Ilya

For those familiar with the current scandals in the British (though Australian owned) press, the inaccuracies in the report are mild by the usual standards.

I disagree. The recent scandal involved a tabloid and had nothing to do with mainstream media. It also had nothing to do with factual inaccuracies in news articles. I may be wrong, but my impression is that the Independent has always tried to position itself as a mainstream newspaper, not a tabloid (its actual printed tabloid format notwithstanding). This article---with its errors and bigotry---is worthy of a tabloid, and a pretty bad one at that.

This article from the London newspaper, The Independent, suggests that money & perks were indeed behind O&V's move, in addition to 'artistic freedom.' Read and find out why several of us have called Kekhman the 'Bananaman' for a while:

http://www.independe...on-6263239.html

The number of factual errors in the Independent article referred to by Natalia is a little too much even for the British press. For example, here are the first two sentences:

For decades, Russia's ballet dancers have had one dream – to dance at the Bolshoi. With the exception of a few defections to the West during the Soviet era, the Bolshoi is the company that everyone wants to join and nobody wants to leave.

What about Irek Mukhamedov, Nina Ananiashvili, Andris Liepa, Andrei Uvarov who left the Bolshoi without defecting, for various reasons, and to various companies? What about other people (e.g., Rudolf Nureyev and Polina Semionova) who declined offers to join the Bolshoi after graduation?

Here is another gem:

The Bolshoi Ballet has been beset by problems recently, with its artistic director resigning after pornographic photographs of him were posted online earlier this year

The only recent artistic director I can think of is Mr. Burlaka. It's absolutely stunning that garbage like this would be printed in a major newspaper.

The rest of the article rehashes all the trash from the Russian media that has been said about Mr. Kekhman, with its tinge of antisemitism ("greedy merchant", "banana oligarch", etc). Somehow completely missing both from the Russian press and from the Independent account are any attempts at evaluation of the Mikhailovsky Theater during Kekhman's directorship and immediately preceding it. Didn't the ballet company tour London last year? Didn't it get good reviews in several British newspapers, including the Independent? I wonder if the author of the article is aware of this.

----------------

Excerpts from http://www.izvestia.ru/news/506701

----------------

"If the kids leave, they will have more possibilities for touring," thinks Osipova's teacher Marina Kondratieva.

"They very much want to dance, whereas the Bolshoi is unable to give them as many performances as they would want," says Kondratieva. "The kids are counting on switching to a contract, in order to have more possibilities for touring. They have a lot of offers from other theaters. If they are free from required presence at the Bolshoi, it will be simpler for them. They wanted to do this for a long time, but this moment was being postponed."

There is another interview with Osipova's teacher, Marina Kondratieva, which seems to directly contradict the interview I translated earlier in the thread and quoted above. According to this second interview, she was neither consulted nor supportive. Navigating Russian press sometimes is very confusing!

----------------

My translation of excerpts from http://www.itar-tass.com/c9/273022.html

----------------

" I don't think that Natasha made this step out of financial considerations," thinks Marina Viktorovna [Kondratieva]. "The money theme doesn't fit her. She is an artist, she lives through ballet, through her roles. She and I have worked together for five years. I know her well. And she said more than once that she can dance for free. Just to have a chance to dance! Most likely, someone confused the kids."

"No, she didn't even call me. This is hurtful. I am attached to her with my soul and with my heart. We have been very close," admitted Kondratieva. "I wouldn't try to dissuade her. They are young. Perhaps the youth is the reason. Generally, the current generation cannot be compared to ours. They are different. It is not always possible to understand them."

"We will see how it works out for them. I wish that everything would go well for them. However, this does not always happen," remarks Kondratieva philisophically. "I very much wanted Natasha to become a great ballerina. And for this she had all the opportunities at the company. She danced both the classics and the contemporary ballets. She had a large repertoire; but there is still much to be done. She is supposed to dance in the "Nutcracker" in December; other plans were also being considered. And her schedule was quite free: last year, for example, she was absent seven months."

"In 59 years of my working at the Bolshoi Theater I can't recall a single case like this, excepting, of course, the defections abroad during the Soviet times. However, in recent history such things haven't happened. And hopefully won't happen," sums up Kondratieva. "And even regarding Natasha and Ivan I still have hope. Perhaps they will change their minds and will realize what the Bolshoi Theater is. Because, as Yesenin wrote, "great things are visible from a distance." Besides, the general manager Anatoly Iksanov says that the Bolshoi Theater is always open for them, and they can always return."

