From the book by Arlene Croce:

[Meliss]

From the book by Arlene Croce:

"Little more than a week later, Godunov defected. The detention of his wife, Ludmila Vlasova, at Kennedy Airport shifted the terms of the drama from artistic to political and legal ones. But the question all season had been whether and how Grigorovich has responded to the new talent in the company represented by Godunov and Pavlova and Gordeyev and Ludmila Semenyaka. Godunov’s act — the first of its kind by a Bolshoi dancer — spoke for him. Ironically, Godunov had shown the most impressive development under Grigorovich’s direction. He is, at twenty-nine, a fine example of a modern-day Bolshoi premier".

I can't understand what new talent is being discussed in the third sentence, and who has been wondering all season (?) whether Grigorovich reacted to the appearance of this talent. Can someone explain?

[Helene]

Croce says clearly that "the new talent is the company represented by Godunov, Pavlova, Gordeyev, and Semenyaka."  "Responded" is whether Grigorovich created work and/or or made casting choices to use this talent to the fullest.  The question was a common one for US critics and audiences, who awaited the Bolshoi tour  to find out the answers.  That question was sidelined, at least temporarily, as the Godunov's defection became the news, not the company's performances, even after it became clear that the Bolshoi wasn't going to cut the tour short and go home.

[Meliss]

1 hour ago, Helene said:

Croce says clearly that "the new talent is the company represented by Godunov, Pavlova, Gordeyev, and Semenyaka."  "Responded" is whether Grigorovich created work and/or or made casting choices to use this talent to the fullest.  The question was a common one for US critics and audiences, who awaited the Bolshoi tour  to find out the answers.  That question was sidelined, at least temporarily, as the Godunov's defection became the news, not the company's performances, even after it became clear that the Bolshoi wasn't going to cut the tour short and go home.

Thank you, this is very interesting. I understood that Croce was referring to some NEW talent in the company represented by these four dancers. And she writes about the question of whether Grigorovich responded it. If he responded, then what? If he didn't respond, then what? It's kind of hard to understand what it's all about. And if Croce wrote about the talents of these four, they don't seem to be new, they all visited the United States on tour until 1979. She writes about it too -

"...so far Nadezhda Pavlova and Vyacheslav Gordeyev have danced only in Spartacus. For many of us, these two dancers have been among the world’s legendary performers ever since we saw them and Semenyaka and Godunov make their startling New York debuts six years ago."

Maybe Semenyaka, Pavlova and Gordeev were on tour in the USA between 1974 and 1979?

Edited August 30 by Meliss

[Helene]

They were newly in the beginning of their primes and ready to be centered, unlike in past full-company tours -- not the "up and coming" tour -- where the prior generation was anticipated and featured, even if younger dancers were given opportunities.  

Of course most US fans and critics were anticipating how Grigorovich would present them, the same way that NY audiences and were anticipating how Nureyev would present his next generation of young stars at Paris Opera Ballet, dancers that we'd heard about but hadn't seen at the center.  I have no idea if Soviet audiences were anticipating how up-and-comers with whom they were impressed in New York City Ballet's 1960's tour would be featured in the 1970's tour, after many of the 1960's dancers had retired by then.

Would we see the dancers in the same roles we'd seen before or new ones?  What about the dancers we hadn't seen, or we'd only seen in smaller roles, but have heard how they'd climbed up the ranks and were giving great performances?  Was Grigorovich going to create work for them?  Who would be partnered with whom? etc. 

[Drew]

1 hour ago, Meliss said:

Maybe Semenyaka, Pavlova and Gordeev were on tour in the USA between 1974 and 1979?

I saw one of those earlier 1970's tours--a performance at Wolf Trap, an outdoor venue just outside of the Washington D.C.. I'm not sure of the year, but maybe 1973?--but this was a "highlight" tour, lots of pas de deux on the program and then also Act II of Giselle.  The then very young Pavlova was also sent home early from that particular tour and didn't appear at Wolf Trap at all --I remember how disappointed I was to miss her although I saw Gordeyev. In 1979 the company brought to New York a much more impressive and ambitious line-up of full length works where one could get a much bigger and better picture of the company, its aesthetic, and its artists. Especially when it came to Grigorovich. The repertory included multiple Grigorovich ballets--not just Spartacus but Romeo and Juliet and Legend of Love. As well as his version of Swan Lake.

