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

The ballet/contemporary dance debate -- a new phase?


Recommended Posts

I'm plucking these paragraphs from Ismene Brown's year-end wrap-up in today's Telegraph (delighted to find someone else who thinks the phrase "heritage ballet" is a dangerous bit of newspeak that needs to be squelched NOW).

Following 2001's favourite slur of "elitism", Southgate and friends chose the phrase "heritage ballet" for 2002. It neatly transforms the two great choreographers Ashton and MacMillan into dead obligations, rather than vivid resources of greatness.

What is evident in the empty posturing of the classical versus contemporary argument at Covent Garden, and also at Scottish Ballet (who, at last, chose Ashley Page as artistic director), is an intellectual resistance to ballet's past achievements. Yet refusing to study the past hobbles any confidence in developing the new, or in forming judgment. Hence, out went Ashton and Balanchine (whose stuff Stretton did not know), and in came the fifth-rate Nacho Duato (whom he thought a master).

What Brown is writing about, I think, is the first crisis in 21st century ballet. Although her context is the Royal Ballet, I think we can discuss her points in broader terms.

The classical/contemporary debate is in danger of becoming a War, with the contemporary side trying to make "new work" exclusively synonymous with contemporary dance, attacking dancer rankings (a/k/a "the hierarchical structure") in ballet companies as "elitist," and painting ballet, at best, as inherently old-fashioned and unsophisticated. On top of this, the word "ballet" has been hijacked to describe works which use modern dance or pop dance (I don't mean to equate the two) movements and aesthetics. Yet these are often described as "firmly rooted in the classical vocatulary."

I have no trouble with the idea that we need new work; both the Royal and New York City Ballets, as well as the young Ballet Theatre, made their reputations on new work. I'd also say that we need to maintain the great works of the 20th century as well as the few shards remaining from the 19th.

How do we do this? How does "contemporary dance" fit into the world of ballet, if at all? What should the balance between new and existing repertory be, and where should we look for new work?

Link to comment

ABT, Royal and NYCB made their name on new work that used and subtly changed an old language: classical ballet. These days it seems to me that everyone wants to make their own language and that is a problem. The focus becomes what can I do that has never been done before versus how may I use and expand the language of ballet to make my statement.

Link to comment

I think it is up to the artistic directors. They must take charge and when commisioning works start from the beginning stating what is expected. Of course on another thread we are picking the Diamond Project to shreds, and it states upfront what is expected. But then the ADs must oversee the process. I continue to go back to writing - we all need to learn the craft, have an editor we trust and master the idiosyncracies of the language and media we work in.

Technique is the language, dancers the media and choreography the text. The editor is the AD or ballet master. Finally of course are genius and luck.

I just appreciate choreographers who use dancers and music well. Even Mark Morris' latest green statement at Kennedy Center left me grateful to see a beautifully crafted, musical piece of fluff danced well - even if it was kitsch (I kept thinking of those 1950's black cat kitchen clocks with the rhinestones and the eyes/tails going back and forth). I appreciate less choreographers who use dancers to explore continuous partnering or technical gymnastics in an effort to be different and create dances that say nothing to me and leave me wondering if the dancers will survive the next performance.

As a dancer, I was always told that when I could hold an audience's attention standing still for a time, then I was a true dancer. Ditto for choreographers, when they can hold an audience's attention with simplicity, then they have begun to master the art.

Sorry to rant, but I feel that we have veered off the course of human, artistic statements or performing entertainments and somehow gotten stuck on a track of fadism. Of course there are exceptions, but to paraphrase Manhattnik: All dances are too long, but these days most are longer.

Link to comment

mbjerk wrote:

Technique is the language, dancers the media and choreography the text. The editor is the AD or ballet master. Finally of course are genius and luck.

I'd agree with that. But today's AD's are looking to contemporary dance rather than ballet (in terms of language). Putting the need for novelty (as opposed to trying to create what Ninette DeValois called "contemporary classics") aside, is this good for ballet? Is it time for contemporary dance to become a movement of its own? Will it replace ballet? It seems to me that the latter is on the agenda of one wing of the dance party who act and talk as though ballet were as outmoded a notion as Modern Dance (referring to the period in the 1930s, not the broader genre), a style of dance that needed to be replaced, rather than, as mbjerk pointed out above, a language that continues to grow.

Link to comment

From where I am, it often appears that many ADs

(or choreographers, or whoever decides what is to be done) are mainly in search of popularity in the media.

(Oh, well... I am FAR away, so this is probably not at all of consequence; but nevermind!)

The main problem with this is that many of those who have a say in the media around here are fairly jaded and bored and yet not especially knowledgeable.

So the ADs or choreographers - or whoever - set out to put together something "which will really 'wow' the critics", and not incidentally get the name of the maker (theatre director / choreographer) in the national or international press.

Little attention seems to be paid to trying to find beauty or truth or any of that.

A lot of attention seems to be paid to trying to be as individual and shocking as possible.

In this, the dance-vocabulary chosen is often NOT the classical; as that would probably be seen straight away as "old and staid", and not worthy of being mentioned in the press.

I would love to see more innovations in classical dance; but not of the sort where the dancers merely start speaking obscure texts and wearing high-heeled shoes.

I do think it would be best to build on the classical vocabulary, if that is what one decides to work with, instead of throwing it out entirely as "old hat".

It is as with any language, which is continually growing and developing.

There are so many possibilities! Just as one can continue to write wonderful stories with the same language; or paint pictures with the same colors....