One can, of course, say that I go to work abroad too often and therefore don't have time to dance everything that I want. Unfortunately, this is yet another problem related to the Bolshoi Theater. The company is huge, it has very many artists, and no one will adjust to fit my schedule. There is no one to blame here, this is the situation. So it happens that at the moments when I feel that I must do a lot, I sit and do nothing. Therefore I need some push, a different place of work, a different repertory. So for me the transfer to Mikhailovsky Theater in St. Petersburg is an absolutely thought-through and correct decision, purely artistic.

This paragraph sums it up and is also slightly contradictory if you interpret it a different way. Essentially Osipova's outside commitments clash with the scheduling situation at the Bolshoi. She should have said the problem is related to her own needs outside of the Bolshoi instead of saying it was related to how Bolshoi operates. If you read between the lines, the point is that Osipova has become too big for the Bolshoi, no pun intended. Why indeed belong to a company if what she really wishes to do is to dance a good chunk of the year at ABT or in Japan and Europe? It would be so much easier to defect to a company that is only too willing to have her and Vasiliev, one that sees them as trophies and demands less commitments from them than the Bolshoi. To say her decision is purely artistic, well I don't know if I really buy that now. It seems like a big part of it is not wishing to be tied down to a company which requires residency instead of few performances a year from its stars. They don't want to wait for Bolshoi to change its scheduling practices even though they say it's actually getting better under Fililn. I feel like they are treading a fine line between placing gentle blame on the Bolshoi and going scorched earth on the company.

I don't think my translation does full justice to what she is saying. It is pretty clear from the Russian text that she is trying to place more blame on herself than on the Bolshoi. To support this point of view, here is an excerpt from another interview of hers (to Kommersant, http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/1816362):

"This has nothing to do with either Sergei Yuryevich Filin, and certainly not with Anatoly Gennadievich Iksanov, both of whom we love very much. Bolshoi has nothing to do with it, I am thankful to it with all my heart. But I don't want to always feel guilty. I understand that I break the rules all the time, that my touring is a nuisance and creates all kinds of difficulties. But I want to both dance at the company, and go here and there, and all this does not come together, and turns out to be hard."

Please, could someone please explain the "Bolshoi emploi system"?

"Emploi system" = "type casting". E.g., the Bolshoi's point of view is that casting Vasiliev in Swan Lake or Sleeping Beauty would be against type. Vasiliev himself agrees with this in the interview when he concedes that he may not be great in such roles. However, his point is that he would still like the opportunity to try. Bolshoi's spokesperson points out that the Bolshoi has given him Albrecht in Giselle (last May)---which would also be considered against his type.

Here are my translations of quotes from Osipova's teacher as printed in the Russian newspaper Izvestia, see http://www.izvestia.ru/news/506701, followed by my translation of a lengthy interview with Osipova and Vasiliev from Monday November 14, 2011, see http://www.fontanka.ru/2011/11/14/149/. Marina Kondratieva uses an endearing Russian term "rebyata" to refer to Osipova and Vasiliev, which I am not exactly sure how to translate. It falls roughly in between "the kids" and "the guys". Bolshoi's press person Novikova uses the same term in the next article.

I am not a professional interpreter and therefore some of the translations are awkward. (I was striving to be as close as I could to the structure of the original Russian text.) Osipova and Vasiliev are much more well-spoken than my translation might lead you to believe.

While some of what they are saying might be spin, two things are pretty clear from these articles: they are both very thoughtful (and in particular, their decision was clearly very well thought through), and Osipova's teacher was in on it and supportive.

----------------

Excerpts from http://www.izvestia.ru/news/506701

----------------

"If the kids leave, they will have more possibilities for touring," thinks Osipova's teacher Marina Kondratieva.

"They very much want to dance, whereas the Bolshoi is unable to give them as many performances as they would want," says Kondratieva. "The kids are counting on switching to a contract, in order to have more possibilities for touring. They have a lot of offers from other theaters. If they are free from required presence at the Bolshoi, it will be simpler for them. They wanted to do this for a long time, but this moment was being postponed."

---------------

Full interview from http://www.fontanka.ru/2011/11/14/149/

---------------

Why did the best young ballet couple in the country choose Mikhailovsky over Bolshoi?

The biggest theatrical event of the day is the transfer from the capital's Bolshoi to St. Petersburg's Mikhailovsky of the most promising ballet couple of the generation of young masters: Natalia Osipova and Ivan Vasiliev. The Bolshoi couldn't name the reasons for the departure of the promising artists---the artists did this themselves, having given the first in St. Petersburg detailed interview to our correspondent.

