Fleurdelis

13 minutes ago, Helene said:

And Balanchine based his teaching on the lessons he learned in the Imperial School, a methodology of practice and example, but that does make what he taught the Imperial style.  And it doesn't make what Vaganova taught the Imperial style, either. 

 

Vaganova was the AD of the company as well as a teacher, and it was she who famously removed the mime from the classical ballets to make the ballets more interesting to audiences, who preferred the tricks.  If that's not a distortion of Petipa, I'm not sure what is.

Balanchine eventually developed and taught his own style, which had to take into account the available talent, traditions and schooling that he had to work with wherever he was. But, of course, his foundation was the Imperial Russian style, which then evolved under the influence of the iconoclastic Les Ballets Russes, and then through his own experience and creativity.

Vaganova did two restagings of classical ballets, and yes, she did shorten the use of mime, since it looked archaic and unintelligible to the more modern audiences. The dancing in the scene where Siegfried meets Odette that we see in most versions of Swan Lake today is Vaganova's creation, before than it was all mimed. But the Petipa style was never defined by the mime in his ballets, rather by the grand corps scenes and iconic PDDs. In any case, staging a new version of a ballet is not the same as distorting a style. And as for tricks, they were well liked by Petipa as well, one of his favorite ballerinas Legnani was famous for her 32 fouettes, which she inserted into Petipa's works, even though many ballet purists frowned upon them as circus-like.

Vaganova's method directly stems from the Imperial style, since she was, after all, a ballerina of Imperial Theaters during their heyday when Petipa was creating ballets for them, and the likes of Kschessinska, Legnani, Preobrajenska, Karsavina and Pavlova graced their stage. And this is also the style on which Balanchine and Fokine were originally brought up, so they both knew it very well, though chose to move into new innovative directions. Vaganova codified and systematized this classical ballet schooling and experience, but she did not invent it.

Once again, she was not "creating" a methodology. She was systematizing the lessons and knowledge that had already existed at the school and at the theater, and which she had herself learned from Vazem, Legat, Cecchetti and Pavel Gerdt (who, incidentally, was Balanchine's teacher too). Of course, she added and expanded on that, but as far as her "distorting" Petipa's choreography, I think that's a bit outlandish to claim. In fact, she helped preserve this classical tradition against the influences of Soviet acrobatic folk-infused ballet, an incredible feat indeed at the time, given how alien (and quite frankly odious) the courtly, lavish and aristocratic imperial ballet tradition must have looked from the point of view of Communist ideology and aesthetic.

LOL! Of course the Vaganova Academy and the old Imperial Theatrical School are the same. Just like Istanbul was Constantinople and old New York was once New Amsterdam.

And Vaganova's key achievement was in systematizing and codifying the teaching tradition that had already existed at the school while she had been a student there (and later when Balanchine was there), fusing the influences of the French and Italian schools with distinctive features of Russian dance that she learned from Ekaterina Vazem, a great 19th century Russian ballerina. So Balanchine's and Vaganova's styles have ultimately diverged, but they directly originate from the exact same foundational and methodological tradition, no questions about it.

Volcanohunter, I am just curious, why do you think Alena's Etudes debut was a disaster? I too saw the YouTube videos, maybe she did not deliver a historic performance, but I thought she was very technically proficient, especially given that she is only 18 years old and fresh out of school. I admit, I am not the one to judge technique (though I do notice obvious flops, like Dorothee Gilbert coming off pointe in Saturday's Emeralds), but I found no such obvious mishaps with Kovaleva. And how would you view her performance in the context of the generally under-rehearsed outings by the Bolshoi in Etudes, including the global broadcast of the first lineup?

I don't mean to start a debate, just trying to figure some things out, and would appreciate an educated viewpoint.

It's sweepstakes time! I wonder which world ballet company will be fast and lucky enough to snag her. My bet is between POB, where they certainly know a talent when they see one, or the Bolshoi, under its new dynamic leadership. Maybe, just maybe, she gets the recognition she deserves back home in the US. Or is it too much to ask of plodding US ballet theater management teams?

Ouch! I think this seals the deal for Maillot in America.

Interestingly enough, FT was kinder to this Taming a year ago, giving it four stars out of five, as opposed to the current two. Unless there were important changes made to the ballet (and I am not aware that there would have been), or unless the dancers really laid an egg last night (wasn't there, so can't tell), it goes to show how narrowly do critical reviews represent the specific writers' own beliefs and biases, if there was such a difference in opinion between two critics writing for the same newspaper.

Kind of makes you think that reviews are better given by teams of two or three persons, to get a broader impression, like Siskel and Ebert.

The way it looks: given the amount of troubling issues this play contains, its staging nowadays has to have enough redeeming features to make up for them. And this particular staging has fallen short.

