First "modern" ballerina?

[canbelto]

There's a lot of talk about "modern" ballet technique versus "historical" style. I was wondering who y'all think was the first "modern" ballerina? Meaning, if she danced today, you wouldnt bat an eye and think, "Oh, she dances differently."

Strange to say but I think it's Alicia Alonso. There isnt much footage of her, but from what I've seen she has many of the qualities I associate with "modern" technique -- very precise footwork, easy extensions, long tapered limbs, super fast turns, an ability to infuse athleticism into even the most lyrical moments. Maya Plisetskaya too, but she started dancing later than Alonso I think.

[Alexandra]

Camargo

[Amy Reusch]

Tanaquil LeClerq? I don't know if she would look modern next to the likes of Sylvia Guillem, but she looked like she would have fit in with the dancers of the 1970s.

Did Alonso dance a lot more than the traditional story ballets? Wouldn't an ability to dance beyond Giselle have more to do with modern ballet technique? I'm sure she must have, but we always seem to see reference to her in the great "ballerina" roles.

[Dale]

Alonso was the original lead in Theme and Variations. Considering that role is still considered a test for the modern ballerina, I'd think she'd fit in.

[Alexandra]

What about Spessitseva, or Doubrovska? Both lean, leggy types.

[Farrell Fan]

In 1947, Alonzo originated the ballerina role in Balanchine's "Theme and Variations." In his Balanchine biography, Bernard Taper wrote: "Alonzo, always a splendid technician, seemed better than her best in this ballet, as if Balanchine had invented a new glamorous and radiant personality."

[Farrell Fan]

Dale beat me to it about "Theme."

[canbelto]

It's not so much the ballets she danced, it's the style. We really dont have enough footage of Spessivtseva to judge, but IMO Alonso's dancing just seems "modern" even if it's Giselle. The sharp, quick attacks, the easy high extensions on the arabesque, the quick multiple piroettes (shades of Gillian Murphy). There's a vigor and pure athleticism in all the footage of Alonso that I find fascinating. Her figure is very modern too -- less of an emphasis on "proportion" and "harmony" but longer limbs, legginess, a bold exotic glamour rather than classical softness.

I mean, when I look at footage of Galina Ulanova or Margot Fonteyn they are clearly "historical' dancers meaning if they danced today I'd raise my forehead and say, "Hmm." I recently watched two Sleeping Beauties, one with Margot Fonteyn/Michael Somes and one with Altynai Asylmuratova/Konstantin Zakhlinsky/Zhanna Ayupova, and the modern technique of dancing is very pronounced when you compare the videos side by side. But Alonso seems as if she could dance alongside Gillian Murphy, Darcey Bussell or Svetlana Zakharova.

I also think different companies and schools made the switch to "modern" style at different times.

For instance the NYCB was clearly cutting edge, and individual companies had dancers that pushed the edge of classicism. Like Maya Plisetskaya with the Bolshoi.

[Alexandra]

I think if Ulanova or Fonteyn walked out on stage today, they would have the same effect that they did then. There are different types of dancers. We give a lot of "points" today for turning and high extensions, but there's also style, line and placement and aplomb. Not to mention, Fonteyn's case, the backbend (compare THAT on the various Cinderella videos). I've heard/read several people who saw Fonteyn in "Sylvia" and felt that none of the three ballerinas who just danced the role in London could match her -- technically, not just the aura.

I don't think one can "get" Fonteyn from video -- at least not easily. I did see her onstage at the end of her career, and believed all of the people knew who raved about her and kept teling me that this or that contemporary ballerina "couldn't touch her," and I still was disappointed in the videos I saw. It took me 15 years. And then one day I watched something I'd watched many times before and suddenly I was seeing what was there, and not what wasn't there. (She hadn't changed, of course. I'd just been exposed to more.)

As for Ulanova, I've never shown the bedroom pas de deux from "Romeo and Juliet" to a class -- of ballet students, modern dance students, or fans -- that wasn't stunned by it. The videos we have of Ulanova are in her late 40s, too, so we're not seeing her in her prime. But written records indicate that was a very fine technician (and I think you can see that in the first act of "Fountains of Baksichirai."

Not to take anything away from Alonso, who was a brilliant techician, great artist and spirited dancer -- and probably could hold her own in any pirouette or fouette competition held today!!!