The spokesperson of the Bolshoi, Yekaterina Novikova, told "Fontanka" that the Bolshoi cannot even guess what specific creative aspects could dissatisfy the artists Natalia Osipova and Ivan Vasiliev. "Both Ivan and Natalia came to the company when they were almost children: Ivan at 16, Natalia at 17. The company helped Ivan, who came from Belarus, both with the citizenship and with the apartment. The kids were occupied both in the classical and in the contemporary repertory: they participated in the premiere of Aleksey Ratmansky's ballet "Lost Illusions" to the music of Leonid Desyatnikov. Natalia was supposed to dance in a MacGregor ballet, Ivan has just danced Albrecht in "Giselle". Before that, Ivan danced "Spartacus", Natasha was going to soon have her debut in the "Nutcracker". They had much to look forward to creatively."

In addition, the Bolshoi could not find the answer to the question as to why the young artists have left the home company specifically now, during the times which are not the easiest for the company, when both in the press and in the theatrical circles unfriendly attitudes towards the company reveal themselves too obviously.

To the artists' credit, it must be said that they did not refuse to provide detailed answers to all the questions of Fontanka's correspondent regarding their move from Moscow to St. Petersburg. The artists categorically denied the obvious supposition that Mikhailovsky's director Vladimir Kekhman simply proposed to them advantageous financial conditions; they said that they were guided exclusively by artistic advantages. As a result, a substantive conversation ensued regarding the problems of today's Russian ballet theater in general.

Q: The main question is obvious: Why did you prefer Mikhailovsky to the Bolshoi Theater? Not the Paris Opera and not ABT with which you have serious artistic relationships---the departure there would be understandable---but specifically Mikhailovsky Theater in St Petersburg? This considering the fact that, at the Bolshoi, the historic stage just opened and the new stage is still actively being used---and now here, obviously, there are many possibilities for the development of young artists.

N.O.: It depends on how you look at it. Of course, this is a huge company with a colossal repertory. But if one takes my repertory at the Bolshoi Theater---I have danced practically everything that I could dance here. Everything else that I would like to dance, I am unable to dance at the Bolshoi Theater. Due to various reasons.

Yes, I also have a wonderful repertory at ABT, but one always wants to surprise and please at home, one's own spectators. To please them in "Don Quixote" or "Giselle"? Well I have already pleased them with these. The question remains: what next? And here is where difficulties start. On the one hand, I am having my peak as an artist now, at 25. I need to acquire and dance as much as possible. First of all, of course, the classics. I am not a purely classical ballerina, very controversial for many; but for me the classics are a priority because when I dance them I feel that I develop and become better. I graduated from a classical school and cannot abandon it and go into some deeply contemporary repertoire. Unfortunately, at the Bolshoi Theater I am unable to dance the classics as much as I need.

Q: They don't have enough classical productions?

N.O.: No, how can the Bolshoi Theater not have enough classical productions? However, I danced "La Bayadere" only twice, unfortunately. One can, of course, say that I go to work abroad too often and therefore don't have time to dance everything that I want. Unfortunately, this is yet another problem related to the Bolshoi Theater. The company is huge, it has very many artists, and no one will adjust to fit my schedule. There is no one to blame here, this is the situation. So it happens that at the moments when I feel that I must do a lot, I sit and do nothing. Therefore I need some push, a different place of work, a different repertory. So for me the transfer to Mikhailovsky Theater in St. Petersburg is an absolutely thought-through and correct decision, purely artistic.

I.V.: You see, at the Bolshoi Theater it is difficult to change something. If I did well as a heroic dancer---danced in "Spartacus", in "The Flames of Paris", in "Don Quixote"---it's very difficult to break this trend. But I don't want to dance "Spartacus" all my life. I want to dance different things, to dance more, to dance the entire classical repertory. Even if it won't be great, I will be able to do it decently, will be able to apply all my energy and put all my soul in it.

Q: In other words, at the Bolshoi Theater you are constricted by the emploi system?

I.V.: Yes, which you cannot say about European companies where they don't fixate on the emploi. There, if the dancer is an individuality, if he is convincing and talented, he can try everything. Experimenting is very important for an artist. It is forward movement, it is development, otherwise the actor starts standing still.

Q: And here, at the Mikhailovsky Theater, what did they promise you?

I.V.: Here they promised us, first of all, that we are going to dance all the repertory that the company has. In addition, that the ballet director Nacho Duato will make ballets specifically for us. And at the same time, here we have a thing which is very important for an artist-- freedom. That is, if we have invitations to work at companies abroad, we can go there and work without any problems.

Q: At the Bolshoi Theater, are there difficulties with this?