Crickets....

I think it is because very few Americans have heard of, let alone read Lermontov. And even those who have read him would still find it hard to follow the plot, it is pretty densely and confusingly staged. The choreography itself is very impressive, however.

Interesting. It is a shame that he does not like ABT's Corsaire, I saw it once and really enjoyed it.

1 hour ago, Drew said:

 

I worry the issue isn't just whether the Bolshoi is only going to tour classics (a term I prefer to warhorses when talking about Swan Lake especially), at least in NY or elsewhere in the States--and of course one wants to see those dancers in the classics!--but also whether the company will be encouraged to tour an increasingly narrow choice of classics. That is, will presenters fear to present Raymonda or--one of the Bolshoi's best productions--the Vikharev Coppelia? Let alone the Esmeralda Natalia mentioned etc. Has NY seen the Burlaka/Ratmansky Corsaire?

 

They would need to freshen up Raymonda. The decorations there are really awful, something out of a bad 1970s science fiction movie, the scenographer was probably undergoing a major creative crisis at the time. Esmeralda and Le Corsaire are so overwrought that they would put even Spartacus to shame in that department. Macaulay would have a field day with them. They are really mainly worth seeing for a couple of iconic solos and PDDs, and, of course, the two grand scenes: Animated Garden and the castle of  Aloise de Gondelaurier (my personal favorite). But the rest consists of tediously endless back-and-forth walking and mime. Would US audiences have the patience to sit through that?  Perhaps, if MacMillan's R&J is any indication. 

1 hour ago, volcanohunter said:

As far back as I can remember--I saw my first Bolshoi tour in 1979--New Yorkers, and Americans more broadly, have admired the Bolshoi's dancers and hated its repertoire. There is a strong bias toward Anglo-American ballet values, the audience was, after all, originally reared on Balanchine and Tudor, Robbins and to a lesser extent Ashton (not to mention the giants of American modern dance). Structural complexity and musical integrity are valued highly, and there is great resistance to the simplistic, choreographic "padding," "flexible," shall we say, tempos and even patchwork scores. It's not just Grigorovich, but choreographers based in western and central Europe who have had a hard time getting respect from New York's critics and audiences, including Petit, Béjart, Cranko, Neumeier, Kylián, Duato and many others. Obviously this is does not constitute a dislike for "Western" choreography, but perhaps a dislike of a "continental" aesthetic, and when Pacific Northwest Ballet brought Maillot's Roméo et Juliette to New York a few years ago, it wasn't received rapturously either, which is why I think the Bolshoi and the LCF should have known better.

I think you hit the nail right on the head when you explain it in terms of the Anglo-American vs the "continental" traditions, although I would disagree with the way you characterize the differences.

P.S. Perhaps a bit surprisingly, Londoners seemed to love Taming last year, and you'd think the nation of Shakespeare would jealously protect its heritage. Though maybe not so surprisingly, given how closely integrated the UK and the rest of Europe have become in the last several decades.

12 minutes ago, canbelto said:

Not me. I loved their Don Q and Spartacus. The Grigorovich Swan Lake is unforgivable though.

Spartacus in a "kitschy schlocky" kind of way? 

50 minutes ago, canbelto said:

 

Well thankfully we did get to see them in Jewels.

But I remember reading last time in an interview with Sergei Filin that the Bolshoi dancers were very unhappy with the repertoire of the last tour (their warhorses Swan Lake, DQ, and Spartacus) and it had been dictated to them by LCF.  So maybe their terms and conditions for coming back was they brought what they wanted. 

Judging by all the comments on this forum from the Bolshoi's last visit to New York, it was not the dancers, but rather the American viewers who were unhappy about the warhorses. Swan Lake was too depressing and dated, Spartacus was too brash and Communist, and the repertoire overall deemed too old-fashioned and lacking creativity. So the Bolshoi decides to change it up and bring fresh, modern, Western works, and still gets panned, this time for the opposite reasons. Looks like it should either just stop touring in the US completely, or change its name to the Don Quixote Ballet Company and become a one-show wonder. Except that the DQ production that New Yorkers saw last time has since been sent to the heap in favor of one with cartoonish decorations and garish costumes.

I was talking about my impression of Maillot's work, where he takes many liberties with the Shakespearean plot and characters, and I think the subjugation bit is really downplayed here. I get a sense that even though Katherine may appear to submit to some of Petruchio's whims (like the imaginary fire), she does so with such obvious condescension and sarcasm, that it is really she who is "taming" him. So, keeping Shakespeare's original title of the play may be a mockery in itself.

Maillot himself said in his interviews that he wanted to move the play away from the "macho" thing and make it more about two extraordinary people meeting and falling in love with each other.

And I think everyone who surrounds Katherine while she is at her father's home is shown as having some reprehensible trait, Maillot takes his time in exploring every character.

