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

Spring 2015: The Sleeping Beauty


Helene

Recommended Posts

One complaint I have is about the Panorama scene. The original score calls for I think three repetitions of the main theme, and here Ratmansky definitely shortens the sequence. I think the backfrops for the Panorama could had been more imaginative, so here I believe this version looses in relation with Kirkland's.

...

Finally, she and Cornejo even omitted the iconic fish dives of the grand PDD. I know they are not original to the XIX century, but they were created for the superb Spessivtzeva for the very London production. I have the feeling that they were not up to the challenge of the sequence. That's a No-No in my balletomane book.

I agree with much of your overall assessment, cubanmiamiboy. Just a note each on these two points.

I believe Ratmansky was facing the task of keeping the evening within (roughly) a three-hour limit, both for union/overtime reasons and for the general comfort and enjoyment of the non-balletomane audience. He left out the march that opens Act III (one of my favorite bits of music -- I love the music that opens all three acts, each exciting in its own way), and he likely left out the repeats of the panorama music (as well as the solo that follows) for the same reason. I suspect this was a trade-off for reintroducing the Act III variations. He likely wanted to keep in as much of the dancing and mime as possible, and saw the orchestral parts as more expendable.

Second, it was announced well in advance that Lane-Cornejo would do the original choreo for the Wedding PDD. Like Helene, I doubt that this was because they were unable to do the fish dives. I'm not even sure that it was they who opted out, as Helene suggests. It may well be that Ratmansky wanted at least one cast to do the original, so it could be seen. I thought the original version was quite lovely, and I preferred it to the less-than-stellar fish dives I saw from Boylston/Gorak and (to a lesser extent) Murphy/Whiteside.

Link to post

Lane and Cornejo were the one couple who opted for the original choreography and did not do the fish dives, but it wasn't because they were not able.

How do we know they didn't do them because they were NOT able to..? That was my impression, and it could perfectly be the reason. We probably will never know. As per the choreography being not original, it is true that the fish dives are not part of the Petipa's original scheme, but as Ratmansky was rather following the London production, and the fish dives were originated by Olga for that very production, it makes sense that they would preserve them. As per myself I don't want to see them substituted by now.

Link to post

Both Lane and Cornejo danced the older version, where they did the fish dives. I'm not sure if they ever danced SB with each other, though. I know Cornejo performed with Kochetkova.

The costumes and sets were based on the London production.

You don't have to agree with or prefer the choice, but it was a legitimate one for a production where the dancing mostly followed the notated text. Ratmansky didn't even have to allow the fish dives.

Link to post

Both Lane and Cornejo danced the older version, where they did the fish dives. I'm not sure if they ever danced SB with each other, though. I know Cornejo performed with Kochetkova.

The costumes and sets were based on the London production.

You don't have to agree with or prefer the choice, but it was a legitimate one for a production where the dancing mostly followed the notated text. Ratmansky didn't even have to allow the fish dives.

I saw Lane do the old version with Cornejo. They definitely did the fish dives. Personally I found seeing the old version quite interesting so I'm glad someone did it. I don't know why Lane & Cornejo were the ones, but I can attest to the fact that they can do the fish dives.

Link to post

Both Lane and Cornejo danced the older version, where they did the fish dives. I'm not sure if they ever danced SB with each other, though. I know Cornejo performed with Kochetkova.

The costumes and sets were based on the London production.

You don't have to agree with or prefer the choice, but it was a legitimate one for a production where the dancing mostly followed the notated text. Ratmansky didn't even have to allow the fish dives.

Russians don't do the fish dives. They are mostly a western tradition after the London production. When I saw the Bolshoi in London, they didn't have them. I still think they are one of the most expected pieces of choreography from Beauty. Costumes were indeed "based" on the originals, but from the pictures of Egorova one can tell that the wedding tutu was more substantial...even created in wired up tutu form, vs. the soft loose skirt of ABT's design.

Lubov.jpg

CHCDK5SUcAAcSpa.jpg

Link to post

The costumes and sets were based on the London production.

Yes, and as Ratmansky made very clear in many interviews, the choreography was from the earlier notations.

There were similarly two different versions of the entire Lilac Fairy solo that were done, both of which came from the notations.

Some of these distinctions (and even some of the other features, like chaines on demi-pointe) may well fall out of this production over the years, but I think it makes sense, on a first offering, that he'd want to offer as complete a picture of what he found in the notations as possible.

Link to post

I saw Lane do the old version with Cornejo. They definitely did the fish dives. Personally I found seeing the old version quite interesting so I'm glad someone did it. I don't know why Lane & Cornejo were the ones, but I can attest to the fact that they can do the fish dives.

Just Google "Lane Cornejo Sleeping Beauty" and you will see a photo taken by Rosalie O'Connor of this pair performing a beautiful fish dive.

(If I could have figured out how to insert an image into a reply on this board, I would have done so.)

Link to post

Regarding Lane/Cornejo doing the fish dives:

How do we know they didn't do them because they were NOT able to..? That was my impression, and it could perfectly be the reason. We probably will never know. As per the choreography being not original, it is true that the fish dives are not part of the Petipa's original scheme, but as Ratmansky was rather following the London production, and the fish dives were originated by Olga for that very production, it makes sense that they would preserve them. As per myself I don't want to see them substituted by now.

Because Lane/Cornejo have done the fish dives in performance before, in the old Kirkland SB for one, without any difficulties.

Link to post

Regarding Lane/Cornejo doing the fish dives:

Because Lane/Cornejo have done the fish dives in performance before, in the old Kirkland SB for one, without any difficulties.

That could be an argument, yes...which doesn't imply that by now, some years later, Cornejo's strength would be the same to carry them. As I said...we can only guess and speculate.

Link to post

That could be an argument, yes...which doesn't imply that by now, some years later, Cornejo's strength would be the same to carry them. As I said...we can only guess and speculate.

Since Cornejo did the partnering in Theme (not easy) and in Romeo and Juliet, without any issues it would seem his partnering strength is fine.

Link to post

So maybe is Lane...

You've said yourself, above, that the Russian tradition is no fish dives, and Ratmansky (a Russian) is explicitly returning to the original Russian tradition of this ballet's earliest years, as it was performed in 1890 and notated in the decades that followed. Given that, and the fact that nothing we've seen has indicated that either Herman or Sarah are unable to perform fish dives any longer, and given that an announcement was made well in advance that these two would perform what was identified as having been the original choreography -- well, I think Occam's Razor gives us our likely answer. Granted, that's no proof. But my inclination is to give these dancers the benefit of the doubt.

Link to post

If anything, I would make a little whisper in the dancers' ears..."psst..go and perform those fish dives instead...audience actually LIKES them"

Fair enough (though I'm among those who appreciated the opportunity to see the original choreo and thought it was quite striking). But that's quite a different message from "That's a No-No in my balletomane book."

Link to post

If anything, I would make a little whisper in the dancers' ears..."psst..go and perform those fish dives instead...audience actually LIKES them"

That's funny but maybe Ratmansky was whispering something else in their ears!

Link to post

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...