I.V.: At the Bolshoi the priority must always be the Bolshoi. And this is as it should be, because it is the main company of the country. But on the other hand, it is very complicated for artists to plan their artistic life if they find out about the repertory a month in advance, whereas in Europe and America the repertory is planned a year ahead, sometimes even two years. So it happens that if we want to work abroad---which is very important for a dancer's development---then we would be creating problems for the Bolshoi, which we don't want to do.

N.O.: Starting this season, since Sergei Filin became the head of the ballet company, the situation changed for the better: we started finding out about our performances three months in advance. But this still does not solve the problem.

Q. Have you communicated with Nacho Duato yet?

I.V.: Not only communicated, we have already worked together, although not much. It was producer Sergei Danilian's project called "Reflection". Certainly, Nacho Duato is one of the best contemporary choreographers, and the fact that he is creating ballets here and now, and there is a possibility to do it together with him---this is very attractive.

N.O.: Imagine how interesting it was to work at the Bolshoi Theater during Alexei Ratmansky's tenure, when he would create dances for you, when because of him at the Bolshoi Theater there appeared the first shoots of contemporary choreography. How everything was stirring! However, when there is no working choreographer nearby, it's very difficult.

I.V.: The fact that Mikhailovsky has Nacho Duato gives us the possibility to ourselves participate in the creation of a new, world-class choreographic language.

N.O.: And also my position is that I don't want to prove anything to anyone any more. And I never had the goal to become a world star. I want to work, dance, give happiness to people. And on what stage this happens---it's not important to me. And, needless to say, I don't want to participate in any intrigues. And, of course, we hope that we will be listened to, and those ballets that we wanted to dance but couldn't, will appear in the repertory.

Q.: Natasha, you were born, grew up, and studied in Moscow, in Moscow you became a world star, whether you want it or not. Aren't you afraid that you will miss Moscow?

N.O.: Of course I will miss Moscow---the company, the coworkers, the friends, the teachers, with whom, I hope, our relationships will never end. But, on the other hand, we will dance in Moscow, and in Europe, and in America. And we won't have much time for

melancholy. For example, I already have a four-year relationship with ABT---and starting this season, I am already a prima-ballerina at ABT.

Q.: Are you planning to continue the collaboration with the Bolshoi Theater in some form? At the company's press office, I was assured that---I'm quoting---"the company is not going to turn away from the artists who left and will always be glad to see them on their stage in any status".

I.V.: You know, despite the fact that we have been reading all day online that the Bolshoi Theater conducted negotiations with us to make sure that we stay, offered us different forms of collaboration---for example, a guest contract---none of this happened. No negotiations were conducted with us, and are not being conducted until this very moment. There have not been any offers of a guest contract, either. To our great regret. For us it would have been a great honor to perform at the Bolshoi as guest artists.

N.O.: Especially in the productions in which the spectators like us.

Q.: Won't the stage here be small for you---it's significantly smaller than the historic stage of the Bolshoi Theater, and is even smaller than the Mariinsky stage?

I.V.: We have danced "Giselle" on this stage, I danced "Don Quixote". Perhaps there is not much difference whether the stage is big or small. The main thing is how to dance and what to dance.

Q.: I don't have to tell you that the situation at the Bolshoi Theater is not the most stable now, despite its reopening with great fanfare. You yourselves recalled the remarkable contemporary choreographer Ratmansky who headed the ballet company of the Bolshoi in 2004-2008, and then left it for ABT. Nikolai Tsiskaridze has started a scandal in the media, taking it upon himself to discuss, for some reason, the quality of the restoration. Dmitri Chernyakov's premiere of "Ruslan and Lyudmila" had an uneven reception, was met with sometimes unacceptable aggression, and even caused a scandal inside the theater during the day of the premiere. All this smacks of an intrigue against the Bolshoi Theater whose meaning we will find out soon. Doesn't it seem to you that your departure may be construed as part of some campaign against the Bolshoi Theater, that you may become its unwitting participants? If you left at the end of the season, such questions to you would not be raised.

I.V.: Our departure is definitely not connected with any campaign against the Bolshoi. The Bolshoi is a huge thing, it's a great company which will exist forever and to which we do not wish anything bad.

N.O.: As to why we are leaving now---because if we wait until the end of the season, we risk losing interesting offers, contracts. The repertory abroad starts being built in the middle of the previous season, right now. We don't want to lose the next season, because ballet dancer's time is limited and every season counts. And separately I want to say: God save us from being in any campaign against the Bolshoi Theater, against our home. I will never say a bad word about the Bolshoi Theater in my life, because everything that I have professionally was given to me by the Bolshoi Theater. And now everything depends on ourselves. We have acquired our feathers and flew out of the nest. I think that they will easily replace us at the Bolshoi.