6 hours ago, Tapfan said:

 Well said.  As someone who is an unabashed cheerleader for greater racial inclusion in the classical arts in America, I agree that the term "diversity" is too often used only as shorthand for "lack of black representation." 

 

And I wholeheartedly agree that it is ridiculous to expect to see what we in the West would define as "people of color" in ballet companies like the Bolshoi and Mariinsky that are so closely tied to national identity and are located in a largely racially homogeneous country. 

 

What I disagree with is the attitude still held  by some in the West, that brown bodies shatter uniformity and are therefore an attack on classicism.  Evidently, uniformity of style, movement and purpose is always trumped by the distraction of that dark girl in the line of Willies, Swans, Sylphs or Shades.  Evidently, other things in classical ballet may evolve, but not the need for everyone to have glowing white skin in Act II of Giselle. 

 

And the fact that these attitudes are expressed by some folks whose artistry I greatly admire like Mathias Heymann, is doubly disappointing.    If due to his Moroccan heritage, his complexion were darker making his being cast as James  in La Sylphide  a distraction, would he be okay with that commitment to white being right?

I cannot see how skin tone would be a distraction, but uniformity in terms of build and height is something that I would find aesthetically pleasing.

I had no idea that Mathias Heymann had Moroccan heritage, he always looked to me like the typical French heartthrob (or, at least, my concept of one).

And if I see someone as gorgeous as Calvin Royal III in the role of Prince Siegfried, or any other classical role for that matter, all I would say would be: "Oh yes!!!!!!!!" Would I like to see him among, say, the Bolshoi's uniform ranks? Oh, yes, please!!!!

On 7/23/2017 at 1:12 AM, volcanohunter said:

 

So do I. Of the versions mentioned, I can honestly say that I find Maillot's the most offensive, because it's a slick, facile and superficial reading that reduces Kate's "personality problem" to sexual frustration, which is magically cured after a tumble in the hay with Petruchio. (Hail the almighty phallus. ) Revolting.

 

Interesting how you saw this. I saw it totally differently. I too saw Kate as frustrated, but not sexually, rather emotionally from being surrounded by hypocrites and imbeciles, having a sister who is hiding treachery behind niceness, and a spineless excuse for a father. Then she finds someone as liberated and strong-willed as she is, her worthy match, which at first feels a bit unusual or even painful, but then, what's wrong with letting yourself go if you start feeling it? A kind of a coming of age story.

3 hours ago, nanushka said:

 

Thank you, but again I was not talking about depth and background; I was commenting on a visual phenomenon.

 

 

I suppose you must be referring to me, since as far as I recall I'm the only one who has commented here about my visual perception that the Bolshoi ensemble yesterday was overwhelmingly white. So much for "leaving it at that."

 

I'll simply repeat that my comment was not meant to suggest that the Bolshoi should look as racially diverse as a U.S. company nor that they should strive to do so or had failed to reach some standard.

 

(Interestingly, your last sentence above suggests to me that you think the company has made an attempt at racial diversity –– though I readily admit I may be misinterpreting you. It's easy to do that in an online forum such as this.)

 I think that Eric and Bruna were selected to the Bolshoi because of their merit and ability. To think that this may have been because of someone's attempt at racial diversity would be an insult to these wonderful dancers, and I certainly will have no part of that.

I am glad that people are finally agreeing that there is nothing wrong with the composition a Russian company being predominantly Russian + the various ethnicities that inhabit Russia.

1 hour ago, fondoffouettes said:

Well, while we're talking about whiteness, I found the Bolshoi's costumes blindingly white. I mean, obviously it's perfectly valid to go with bright white for a ballet called Diamonds, but the ivory tops in Karinska's costumes provide a bit of a relief for the eyes, while also making the dancers' white-tight-clad legs stand out. And Smirnova's bodice was so encrusted with crystals that I had to force myself to not focus on it as she began the PDD. The Karinska bibs are heavily decorated, as well, but a variety of materials are employed so that it doesn't become overwhelmingly blingy. The Bolshoi bodices also seem to have virtually no heft to them; they read like stretchy gymnast/figure skater tops. I guess the idea is to make the dancers look as thin as possible. The upside: the corps women wear perfectly fitted opera-length gloves, complete with fingers, in the final movement -- no cut-outs for the fingers, like in the Karinska costumes, which I always think looks sort of odd.

We need to remember that the Bolshoi's costumes were made with a different background in mind. In the videos from the Bolshoi's performances, Diamonds are performed against a deep sky blue background with a constellation of diamond-like stars. Which makes the dancers and their white costumes stand out a lot more. By comparison, the NYCB's background I found dated, a bit tacky, and distracting from the dancers. The background for Rubies, however, was right on target.