To address your other question about Croce's words:  "if he [Grigorovich] responded then what? If he didn't respond, then what?"--I'm not sure I have understood the question.  Croce is writing as a critic/commentator evaluating the state of the company and the experience of the tour as she judged it.  There is no "then what" other than her articulation of her judgments, opinions, and ideas which may (in the case of Croce DID) generate response and debate among those interested.

Critics write for the audience--a very few may gain professional influence beyond that--but ultimately that is not their role. (Just as I was about to post this I remembered that during the era of Fonteyn-Nureyev's stardom, Croce wrote, for example, about Royal Ballet casting policies that she thought were deleterious to the development of younger talent in the company. So that would be another example of her interest in how a great company was developing its talent.)

Edited August 30 by Drew

[Meliss]

13 hours ago, Drew said:

To address your other question about Croce's words:  "if he [Grigorovich] responded then what? If he didn't respond, then what?"--I'm not sure I have understood the question. 

From the book by Arlene Croce:

"Little more than a week later, Godunov defected. The detention of his wife, Ludmila Vlasova, at Kennedy Airport shifted the terms of the drama from artistic to political and legal ones. But the question all season had been whether and how Grigorovich has responded to the new talent in the company represented by Godunov and Pavlova and Gordeyev and Ludmila Semenyaka. Godunov’s act — the first of its kind by a Bolshoi dancer — spoke for him. Ironically, Godunov had shown the most impressive development under Grigorovich’s direction. He is, at twenty-nine, a fine example of a modern-day Bolshoi premier".

...whether and how Grigorovich has responded to the new talent in the company - 

Can you explain what is meant here?

 

[Meliss]

22 hours ago, Helene said:

Would we see the dancers in the same roles we'd seen before or new ones?  What about the dancers we hadn't seen, or we'd only seen in smaller roles, but have heard how they'd climbed up the ranks and were giving great performances?  Was Grigorovich going to create work for them?  Who would be partnered with whom? etc.

And wasn't all this information contained in the promotional brochures and known to the public?

[Drew]

26 minutes ago, Meliss said:

And wasn't all this information contained in the promotional brochures and known to the public?

Sometimes but sometimes not until later…and also almost never for soloist roles. Also even when announced one didn’t know what the result would be until later. But the brochure can be the beginning (just the beginning) of getting a sense of what was happening in a company.

9 hours ago, Meliss said:

From the book by Arlene Croce:

"Little more than a week later, Godunov defected. The detention of his wife, Ludmila Vlasova, at Kennedy Airport shifted the terms of the drama from artistic to political and legal ones. But the question all season had been whether and how Grigorovich has responded to the new talent in the company represented by Godunov and Pavlova and Gordeyev and Ludmila Semenyaka. Godunov’s act — the first of its kind by a Bolshoi dancer — spoke for him. Ironically, Godunov had shown the most impressive development under Grigorovich’s direction. He is, at twenty-nine, a fine example of a modern-day Bolshoi premier".

...whether and how Grigorovich has responded to the new talent in the company - 

Can you explain what is meant here?

 

My explanation would not be substantially different from what @Helenewrote above. Another way to put it might be to ask whether the artists are being developed to their full potential? Or are their talents being used properly? 

[Helene]

Back in the day, before the internet, you might know that the company was coming in the "summer" or "fall.," mostly from what the mainstream media deigned to tell the public or the producers announced in a mailer to sell tickets.  The day(s)/week(s) would be clarified eventually.  You may or may not have known the rep until then; it might be announced only when tickets went on sale.   Casting may have been published in the ad in the New York Times months before the show -- highly unreliable, since dancers get injured, new work gets abandoned, and, in Soviet times, dancers weren't allowed out of the country -- or, the first time it was disclosed might be when the program was put in your hand, and, you hoped it was accurate.

 

[Meliss]

10 hours ago, Drew said:

Another way to put it might be to ask whether the artists are being developed to their full potential? Or are their talents being used properly? 

I think you're right.

Logically speaking. Before and after that, Croce writes about Godunov. Apparently, by "new talent" she means him. And the question they are interested in is precisely whether Grigorovich reacted to the appearance of this talent and, if so, how. Why would a talent run away if he's fine with working in his troupe? 

If that's the case, then the only thing that's unclear is why Croce calls him a "new talent." Maybe because Gordeev, Pavlova and Semenyakа went on foreign tours from 1974 to 1979, and they were known in the West, but Godunov was not allowed out of the country, and he really became a "new talent" for Western viewers.

What do you think?