I just read an account, by the way, of a nameless 18th century female dancer -- a groteschi, hence not considered a ballerina -- who could perform 20 entrechat huit and made the leading Paris Opera ballerina of the day "seem like a stone."

[canbelto]

Indeed, Alonso on video at least accomplished the 32 fouettes for Swan Lake without ever leaving a small marble square onstage. And she ended the series with what looked like a quadruple pirouette. I was stunned.

I'm not saying Ulanova and Fonteyn were NOT technicians (indeed, her Rose Adagio can stand alongside any modern Aurora) but just that their overall style seems to be clearly from a different era. With Alonso, I just dont get that feeling at all.

[sandik]

What about issues of extension and distortion? This is just off the top of my head, but one of the things that I think about when I try and consider the difference between a contemporary ballet dancer and a more classically oriented one is their sense of where plumb starts and ends. With some of the examples mentioned here (Fonteyn especially) I think of a great connection to verticality -- she certainly could move away from vertical, but the feeling of equipoise in balance is different than the sensation of constantly shifting counterbalance that we find much more often today.

[carbro]

When I think of "modern," two qualities come to mind: scale of movement and aggressiveness of attack. These would disqualify Fonteyn but not Alonso or Plisetskaya. Still, judging from the eensy weensy bit of evidence I saw of Spessivitzeva (in the multi-ballerina Giselle documentary -- what was the name of that???) I would peg her as The First Modern Ballerina. She just seemed to link ballet of my time to what I imagine to have been ballet ca. 1890.

[canbelto]

carbro, it's Portrais of Giselle, and has Anton Dolin coaching Patricia McBride.

Spurred on by y'all's comments I saw the brief clips of Spessivstseva last night and agree that she does seem "modern" -- long and leggy, with a quickness and sureness of attack, but I really have to see more of her dancing to decide.

Another thing I associate with "modern" ballerinas is turn-out and feet. That's yet another aspect of Alonso's performances I noticed -- the sharp, clearly defined turnout and very arched feet.

I suppose I'm just bowled over by Alonso. I hitherto had thought that the 1950s NYCB ballerinas were the first ballerinas to dance in a style that I'm familiar with today (remember, I'm a 20something!!) but Alonso really pushed back that clock. And I still havent seen the quadruple pirouette done by anyone else

[Mel Johnson]

I had to think for a long time about this one, and my nominee is Vera Nemtchinova. She was still teaching while I was a student, and I was surprised at how au courant her work still looked, even as an old woman, and how "modern" her style was, even though her training dated from the Imperial School. Her work during the Diaghilev period was the bridge between eras. Her kindred spirit in choreography was Bronislava Nijinska, who is advanced even for some audiences today!

[Mme. Hermine]

unfortunately, unless i remember incorrectly, that's the only film of spessivtseva we'll ever get to see.

[Alexandra]

And I still havent seen the quadruple pirouette done by anyone else 

Dudinskaya does a quintuple pirouette on one of the Best of the Kirov tapes (in Bayaderka, with Chabukiani, who turns faster than anyone I've ever seen). She doesn't look like a contemporary ballerina at all, but she could move. Remember, the people who taught those 1950s NYCB dancers were all Imperial Russians

[atm711]

Alonso was the original lead in Theme and Variations.  Considering that role is still considered a test for the modern ballerina, I'd think she'd fit in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The only ballerina I saw who was as impressive as Alonso in this role was

Asylmuratova.

Canbelto--I wrote long essay (for me!) about Alonso on my blog--you might like to read it.

http://ballet.blogs.com/ruminations.

[Amy Reusch]

But Theme is still a tutu ballet. When I think "20th Century", I tend to think of the advent of leotard ballets. I suspect Spessivtseva as well, but not having a 20th century work to judge her in, it seems tricky to count her... though perhaps she inspired a desire for dancers that resembled her?

... oh I'm sorry... I remember now it's not "20th Century" but "Modern"... still, when I think of "modern", I think "modernist" and I'm back to leotards. Is "plotless" sufficient? ... though I guess, when I think "ballerina", it's hard not to think "tutu"; "modern" or not.