Zhanna Zaretskaya,

"Fontanka.ru"

Once I heard Halberg was injured I was worried Osipova might pull out. I know others, including Semionova just recently, have gone on at the last minute with new partners, but this is not a role Osipova has danced much--only once to my knowledge and that time with Halberg--and, as already noted, she is preparing her debut in Ashton's Romeo and Juliet for next week in London. I don't blame her, though I could very much wish she had felt able to decide otherwise. (And her schedule often does seem decidedly ultra packed.)

Pulling out because one's partner is injured six days before the performance seems unprofessional to me. It would seem that six days is ample time to rehearse with a new partner. Also, partner injuries happen all the time, and such eventualities need to be part of the planning. Pulling out because one's guesting schedule is ultra packed, is decidedly unprofessional. If you cannot handle the schedule, don't commit to being on two sides of the Atlantic at the same time.

Perhaps in the future ABT should publish other commitments of their guest stars. At least that way we the ticket buyers will be better informed about the odds we are facing.

I have to eat my words. Both performances---Giselle on May 26 and Coppelia on May 27---went on with the announced casts. Osipova was spectacular in both. 24 hours after an unbelievable "Giselle" which, in my opinion, surpassed her performance two years ago with ABT, she was fresh, effervescent, and full of energy in "Coppelia". There were indeed cameras in the theater for the "Coppelia" performance on the 27th, probably as a backup for the live broadcast planned for May 29th. Ivan Vasiliev's house debut in Giselle went very well.

Well there is no announcement in English, but the Russian version of the website says: "Ivan Vasiliev is making his debut in the part of Count Albrecht", http://www.bolshoi.ru/ru/. I guess this could mean his house debut.

The Coppelia performance that's going to be broadcast live is that on May 29. Osipova is scheduled for that one, too. One would guess that if this Coppelia is scheduled for a later release on a DVD, then they will also be filming on May 27 (I think it is common practice to film more than one performance, just in case something goes wrong.) To summarize, she is currently scheduled to dance in Giselle on May 26, in Coppelia on May 27, and in Coppelia (live broadcast) on May 29! My wild guess is that once the tickets are all sold, then resold at twice the price, and then resold at three times the price, then the Bolshoi will post a cast change---either for May 26 (most likely) or for May 27.

Yekaterina Kondaurova did win the 2011 Golden Mask. The awards were announced yesterday:

http://www.goldenmask.ru/news.php?nid=1452&year=

They are listed in Russian only. Leonid Sarafanov also won.

Thanks for your advice Natalia! Given that the performances I'd like to attend are Giselle on May 26 and Coppelia on May 27 (Osipova is listed for both, at least for now, and the former one is being billed as Vasiliev's debut in the role), I think this enterprise is doomed to failure; however, I'll give it a try!

Does anyone have any pointers on how to buy tickets to sold-out performances at the Bolshoi? I am willing to pay more than the face value, but I would like to buy them in advance from a legitimate source. The problem is, there seem to be dozens if not hundreds of ticket agencies in Moscow which offer Bolshoi tickets at about 2-3 times the face value. I do not know any of them. Which ones are trustworthy? By trustworthy I mean that I would pay them over the phone or online with my credit card, and as a result (a) my credit card will not be compromised and (b) my tickets will be waiting for me at my hotel when I arrive in Moscow.

Of course they like her - they gave this dancer her job and have propped her up, despite overwhelmingly negative reviews from MOST critics of MOST appearances in the US and the UK. I don't have the hours required to begin to compile the long list of negative in-print reviews...but I vividly remember one from a NY critic (druing the 2008 City Center tour) who described her look as a praying mantis with stick-thin legs attached to her hips by a pin.

A more generous view might be that they saw Ms. Somova's talent early on and invested a significant effort in developing it---a strategy which seems to be paying off in the form of more positive reviews of late as well as a major award. The 2008 NY reviews of her Balanchine performance were good, as opposed to the reviews of her performances of the classics. In any case, three years is a very long time in a young dancer's career, and she appears to have made a lot of progress.

By the way---my chiming in in defense of Ms. Somova is not meant to detract anything from the other performances. I watched all the other casts during the DC tour and immensely enjoyed watching all three other principal ballerinas (as well as many other dancers). I'm just a little surprised that Ms. Somova has generated so much ill will. Just trying to bring some balance to the discussion.

Thanks nysusan, alexa1aa, and Ilya for your thoughts! It is wonderful to hear positive reviews of Alina Somova. Forgive me for using the words "stuck" but I have encountered such an overwhelmingly negative appraisal of her dancing here. Until I see her perform live, I'll refrain from passing judgment.