Edited September 1 by Meliss

[Meliss]

10 hours ago, Helene said:

Back in the day, before the internet, you might know that the company was coming in the "summer" or "fall.," mostly from what the mainstream media deigned to tell the public or the producers announced in a mailer to sell tickets.  The day(s)/week(s) would be clarified eventually.  You may or may not have known the rep until then; it might be announced only when tickets went on sale.   Casting may have been published in the ad in the New York Times months before the show -- highly unreliable, since dancers get injured, new work gets abandoned, and, in Soviet times, dancers weren't allowed out of the country -- or, the first time it was disclosed might be when the program was put in your hand, and, you hoped it was accurate.

That is, the public had little information about the upcoming tour. But if that's what Croce meant -

On 8/31/2024 at 12:08 AM, Helene said:

Would we see the dancers in the same roles we'd seen before or new ones?  What about the dancers we hadn't seen, or we'd only seen in smaller roles, but have heard how they'd climbed up the ranks and were giving great performances?  Was Grigorovich going to create work for them?  Who would be partnered with whom? etc. 

- then it's kind of strange that she mentioned it and returned to the topic of Godunov again. Godunov ran away, distracted attention, but all season we were interested in the question of how Grigorovich treated new talents, and Godunov ran away)). Such a slightly confusing logical chain turns out.

[Helene]

By new talent, Croce meant exactly what she wrote: "the new talent in the company represented by Godunov and Pavlova and Gordeyev and Ludmila Semenyaka." (emphasis mine).

Godunov certainly was allowed out of the country.  For example, he was part of the 1973 tour when he was in his 'mid-20's, where Clive Barnes and Anna Kisselgoff wrote about performances where  partnered Semenyaka in the Black Swan Pas de Deux and Struchkova in Don Quixote..Pavlova and Gordeyev danced the Nutcracker Pas de Deux on the same tour. 

She was asking the questions that critics and the audience were asking:  would they see the development of the young dancers whom they'd seen before reflected by the casting and the repertoire.  It's quite simple, actually.

[Meliss]

22 minutes ago, Helene said:

By new talent, Croce meant exactly what she wrote: "the new talent in the company represented by Godunov and Pavlova and Gordeyev and Ludmila Semenyaka." (emphasis mine).

That is, Croce wrote that everyone was wondering if Grigorovich was doing enough to flourish the talents of these young performers?

23 minutes ago, Helene said:

Godunov certainly was allowed out of the country.  For example, he was part of the 1973 tour

I wrote about the period from 1974 to 1979, when he was not allowed out of the country:

41 minutes ago, Meliss said:

Gordeev, Pavlova and Semenyakа went on foreign tours from 1974 to 1979, and they were known in the West, but Godunov was not allowed out of the country

.

27 minutes ago, Helene said:

She was asking the questions that critics and the audience were asking:  would they see the development of the young dancers whom they'd seen before reflected by the casting and the repertoire.  It's quite simple, actually.

But Croce wrote about it after Godunov's escape - that is, towards the end of the tour. It seems that the answers to this question should have been clarified by then.

[Helene]

She was saying that the focus should have been on learning the answers to the artistic questions that had been anticipated and asked in the season leading up to the tour, but this was overtaken by the defection, and that news took over the conversation, instead of the company and art.

[Meliss]

47 minutes ago, Helene said:

She was saying that the focus should have been on learning the answers to the artistic questions that had been anticipated and asked in the season leading up to the tour, but this was overtaken by the defection, and that news took over the conversation, instead of the company and art.

It is curious that, Godunov's escape turned out to be more interesting than artistic issues for the press and the public. It seems that one should not interfere with the other. Thank you very much for the explanations, for some reason it is sometimes difficult for me to understand the meaning of what Croce writes about. For example -

"But the question all season had been whether and how Grigorovich has responded to the new talent in the company represented by Godunov and Pavlova and Gordeyev and Ludmila Semenyaka. Godunov’s act — the first of its kind by a Bolshoi dancer — spoke for him.  Ironically, Godunov had shown the most impressive development under Grigorovich’s direction.  He is, at twenty-nine, a fine example of a modern-day Bolshoi premier".

Did Croce want to say that the fact that no one had ever escaped from the Bolshoi Ballet before Godunov spoke in favor of Grigorovich? That he cared about talents? 

But then it's completely unclear. Where else could Godunov have developed? He didn't seem to have any options. Did Croce mean that without Grigorovich's guidance, Godunov would not have reached such heights in ballet? But in fact, Grigorovich practically did not allow Godunov to perform in his productions in 1974-1978 (he played Spartacus 2 times and Ivan the Terrible 8 times during these 4 years), did not rehearse with him. It was only in 1979 that Grigorovich created Tybalt for him. For the first and only time ever, and not the main role(.