[Mel Johnson]

To support my nomination, take a look at a photo of Nemtchinova in "Les Biches" - OK the costume is velvet, but she looks like she could do "Concerto Barocco" in it.

[Amy Reusch]

And I still havent seen the quadruple pirouette done by anyone else

Do you mean on stage or in that piece? I don't think a quadruple pirouette is that unusual...

[atm711]

My nomination is Felia Doubrovska---alas, I never saw her on the stage, but I did watch her teach a professional class at SAB. I thought I was there to watch a prominent ballerina take class---but I could not get my eyes off of Doubrovska. She was wearing a filmy chiffon tunic and looked as magnificent as she does in those old photos. My heart went out to the 'prominent ballerina'---she was no match for Doubrovska.

[Paul Parish]

There;'s lots of different ways of taking "modern" here -- but thanks, Canbelt0o, for starting suh an interesting thread.

The ideas that appeal to ME the most have to do with "dance imagination" rather than technique; LeClerq, Spessivstseva, Doubrovska.

Marie-Jeanne may have a claim here -- not that any of us can see ANY footage of her dangicing, but if you read the accounts of how she danced, and the kinds of things Balanchine ASKED HER TO DO in the original ballet Imperial -- she was a thrillingly spontaneous jazzy dancer, who could do anything, and do it very fast.

[Alexandra]

I thought of Spessitseva and Doubrovska for their lines -- long and lean. Doubrovska was a unitard ballerina, and if Spessitseva wasn't, she could have been.

[canbelto]

Long and lean figure is part of it (and I agree that Spessivtseva had that) but I was also thinking of a jazzy, quick, precise attack, fast footwork, easy high extensions ... In that regard, I was shocked at how "modern" Alonso was -- the lightning fast way she seemed to get her leg above 90 degrees, the way her feet seemed to accentuate each step of a dance with such bold confidence. When she kicks she KICKS, she doesnt just place her leg. She seemed unconstrained by the "classical" positions. I could easily see Alonso doing, say, Rubies, whereas in my wildest imagination I dont think Ulanova could have done it

I'm not "knocking" the purely classical dancers like Ulanova at all. I mean, it probably takes as much skill to perfectly place your leg at 45 degrees as it does for Plisetskaya to do a huge grand jete. And I think most ballerinas today are a combo of "modern" and "classical" -- they might emulate Ulanova's soft, lyrical arms while at the same time strive for Plisetskaya's leaps or Alonso's quick, multiple pirouettes. Some dancers, like Julie Kent, I think are more "classical", others (say, Wendy Whelan) more "modern" and every once in awhile you have a dancer who seems perfectly balanced between "classical" and "modern" (ex: Asylmuratova, who had the easy high extensions and danced modern works while showing such classical line, or Natalia Makarova).

[richard53dog]

Long and lean figure is part of it (and I agree that Spessivtseva had that) but I was also thinking of a jazzy, quick, precise attack, fast footwork, easy high extensions ... In that regard, I was shocked at how "modern" Alonso was -- the lightning fast way she seemed to get her leg above 90 degrees, the way her feet seemed to accentuate each step of a dance with such bold confidence. When she kicks she KICKS, she doesnt just place her leg. She seemed unconstrained by the "classical" positions. I could easily see Alonso doing, say, Rubies, whereas in my wildest imagination I dont think Ulanova could have done it 

To take this thread off in a slightly different direction, I think Alonso also had great skill in what we would call today "re-inventing" herself.

I saw Alonso a few times back in the 70s and the Alonso I saw was very different from her dancing on the Alonso documentary video, particularly the Black Swan.

She used a very pronounced softness in her dancing, there was none of the athleticism she evidently used much earlier. While she had a very easy extension, the overall quality was that of a very cloudlike floating.

Now this makes a lot of sense from a practical point of view. The films show a dancer in her mid 40s, the dancer I saw was in her mid 50s. I would guess that that amazing athleticism was no longer really an option for her at that point so she focused much more on being the vision of those mid 19th century images of a Romantic ballerina.

Amazing isn't it? And of course that striking magnetism remained intact, she was a very creative performer.

Is anyone familiar with another documentary that features Alonso, one called The Romantic Era? I've been doing a lot of housecleaning lately, found a copy of this, started watching it, and then misplaced it in some more continued housecleaning.