ballet, as they should.

The long and unusually interesting interview taken by Maria Sidelnikova for Russian newspaper Kommersant.

He did it anything but abruptly. It was announced already two weeks ago as well as him not taking part in the premiere of «Manon». Anybody who had any connection to the theatre knew it.

Aren't you answering your own own question? In an interview that Le Riche gave on the occasion of his Farewell gala at Palais Garnier, Le Riche was almost explicit that he didn't get along with Millepied and he didn't share his vision "of what dance is". He also sounded a harsh assessment of the current situation of ballet in France and of the lowered standards in the troupe of the Opéra with an obvious implication that both were the legacy of Mme Brigitte Lefèvre's era.

I am holding my breath waiting whether the Acting Director is going to promote Stepanova before she goes on stage at Covent Garden in three weeks time as Odette. At the moment he is risking of being remembered in the future as, I guess, the only director in history who dared to come to the Royal Opera House with a corps de ballet girl dancing «Swan Lake». That could truly create a world wide sensation.

The current Acting Director in his 6 years at the helm of the Mariinsky Ballet has not contributed to developing the career of even a single graduate of the Saint Petersburg school. Except for Batoeva (nominally, promoted to Second Soloist; in reality given only inferior parts to dance), every other one is still buried in the corps de ballet. "Green light" and support are exclusively for graduates of other schools (Perm, Kiev).

The Prologue is one of the most questioned parts of Vikharev's "reconstruction". Returning to your earlier "impressions". Nadezhda Gonchar is a veteran. She graduated from the Kiev Ballet School in 1996 and then danced at the Kiev National Theatre of Opera and Ballet. In 2002 she joined the Mariinsky ballet troupe. Expecting in such circumstances that she would develop characteristics of the Saint Petersburg's school was not realistic.

Observing the constant flow of these instagram pics, facebook posts, tweeted "thoughts", makes me sad. Once Ballet was considered a High Art, and a ballerina was considered its priestess. Today it's just the same silliness and infantilism you observe everywhere around yourself.

I was responding, Helene, to You have in mind, I suppose, what this primaballerina or that premier had to say in an interview in response to questions about their own attitude to certain works presented as "reconstructions". And because Vikharev's "reconstructions" at some point generated so much debate, it is obvious that every ballet personality in Russia was supposed by media to have the opinion. In the case of Bolshoi, instead of "reconstructions" I would rather employ the term: "re-creations" or "stylizations". I love them a lot, and I am delighted each time I have an opportunity to watch any of them, yet it would never occur to me to mistake them for the "authentic original versions". And at Bolshoi they are not presented as such as far as I know. Vikharev, at least initially, aimed at genuine reconstructions, and not of lost works, but of the staple of the classical repertoire. The actual results were only partially successful. Some parts were pure guesswork, as later research showed — done under mistaken assumptions. That would be fine if the results were not heralded left and right as the "authentic original versions". According to my knowledge, such claims zealously advanced in the media and attempts to discredit the critics damaged the credibility of the "reconstruction movement". On the other hand, the amount of discussion Vikharev's efforts generated I consider to be very beneficial. It certainly led to some serious research into all aspects of the transmission of the choreographic text by competent ballet historians, and this can only be welcome. This work is still continued by Fullington in the West and certain balletologists in Russia.

I value what he has been doing, I am also very well aware of his personal bias. He is very knowledgeable in the area of the history of ballet music but not in the history of choreography, Stepanov notation, "Harvard manuscripts", etc. The professional ballet historians involved in the debate are anything but against reconstructions, they are against simplistic approaches, and they are offended when questionable work is presented to the public as "authentic" and "original version".

This is totally inaccurate. The person who was in charge of the repertoire policies at Mariinsky at the time was very much pushing the reconstructions and was against continuing using the traditional Kirov versions. Vikharev's versions (as they should have been called) were discontinued essentially because the "reconstructions" have been questioned by professional ballet historians on multiple points. Mariinsky dancers are highly trained professionals. They are following instructions given by a choreographer to the minutest detail, certainly not "questioning" or entering into discussions with the choreographer.

I am not "referring to the fact that Sergei Vikharev wasn't allowed to restore the choreography documented in the Stepanov notation 100%". (Not allowed by whom?) If you are interested in the issues surrounding the reconstructions and Stepanov notation, it is best to study the works written by professionals on the subject. Start from articles by Doug Fullington who has been a prime authority on the Sergeev Harvard Collection. Detailed critical analyses appeared in Russian balletological publications.

The reconstruction of «Sleeping Beauty» was seriously flawed, with arbitrary decisions falsely presented as "returning to the original". The main critics were, in fact, competent ballet historians. Are you aware of this?

Now you are discovering some well guarded secrets of Mariinsky Ballet.... Chebykina is a recent addition to the troupe. She graduated from the Kiev Ballet School. From the moment she arrived last year she has been on the fast track to Soloist despite all her obvious deficiencies. Oksana Marchuk, who is much better in every respect, unfortunately has been buried deep in the corps. Unless Yuri Fateev undergoes some miraculous conversion, her future in the troupe as well as of other Vaganova graduates, I am afraid, looks bleak. Concerning Anastasia Kolegova — yes, this was her debut as Nikiya. She danced Gamzatti many times.

The "survival" rates of such videos are extremely dependent on where the links are being posted. Doing this here, or on the British ballet forum, is almost a guarantee of their rapid extinction. Otherwise they may be available for a very long period of time. People recording at several Russian theatres do this with full knowledge of the management. And the whole (ballet) world is watching those Russian ballerinas. It is hard to think of better publicity. Every ballet goer knows that those YouTube videos are not at all comparable to seeing the performance in person and the availability of ballet recordings can only boost the numbers of ballet theatre patrons.

You have a very good eye... I personally like her delicate "doll-like" qualities. This may be one of the reasons why she has been enjoying such a strong support from Yuri Fateev (Vladimir Shklyarov being her husband could be another reason).

Nothing. You are too late. When I saw the posted link to the YouTube video I instantly knew that was a bad idea. Somebody who reads this forum contacted the Bolshoi, or even works for them or for Maillot. The same happened to the videos of the two recent ROH performances at the Bolshoi. The moment they were posted on the British ballet forum, not much later they were all gone.

I thought she was scheduled to take part only in the opening night gala and the last show of the tour. Is she in Paris at all? Sans Francisco Ballet – Gala d’ouverture des Étés de la Danse 2014 The whole world is apparently talking about our "star of social networks".

I heard very complimentary reports from multiple sources about the gala. A Russian source (close to Bolshoi), said after the gala: "a very strong troupe". The same source has been much less complimentary about the current quality of the Opéra ballet troupe. I haven't heard anything about Messmer however. Is she in Paris?

Krysanova is much to be preferred in classical repertoire. Shipulina's forte is Modern and Contemporary.

Shirinkina is expecting. Yuri Fateev has employed the best Mariinsky pedagogues to develop what she (and his other favorite), were missing.