Elizaveta, one would indeed not think much of Ms. Somova based solely on the opinions expressed by several posters on this board. However, positive opinions have been expressed, among others, by two different Ballet Directors of the Mariinsky (the current one and the previous one), Alexei Ratmansky, Maya Plisetskaya, the jury of last year's Golden Mask awards, and the New York Times in the review of last Wednesday's performance. As much as I like this board, positive views voiced elsewhere made me curious enough to attend her performance, and I am glad that I did.

I did see the Wednesday night performance with Ms. Somova and Mr. Ivanchenko. She was impressive: very musical, great arms, great legato dancing, wonderful acting. Very well thought out interpretation, down to every small detail.

Natalia and YID---thanks a lot for your explanations!

Does anyone know more about the extra variation that Mr. Shklyarov danced tonight in the first act? Whose music is this? Who choreographed this variation and when? Who danced it first? Why is Mr. Shklyarov including it in his performances whereas other Mariinsky Albrechts do not?

I'm curious---will Osipova's Aurora on Saturday be her first ever performance of the role? (I do not believe she has danced it at the Bolshoi---?) If so, does anybody know which ABT coach she is working with on this role?

It seems that the original Namouna, as choreographed by Lucien Petipa in Paris in the 1880s, was a story ballet. Does anyone know what the story was, and whether Ratmansky used the same story? I was able to find very little information on this ballet (http://www.answers.com/topic/namouna, http://www.answers.com/topic/namouna-ballet-in-2-acts). Anything more in-depth would be highly appreciated. I am going to watch it for the first time on Saturday, and would like to be as prepared as possible.

Mikhail, thank you for your detailed explanations. I really wish that your explanations, along with the English translation of the 1899 libretto and of all the other fascinating 19th-century information which I had never seen prior to following your link (and neither, I am sure, 99.9% of my fellow spectators in DC), were included in the Kennedy Center program. They would have helped prevent much of the confusion/dismay that the production has generated, and would have provided some badly needed context for it.

Some of my confusion still remains, however.

Reading through your Russian-language 1899 libretto, I do see many references in it to Isaac's Jewishness (thankfully, that libretto uses a more polite terminology than its 1858 counterpart!) The Bolshoi retained only one of these references in their domestic program notes for the current production, and zero in the Kennedy Center notes. I am still puzzled by the arbitrariness of these decisions. I could not find in the libretto any references to Lanquedem's big fake nose. That's another decision that someone at the Bolshoi had to make, and that had nothing to do with following the original libretto or choreography. Ditto with the "rear padding" of the "Old Maid" that Natalia mentioned above. Absent any other documentary 19th century sources for these decisions, they seem quite in poor taste to me.

These are mime and makeup jokes, as far as I can tell, invented by this production because the designers thought they would get a response from the audience. Bad taste but also a miscalculation I would think. Show me where the evidence is that these specific mime sequences have historical precedent? And even if they do, they are no longer functional. Those mime sequences are there to be funny. They're not.

My guess is these are functional and funny in Russia, unfortunately. Perhaps someone who watched this production in Moscow can chime in to confirm?

It's sad when arts cheaply play to the basest prejudices of the crowd...

I think Ilya's point, if I understand it, is that the characters that he finds offensive were not even part of the original but were added, and he's asking why. If that's the case, then leaving them out isn't untrue to the original; it would be the opposite.

This is not entirely my point. My points are (1) there is no "THE" original, (2) we do not really know for sure how exactly those characters were portrayed in the 19th century and (3) Bolshoi retained very significant 20th century add-ons such as making Conrad a dancing role and keeping some 20th century choreography for the two pdd's. Why not retain another 20th century tradition: toning down the offensive parts? And, if they insist on keeping the offensive parts in the ballet, why not at least tone down the domestic program notes?

It's too bad about the offensive elements, which were in practically all 19th/early-20th C story ballets (e.g., Bayadere's 'little sambos' in Act II; 'American Negro Couple' in the Legats' Fairy Doll; even the Moor in Fokine's Petrouchka). Many of the wonderful Bournonville ballets that survive have offensive elements but we still embrace the Royal Danish Ballet; we certainly do not call today's Danish population 'racist' just for keeping these elements in the Bournonville ballets. It was the 19th Century and today's audiences are expected to have the maturity to understand that they are seeing a relic of the past, I suppose. But we still feel queezy just seeing it, even if we know that it's a museum piece.