It would be a good start if the ADs and choreographers were not at the mercy of "whoever holds the purse-strings", especially when those folks have no idea of what ballet or dance is, and then blindly follow the press.

mbjerk wrote:

As a dancer, I was always told that when I could hold an

audience's attention standing still for a time, then I was a

true dancer. Ditto for choreographers, when they can hold an

audience's attention with simplicity, then they have begun to

master the art.

I like that.

I feel the same way for most art.

It is often the spaces between the shapes/ sounds/ movements which make the difference.

And this -to me- often has everything to do with simplicity.

Oh, to be able to write pithily!

;)

-diane-

Link to comment
Originally posted by diane

From where I am, it often appears that many ADs  

(or choreographers, or whoever decides what is to be done) are mainly in search of popularity in the media. (Oh, well... I am FAR away, so this is probably not at all of consequence; but nevermind!)

The main problem with this is that many of those who have a say in the media around here are fairly jaded and bored and yet not especially knowledgeable.  

So the ADs or choreographers - or whoever - set out to put together something "which will really 'wow' the critics", and not incidentally get the name of the maker (theatre director / choreographer) in the national or international press.  

Little attention seems to be paid to trying to find beauty or truth or any of that. A lot of attention seems to be paid to trying to be as individual and shocking as possible.  

In this, the dance-vocabulary chosen is often NOT the classical; as that would probably be seen straight away as "old and staid", and not worthy of being mentioned in the press.  

It is the same here, perhaps more so -- and I agree with everything you wrote. As a critic writing for a daily paper, everything is news driven. New ballet, new choreographer, new cast. Reflection is something left to someone else, except there isn't someone else any more. There's no long term view. They treat the public as though we're slobbering dogs lunging at red meat; and if we're treated that way long enough, that's what we'll become. (With apologies to dogs, of whom I am quite fond.)

One of the several reasons I started Ballet Alert! is that, as an editor, I met several young dance crtiics who proposed articles about Improv Festivals, or Cutting Edge Choreography -- I'd take them; they need to be covered, too. But they'd be living in cities with a major, or undercovered, or otherwise interesting, ballet company, and I'd ask if they'd write about that. "Oh, I love classical ballet, even though I realize it's very old-fashioned," they'd say. When people are embarrased to say they are interested in ballet, we have a problem.

Link to comment

as Alexandra has just written:

"Reflection is something left to someone else, except there isn't someone else any more". Truer than true !

Classical ballet is about as out of date as astrophysics, or civil engineering. Do any of us recall being told that the Internet Bubble, or the Property Bubble, or the Stock Market Bubble, were going to replace Reality ? That the Videogame "Industry" was about to replace food, agriculture and farmers ?

My little finger tells me that the Pina Bausch Bubble is not destined to replace Reality, either.

Link to comment

I thihk we need the Pina Bausches of the world AND ballet -- I think there's room for both. There should be people who are brave enough to work in the temporal -- make what you need to do, trends be damned, if it lasts, it lasts. It can be very exciting, it's fine. It's a personal expression created through a personal vocabulary.

But we also need work that is created consciously to last and that uses a more common, infinitely expandable vocabulary, I think, and we need people to preserve those works that are for institutions -- because the very role of an institution is to preserve and protect as well as create.

Link to comment

Let me just reiterate, for the sake of clarity (I'm not taking offense, grace and Alexandra, it's just so important, I have to say it twice), that today's upcoming choreographers working with ballet companies seem to be choreographing in pidgin! Christopher Wheeldon being a notable and laudable exception!:)

Link to comment

Can you imagine BLANCA LI

a former gymnast and night-club artist, with NO KNOWLEDGE of classical ballet whatsoever, being given a commission by Brigitte Lefevre to choreograph a one-hour work on POB étoiles ?

It happend, in 2002 !

On the strength of that masterwork, "Scheherezade" - a description of which I shall spare you here - the lovely Blanca, who is said to be a Lion (Lioness ? ) of Paris Nightlife, was appointed to head the ballet of the Komische Oper Berlin. That, as its name does NOT indicate, is one of Germany's leading troupes.

That little adventure lasted about three months...

Bon sang ne saurait mentir, as the French say, which translates roughly as The Truth, will Out.

Link to comment

not to change the topic, but i finally had the opportunity to see a wheeldon work this year, and was 'underwhelmed' (to quote ms. kirkland, who used the term to comment about something else). mel - like alexandra, i was agreeing with you (both).

good story, katherine - quite remarkable.

Link to comment

I think Wheeldon's still green, but worth watching -- to continue off-topic and let Mel get in his plug :) I think one of the problems with the post-Balanchine era (speaking from a U.S. perspective, of course) is that we were dealing with a mature choreographer from the time NYCB was founded and Balanchine was in his 40s. It takes awhile for choreographers to mature -- Fokine being one 20th century exception to this -- and many do their finest work in their 50s. I think Wheeldon also may be one of those who's best judged looking at his entire oeuvre (I think Ashton is another). This or that ballet may be judged solidly constructed, but slight -- but put them all together and they stand for something. That said, it's still early days and who knows what Wheeldon will be like at 46.

Katherine, I'm not as bothered by ONE nonballet ballet at the Paris Opera; DeValois's writing convinced me of the place of novelty in a repertory. (It's fine in its place, and if everyone involved realizes that it's a novelty, the Twinkie, if you will, rather than the beef or spinach or tofu casserole on the school cafeteria menu, and not let the children eat too many Twinkies.) What troubles me is that nearly the entire current POB repertory is either nonballets or Rudiballets (a/k/a "the classics"). THAT can lead to audience bifurcation, as mentioned above, rather than exposing the whole audience to a range of different styles. Have Bianca Li, but have her on a program with a Leo Staats (revolutionary idea) and a Balanchine or Ashton or Robbins. Make each segment of the audience sit through what they think they don't like, in other words. :)

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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