Jump to content
l'histoire

Balanchine's Don Quixote: Worth a Revival?

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, canbelto said:

Well I've read the novel twice, cover to cover, and it really is an undanceable novel, if that makes sense. There's just so many stretches of the novel that are Don Q and Sancho traveling through Spain, meeting people and talking, sharing ideas and gradually almost fusing into one person. It's a great achievement of literature but I've always thought that great novels make poor dances.

I feel this way about the Peony Pavilion (a famous Chinese opera, which is a supreme & beloved achievement as a work of literature & as excerpts in traditional Chinese opera), which the National Ballet of China made into a ballet. As highly stylized as Chinese opera is, it's still not ballet (and I've been horrified by what parts of the ballet I've seen, insofar as "telling the story") - it is a glorious piece of literature that is "undanceable." 

Share this post


Link to post

Balanchine's Don Q could be revived. Not only is there a full-length b&w movie of the opening cast, which was shown at the Kennedy Center 4-5 years ago, but Farrell staged it for her company in the mid-'00s. It was a co-production with the NB of Canada. I saw a performance starring the wonderful Sonia Rodriguez in the Farrell role. I believe that the work is worth reviving for the historical interest, if anything. The most negative element is the dullish music. Neither did I care for the nasty depiction of mental torturing of a senior.

Today's average paying public is so used to the title of a "Don Q" ballet to mean rollicking fun; this is definitely not that Don Q. For balletomanes and sophisticates, in general, Balanchine's Don Q would be a compelling piece of theater, if the casting is right.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, cubanmiamiboy said:

This whole affair of El Don/Balanchine vs Dulcinea/Farrell onstage sounds bizarre to me.

Why "bizarre"? There's a reason the documentary made of her is called Elusive Muse - I actually think that captures Balanchine's presentation of Dulcinea in Don Q to a 't,' from what I've seen/read of the ballet. I can appreciate the fact that Balanchine's Don Q wasn't the bravura-fest that most versions of the ballet are (even if I think its potential of being revived handily are slim to none). 

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, cubanmiamiboy said:

Because of the obvious.

FWIW, my thought was the same as @l'histoire's — i.e. "the obvious" wasn't obvious to me, particularly given the basic gists of the Don Q / Dulcinea relationship and the Balanchine / Farrell relationship — and given Balanchine's lifelong interest in playing out onstage, even in "plotless" ballets, ideas about relationships between man and woman, artist and creator, that had both aesthetic and biographical resonance.

(That story about Balanchine casting himself as the allegorical personification of Polio attacking the young Tanny in some long-lost one-off benefit piece he created when she was like 15? Now that's bizarre.)

Edited by nanushka

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/30/2018 at 1:17 PM, nanushka said:

FWIW, my thought was the same as @l'histoire's — i.e. "the obvious" wasn't obvious to me, particularly given the basic gists of the Don Q / Dulcinea relationship and the Balanchine / Farrell relationship.

I can just imagine the inner circle of dancers who knew the whole of the drama between the two seeing such a thing onstage, and I'm sure many of those who have seen the original video, and by now know the details of the platonic affair, have drawn conclusions and parallelisms. I know I would 

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with cubanmiamiboy, it was "obvious" to anybody who had the slightest knowledge of the company and Balanchine's devotion to his Muses. If during the Romantic period ballet placed Womanhood at its centre, then in Twentieth Century it was Balanchine who continued this worshipful attitude to feminity expressed through movement and gesture.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Laurent said:

I agree with cubanmiamiboy, it was "obvious" to anybody who had the slightest knowledge of the company and Balanchine's devotion to his Muses. If during the Romantic period ballet placed Womanhood at its centre, then in Twentieth Century it was Balanchine who continued this worshipful attitude to feminity expressed through movement and gesture.

Right—that's what's "obvious." What I don't see is what makes that "bizarre." That was the claim @l'histoire and I were responding to.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, nanushka said:

Right—that's what's "obvious." What I don't see is what makes that "bizarre." That was the claim @l'histoire and I were responding to.

That elderly abuse onstage business that others have referred to...? Isn't that bizarre...?

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, cubanmiamiboy said:

That elderly abuse onstage business that others have referred to...? Isn't that bizarre...?

Ah, perhaps, if that's what you were referring to. But you wrote:

Quote

This whole affair of El Don/Balanchine vs Dulcinea/Farrell onstage sounds bizarre to me.

Is the "mental torturing of a senior" that @manhattangal referred to in the ballet an abuse performed by the character of Dulcinea herself? I didn't realize that was the case; that's why I didn't find your referent to be obvious.

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't seen the ballet, but for what I have read, it was quite art imitating life there, and I find that bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post

In the way that La Dame aux camélias is bizarre? Dumas fils didn't recreate his relationship with Marie Duplessis completely acurately, and I'm sure that Balanchine didn't either in Don Quixote, but it's not uncommon for artists to create semi-autobiographical works.

Dante is said to have met Beatrice Portinari only twice, but she looms large over his works. Balanchine knew Farrell well and worked with her a great deal, which already makes their relationship and artistic collaboration at lot less unusual.

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/8/2018 at 4:58 AM, volcanohunter said:

In the way that La Dame aux camélias is bizarre? 

No...not in a XIX Century way. More like in the way that the gossiping 60's NYC dance world-(and probably many others sitting in the audience at the time)- knew of how bizarre the Balanchine/Farrell afair was.

Edited by cubanmiamiboy

Share this post


Link to post

Speaking of 1965, you can sense Balanchine's obsession with Farrell in this PBS documentary filmed around that time:

 

Share this post


Link to post

Fascinating to watch that documentary, despite the sound issues, it is wonderful to see the dancers in roles they created, or soon after creation.  

Share this post


Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×