Edited September 1 by Meliss

[Drew]

 It seems to me she thought Godunov danced well (and more than well) at the Bolshoi in the style the company and its repertory needed/wanted—and therefore that it was somewhat ironic that he chose to defect, since defecting implied he himself had some feelings of dissatisfaction with his career there. At least that is what an observer would conclude —that he wanted different artistic opportunities than the Bolshoi offered. Obviously, at the time he defected, it was not the case that he could return or dance on both sides of the iron curtain. It may well be that when she wrote her review she was not aware of the casting limitations put on his career under Grigorovich that @Meliss mentions. Today, I can go online and check out Bolshoi casting in some detail. In 1979? Hardly. Also she may have been more concerned with what she saw on stage than what was happening behind the scenes anyway.

If I remember that essay correctly—I don’t have time to search it out and reread—she complains that although Semenyaka was a very turned-out dancer she didn’t always use her turnout and Croce seemed to blame that on the impact of the Bolshoi aesthetic on Semenyaka’s more purely classical St. Petersburg background: I guess that would be an example of her thinking a dancer’s talent was not being properly cultivated. Or that she thought a dancer did not entirely fit at the Bolshoi. I am not defending this, just remembering it as an example of things she discussed.

I consider Semenyaka one of the all time great ballerinas and have no opinion about the state of her turnout during that long ago tour.  I was supposed to see her in Swan Lake with Godunov, but as he had defected by then, I saw her with Kozlov who defected later on the same tour! The performance was sold out. I did not have tickets and it was like a warzone outside the theater as numerous fans like myself struggled to find someone with an extra ticket they were willing to sell. (Not scalpers—just someone whose companion got sick or some such. Scalpers had, according to rumor been offered unheard of prices for the performance earlier in the week and I would not have been able to afford anything of the kind.)

“Warzone” is an exaggeration, but while I was outside the theater my sister was in a line inside the theater waiting for tickets that sometimes got turned back to the box office. Several people in line in front of her insisted on two seats together and she was able to buy the individual seats that they kept turning down. But by the time she did so, it was past curtain time; she came racing out of the theater and, since I was across the street, she shouted that she had tickets—and then, people who thought she was selling them swarmed her waving money in her face. They were not happy, even almost angry, when they realized she had been summoning me because she had just bought tickets for us.
 

In the meanwhile I was sure we had missed the first scene, and would not be seated until intermission, but the curtain was being held for some reason we did not understand (not for us of course!!). Shortly after we got to our (separate) seats, the company announced over the loudspeakers they would not begin the performance unless Godunov’s wife was permitted to leave the U.S. (Her plane was being held at the airport while U.S. officials clarified that she genuinely wanted to leave—a long drawn out affair.) Fortunately,  the company was making an empty threat and the curtain did go up. Altogether, the performance started about  20-25 minutes late — really not that much, but all the drama made it feel longer. The performance itself had strange elements too. Semenyaka and Kozlov had evidently not had much time to rehearse. From where I was sitting downstairs I could hear her occasionally say something to him out loud in Russian, as if giving him instructions.

It was, without a doubt, my craziest experience attending a ballet performance: I was still a teenager and did not always have restrained emotions (still don’t, but I am older and a little wiser). Anyway: The nerve wracking two hours in front of the theater pleading with strangers to sell me any extra ticket (though most people were pretty sympathetic—Semenyaka was already almost a legend); the hopelessness I felt when it was curtain time; the sight of my sister racing from inside the theater then seeing her mobbed by other fans who thought she was selling. Then getting to my seat and hearing the company announce that the curtain might not go up at all, and then hearing the ballerina talk out loud to her partner in the middle of Swan Lake no less….BUT the greatness of the performance—Semenyaka’s greatness — makes this more than just a memory of zany ballet fan experiences at the height of the dance boom and the Cold War.   I was dazzled by the whole company—when the opening scene waltz started I remember thinking how fabulous they were. I was even more awe-struck by Semenyaka’s dancing. (I don’t think video does her justice.) And yes, for sure it would have been great to see her with Godunov.

So um, back to the topic. It was a tour where it became hard to separate art and politics and in that sense I guess Croce had a point about politics becoming a focus of attention, but certainly there were artistic triumphs!

Edited September 2 by Drew

[Meliss]

2 hours ago, Drew said:

It was, without a doubt, my craziest experience attending a ballet performance

A shaking story! Thank you!!!

[AG]

Oh my goodness, @Drew, what an incredible experience—thank you for sharing it!