The mere presence of characters of different ethnicities is obviously not equivalent to racism. For example, the African boys in Mariinsky's Bayaderes that I have seen, are not offensive at all.  As another example, Lankedem's ethnicity is not specified in the Gusev and Sergeyev productions, ethnic stereotypes are not used, and, as a result, those characters are not offensive, either.  (In addition, the great Konstantin Zaklinsky who dances Lankedem on the Mariinsky DVD somehow manages to make the character almost likable!)

I just do not buy the "relic of the past" or "museum piece" argument. None of the 19th century ballets have survived to this day in their original, pristine 19th century form.  Most of them do not even have "the original" form because they kept being modified and re-staged throughout the 19th century to adapt to new dancers and tastes.  I do not know of any ballet where the racist elements were central to the story, hence they can always be judiciously removed.  Case in point: the differences between the domestic and export staging and program description of the handkerchief episode in Bolshoi's Le Corsaire.  If they realized that the description, costume, and mime for that character are offensive enough to be changed while on tour, why did they have it in the ballet in the first place?  Or, if they are sticking to the "museum piece" story, why did they make the changes?

I am curious about the 'Conrad solo' in the cave scene -- the famous male solo of 'Corsaire pdd.' Your sources mention that in the 1899 version -- the version that Burlaka et al attempted to reconstruct -- that solo was performed by Georgi Kyasht, rather than Conrad, who was mimed by Pavel Gerdt. Did Kyasht's character have a name (not "Ali" - we know that!) or was he merely a young guy/porteur who shows up to dance with Medora?

The review does not mention the name of Kiaksht's character.  In any case, I doubt it very much that the choreography in the male solo we have seen in DC is the same as what Georgi Kiaksht danced.

Mikhail, there is no need to be facetious and dismissive.  I have been attempting to have a serious and respectful discussion.  There is no Muslim character in the ballet that's made up of anti-Muslim stereotypes. Seyd is actually quite a multi-dimensional character (at least, by ballet standards), capable of falling in love (with Medora) and being loved (by Gulnare), and, at least in the performance I watched, quite handsome and, contrary to what you are saying, not portrayed as silly at all (according to the program notes, it was Alexey Loparevich).  Isaac is made up entirely of centuries-old antisemitic stereotypes.  The "old maid" character, as described above by Natalia, is entirely made up of racist stereotypes.  Neither set of stereotypes is essential to the ballet's story and can easily be toned down, as was done with the "old maid" in DC.

If the Bolshoi did not feel they were doing anything wrong, why the change in the program notes and in the costume and mime of the "old maid" character?  Why did they feel it was important to identify the slave trader as a Jew in their domestic program notes and omit this identification in the Kennedy Center program notes?  Bizarre.

There are some works of art in which racism is inextricably intertwined with the story and cannot really be excised. These are usually works that have words in them, such as plays, novels, operas, etc. Ballets simply do not fall into this category, at least not Le Corsaire. Changing a few words in a program booklet for a new staging of a ballet and a few details of makeup and mime are not quite the same as changing words in a Shakespeare play. (Even in Shakespeare, by the way, there is room for different interpretations of roles like Shylock, as various great actors have demonstrated.) The discussion of all these other works of art would be very complex and is quite beyond the scope of this thread. But using what Shakespeare did 400 years ago as an excuse for what is done by the Bolshoi now does not make much sense to me.

This was no excuse for European terrorists who attacked a peaceful Muslim town.

Interestingly, this is more or less how it is in Byron's poem---Conrad is portrayed as quite a vile character who kills, burns, and pillages for no good reason.  And Gulnare is quite Lady Macbeth-esque.

As mentioned here Zakharova is busy in Milan, Lunkina is on maternity leave, the scheduled Nikulina was injured, Alexandrova left after opening night, and it was undoubtedly a mistake to cast Osipova so soon after her New York/ABT outing. Some posters here make it sound as if audiences in Washington DC were victim of some special treatment. Really they were not!

Marc, we were victims of really, really poor planning on the part of Bolshoi's management, as well as some extremely bad manners, also on the part of Bolshoi's management. I believe Alexandrova did dance on Thursday. After that, they had two ballerinas left to do four performances in 69 hours. It may have been wise to have, for example, Alexandrova stick around for three more days, just in case of an emergency. In any case, everyone's prior engagements had been known for a very, very long time, and the Bolshoi had more than enough time to have new dancers learn the role, instead of scheduling Ms. Shipulina to do the dress rehearsal + four performances. Common sense also dictates some good will gestures like letting people know (or at least trying to!) about the cast change as soon as it occurs, not 10 seconds before the performance, especially if you are planning to come back to the same venue for many years to come and presumably want to have repeat customers.

Having said this, I would like to reiterate my admiration for Ms. Shipulina and Mr. Skvortsov who really saved the day for the company in very tough circumstances.

