Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

The Perfect Odette/Odile


MelissaK

Recommended Posts

Thank you for bringing up Markova, atm, and the question of "marking." I think that raises a good point. When I first started watching the Danes, I was amazed -- curious, befuddled -- that they didn't emphasize the steps. It wasn't that they didn't dance cleanly, it's that you could barely see the steps. Beats were too fast for the eye -- and I've read critics who complained about that. "James should wear white socks so you could see the beats better" -- well, he didn't wear white socks, which told me they didn't want you to see the beats as BEATS, but watch the dancer's whole body. The women make the steps disappear. Other companies will. emphasize. every. step. even. the. linking. ones. The Danes didn't. Some people wrote that this was "weak dancing." The Danes had "no technique." Once, I watched a rehearsal of "La Sylphide", the Sylph's first solo, where the dancer made it look like nothing. It looked as though someone with six months of training could do it. This was one of the company's strongest technicians, and when it was over, she was gasping for breath for about four minutes. That was a big lesson for me. (note to atm - I hope you'll see the Style threads I've posted on the Discovering Ballet forum and contribute there. You'll have a view of ABT style when that meant Markova, Alonso and Nora Kaye and I'd very much like to have it.)

Link to comment

Ashton's ballets are definitely extremely difficult to dance--very challenging even for today's dancers. I agree that dancers of 50 years ago had good technique--you can tell they must hae had excellent technique even in the 19th century from the ballets of Bournonville and Petipa--Désiré's variation from Sleeping Beauty leaves most current dancers breathless, yet we read that Legat's version was even more difficult. Certain things were not as refined then--turnout was not necessarily always 180 degrees, and fifth position was not necessarily always toe-to-heel. Certainly technique has been cleaned up a great deal lately, and I think a lot of it has to do with abstract ballets and minimalist costuming--no plot, no acting, no sets--what else is there but perfect technique? While I definitely object to the traditional English style, I do not maintain that it is bad technique--however, I only realized after watching old videos many times. Rachel, you might want to try watching Sizova in Sleeping Beauty or Nureyev with Svetlana Beriosova. Sizova especially provides a bit of a bridge from the '50s to the present day so that the differences are not quite as obvious. If you want to see really old (not bad) technique, there's a video of Karsavina taking class out there somewhere. She dances well, but the style is so old-fashioned that it first led me to label it 'bad;' for example, Russian dancers back then leaned forward a great deal more in arabesque than we are used to seeing today as Balanchine and the Royal Ballet popularized the more upright Italianate arabesque.

Link to comment

This is really veering pretty far off topic, but I'm finding this fascinating.

I saw Fonteyn twice in person -- in The Merry Widow with the Australians, and as Lady Capulet when LaScala brought Nureyev's R&J to the Met. (Oh, and once more when a friend who was a pianist at the Joffrey school invited me to observe her teach a Variations class. Lucky Me! :)) But I have come to know her best through video. Watching repeatedly and with sharpened attention, I have come to appreciate her artistry. She was a very subtle dancer. I think the Big Idea behind the Royal style was decorum, not to be overly assertive, deportment appropriate to lesser courtiers. (This is, after all, a country that is very self-conscious about its monarchy.) In other words, never let 'em see you sweat.

One of the most bizarre performances I ever saw was Merrill Ashley's Aurora with London Festival in the late '80s or '90. During the Prologue, I was so pleased by all those lovely arms and epaulement. Then, when Aurora made her first entrance, wow! Someone who could really cover space! The LFB (now English National) danced on an even smaller scale than the Royal, and seeing the huge-moving Ashley -- with her rigid shoulders and flyaway arms -- on the same stage as those static dancers of the lyrical upper bodies, brought into jarring relief the two very unharmonious styles, clarifying the differences between two very branches of the Diaghilev diaspora.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...