As for the white gloves, I found them god-awful, would have much rather preferred to see the beautiful long expressive arms of the Russian ballerinas. The Bolshoi did not always have these gloves, if I recall correctly, where have they come from here? 

45 minutes ago, aurora said:

 

 

Ethnicity is complex in the US as well. People here often do not neatly fit in one box either, and despite your assertion, no one (or very few) Americans would argue that those boxes you listed cover all the ethnic diversity that exist in the world. For one thing, you omitted Native Americans...

 

 

My mistake, I was only reciting from memory the ethnicity questionnaire from the multiple forms one gets to fill out in the USA. But I never encountered a box for "Tatar" or "Georgian" on any of those forms. Wonder why this may be. Is it because there is not enough diversity in America?

24 minutes ago, canbelto said:

Hmm FWIW I once was at a Home Depot and a Russian guy came up to me and spoke nearly perfect Chinese. He said he grew up in an area where the majority of people had Chinese descent and picked up the language as a child. There's a lot of Russian ballet dancers (past and present) who have a central Asian look that is not anywhere near what I'd call looking "white."

 

One example: Ana Turashvilli:

 

That's Turazashvili.

Couple of more examples: Eric Swolkin and Bruna Cantanhede Gaglianone from Brazil. Both were among the Bolshoi cast in Diamonds yesterday, too bad some people here have missed them. The Bolshoi was apparently more diverse than the NYCB last night. Though their path has not been an easy one.

Bruna with Brazil's then-president Dilma Rouseff

20 minutes ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

 

I wasn't asking you to do my work for me; I simply thought someone might know. Since I haven't seen the Bolshoi in quite some time, I can't speak to how diverse the company looks from the stage. 

The issue is, in the old Soviet Union, people were forced to declare their ethnic group and stick to it, so something like what you suggest could have been easily done back then. Thankfully, this practice has been abandoned since the 1990s, and now people are free to choose for themselves what type of ethnicity they feel they most belong to, and to even refuse to be categorized and judged based on their ethnicity. You can still more or less figure out people's backgrounds based on their names (except for the ladies who get married, and take their husbands' last names), as well as sometimes (and this is a VERY slippery slope) their appearance. But you may find that this topic is a lot more complex and diverse than simply slotting people into white, black, Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Islander boxes, which, unlike some people in the US might think, does not come even close to covering all the ethnic diversity that exists in the world.

2 minutes ago, nanushka said:

 

I never said that I didn't! You provided a perfectly reasonable historical explanation for the phenomenon that I observed. I never said that I required or desired or even expected to see anything other than what I saw onstage.

 

Once more:

Yes, what I had in mind was how, even accustomed as we are to our own fairly whitewashed ensembles, it's quite visually striking to see even that small bit of diversity absent.

 

I am not criticizing the Bolshoi! Please look back at what I have actually written above, rather than assuming that you know what I meant.

You can see in my other comment that the Bolshoi dancers that you saw could actually be a lot more diverse when you might think once you actually look deeper into who they are and their backgrounds. I suggest we leave it at that.

2 minutes ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

A nation needn't have had a history of chattel slavery to be ethnically diverse, nor for there to an expectation that its national dance company would reflect (if not actively respect and celebrate) that diversity. There are any number of ethnic minorities still living in today's Russian republic, even if it's shed many of its former non-ethnically Russian republics -- the various Central Asian "stans" by way of example. If I'm not mistaken, Nureyev was ethnically Tatar. Balanchine may have been culturally Russian, but he was ethnically Georgian. 

 

I don't know anything at all about the ethnic makeup of Russia's big dance companies: would it be surprising to find non-ethnic Russians among its ranks? 

One simply has to dig deeper and learn about the different ethnic groups that inhabit Russia, and also learn a bit about the individual Bolshoi dancers and which ethnic groups they come from. Thankfully, the internet provides ample opportunity for this.

Then, perhaps, these "Russians" will all of a sudden stop looking the same and lacking individuality and, yes, diversity, to the enlightened American public.

3 minutes ago, nanushka said:

I was indeed referring to the lack of racial diversity that I saw onstage, which was "visually striking" to me.

 

I did not, however, say that I "expect[ed] a ballet company from another country to have the same ethnic makeup as a US company." Those are your words, not mine.

If you were referring to racial diversity after all, then you should perfectly understand and accept the reason I have provided.

Just now, aurora said:

 

You made it a point, seemingly, to negatively compare the US and Russia vis-a-vis this issue--hence the turn this conversation took.

 

I'm not "Jewish from Russia" because that side of my family was forced to flee 100+ years ago...

No, I made a point that it is ridiculous to expect a ballet company from another country to have the same ethnic makeup as a US company. Because their histories, and, therefore, implications on current ethnic makeup are quite different.