.... i didn't notice any obvious anti-semitism. Only reading THIS thread made me realize that Isaac and his nose CAN be of semitic origin. For me it was a greedy old character. And the nose can just emphasize the age, like that beard of Sultan/ Pasha......

YID, I am with you. There was nothing in the portrayal of the Isaac Lankedem character that made me think of him as 'Jewish'! He is a very funny, silly old miser...especially the part when, after Lankedem pleads with the pirates that he has no money, the pirates make him remove his turban and coins spill out!

If there is nothing in the character to imply that he is Jewish, what is the point of identifying him as such on the official Bolshoi website? I posted the link and the quote above, here it is again, both in English and in Russian:

http://bolshoi.ru/en/season/ballet/reperto...dynid26=323#dyn

http://bolshoi.ru/ru/season/ballet/reperto...ynact26=art#dyn

And what is the point of endowing the character with stereotypical antisemitic traits and a Jewish name?

For something that could be truly 'offensive' on tour BUT the Bolshoi has sense enough to tame: In the full Moscow version of Corsaire, the character role of the Sleeping Maid -- the rotund lady who is the object of the 'handkerchief joke' in which the Pasha's Harem Girls toss a handkerchief on her while she sleeps, designating who will sleep with the Pasha that night -- this character is supposed to be an African lady and, in fact, the title of the role in Russian printed programs is "A Negress." When she awakens to find the handkerchief and is so happy to think that the Pasha wants her...she jumps up and down and hugs the Pasha in an offensive and stereotypical manner.

Natalia, thank you for describing this. I never watched the full Moscow version, and now I am glad that I did not. This is offensive, period. Whether in Russia or on tour, this is offensive. A search of Bolshoi's synopsis of the ballet in English yields the following pearl (see the link above):

"...eventually the handkerchief, passing from hand to hand, reaches an old negress who, picking it up, starts to chase Seyd-Pasha, smothering him with her caresses. Seyd-Pasha is hard put to it to contain his anger."

Through yet another miracle of English-to-English translation, this becomes, in the Kennedy Center program:

"...until it reaches an old maid who, picking it up, starts to chase Pasha Seyd, smothering him with her caresses. Pasha Seyd has a hard time containing his anger."

I'd recommend that people attended the talk with Burlaka, that would have answered a lot of questions. I wish it was published. Their goal was to RESTORE as much as possible and as closely as possible.

Yes, I wish it was published, as well. In fact, given how much work has allegedly gone into reconstructing the 19th century story, choreography, costumes, and sets, I was expecting to see a long article in the program booklet detailing the scholarship and explaining the result. I was dismayed to find nothing of the sort. In fact, the printed program does not even identify the composers who wrote the music.

If the Bolshoi thought it important to fully restore everything as much and as closely as possible, including the 19th century racism, they should stick to this position and defend it, instead of watering down their program notes and mime while on tour. Present your "negress" and your "jew" in DC, and let's have an open discussion of the merits of this approach. If this were their position, it would at least command some respect from me. However, this position would not stand up to close scrutiny, for reasons that I explained earlier in this thread: this production is far from restoring "as much as possible as closely as possible." To take one obvious example, Conrad was not a dancing role in the 1899 production that the Bolshoi purports to restore. Here is how the Sankt-Peterburgskaya Gazeta of January 14, 1899 described the January 13, 1899 performance (the English translation is mine):

"The ballerina's partner in the pas de deux, Mr. Kiaksht, danced magnificently as well, surprising with his jumps, double turns in the air, etc. The variation of Mr. Kiaksht caused a complete sensation and was repeated.

...

Corsair Conrad was performed by Mr. Gerdt..."

Mr. Gerdt, 54 at the time, could not possibly have had a dancing role, much less the virtuoso steps that Mr. Skvortsov executed on Sunday afternoon. Clearly the ballerina's partner during the pdd was a different person in the original production. Also, here is an excerpt from Sankt-Peterburgskie Vedomosti of January 12, 1858, regarding the original Perrot staging:

"On the square, a crowd of corsairs is walking, with their leader Conrad (Mr. Petipa.)

...

Mr. Petipa did not dance in this ballet; he performed his role with great energy."

[Everything is quoted from "Russkaya baletnaya kritika vtoroi poloviny XIX veka" by O. Petrov, Sfera, 1995, ISBN 5-86193-022-8.]

So, if the Bolshoi was really aiming to "RESTORE as much as possible as closely as possible," they would have gone back to Conrad being a purely mime role. Clearly, they felt they had enough leeway to change this important aspect of the original. If so, why not do away with the racism as well?