The dead hand of Artists' heirs?

[Ian Macmillan]

The Times' chief Arts Writer, Richard Morrison, has published a piece to day in which he's pretty critical of the powers that heirs continue to wield over performance and interpretation of a forebear's work:

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/richard-morrison-artists-heirs-shouldnt-be-allowed-the-power-to-censor-their-work-trg5fgj36?shareToken=ce4a16491f0e27b579ffb15eea65e66b

 

That link should take you behind the paywall.  Reactions?

[Vanartus]

Many thanks for this. Never knew about the RB Apollo débacle either. A friend of mine - not a balletomane - far prefers theatre and opera because he feels they are both far freeer to experiment...he feels they are more “confident” as art forms. An interesting choice of word. 

[ninamargaret]

Not at all sure how I react to this. While I want ,in many cases,to be able to see what the original composer/ choreographer wanted me to see I do not really see why their wishes should be set in stone for a long period of time. Having said that, I find some modern interpretations of works so far away from the original ideas of the author as to render the work incomprehensible. I suppose I want new ideas provided I like them - totally unfair and impossible! But I think that too close adherence to ' the original' can stifle a performer's interpretive skills. 

[capybara]

Isn't it ownership  rather than copyright on the part of heirs and foundations which is the issue?

There has been many a mention on here about heirs/guardians who take it upon themselves to make changes of which not everyone approves!

[Fonty]

I suppose it depends on exactly what the original choreographer stipulated at time of their death.  It is obvious that Balanchine liked his women to be leggy and skinny, but what would happen if the Balanchine estate insisted that every female dancer cast must be over a certain height, and weigh less than a certain amount?  

 

I guess part of the problem might be that of Trustees using their own personal prejudices to justify bans.  There is the famous case of the RB dancer deemed to be not the right shape (I am paraphrasing politely here) to dance Tatiana in Cranko's Onegin, by one of the representatives of his estate.  The sad thing was I had already seen her dance this before, and I thought she was terrific in the role.  Why she should be thought unsuitable later on is a mystery to me.  

 

 

[betterankles]

3 hours ago, Fonty said:

I suppose it depends on exactly what the original choreographer stipulated at time of their death.  It is obvious that Balanchine liked his women to be leggy and skinny, but what would happen if the Balanchine estate insisted that every female dancer cast must be over a certain height, and weigh less than a certain amount?  

 

I guess part of the problem might be that of Trustees using their own personal prejudices to justify bans.  There is the famous case of the RB dancer deemed to be not the right shape (I am paraphrasing politely here) to dance Tatiana in Cranko's Onegin, by one of the representatives of his estate.  The sad thing was I had already seen her dance this before, and I thought she was terrific in the role.  Why she should be thought unsuitable later on is a mystery to me.  

 

 

Except that's a bit of a legend.   A number of Balanchine dancers were not particularly long legged, tall or that skinny!

 

Not discussing the particular example in your second paragraph Fonty, but dancers don't always dance similarly throughout their careers, and while they may be suitable or unsuitable for a particular role at some juncture in their careers, they may become more or less so at another point...

[Bluebird]

6 hours ago, Fonty said:

 There is the famous case of the RB dancer deemed to be not the right shape (I am paraphrasing politely here) to dance Tatiana in Cranko's Onegin, by one of the representatives of his estate.  The sad thing was I had already seen her dance this before, and I thought she was terrific in the role.  Why she should be thought unsuitable later on is a mystery to me.  

 

 

 

If we're thinking of the same occasion, the dancer in question had just come back after an injury and had probably gained a couple of pounds during her time off.  At the time, we heard that the representative of the estate thought that she would not, therefore,  show off the costumes to their best advantage.  It was, in fact, a very last minute decision as many of us saw her performing in an Onegin rehearsal during an Insight Day which took place the Saturday before the first night of the run.  

[Fonty]

5 hours ago, betterankles said:

Except that's a bit of a legend.   A number of Balanchine dancers were not particularly long legged, tall or that skinny!

 

 

But I thought his favourites fitted that description?  Or is that a later trend?  Given the costumes he liked dancers to wear, that body type certainly looks the best in them.

 

1 hour ago, Bluebird said:

 

If we're thinking of the same occasion, the dancer in question had just come back after an injury and had probably gained a couple of pounds during her time off.  At the time, we heard that the representative of the estate thought that she would not, therefore,  show off the costumes to their best advantage.   

 

I could understand that argument from the rep if the costumes were the unforgiving, white bathing suit type that Balanchine favoured.  But Tatiana wears long gowns, doesn't she?  Not sure if a couple of pounds would make that much difference to that kind of outfit.  It does sound like an excuse to me!

[Lizbie1]

Not even an excuse, more like an easily deciphered code.

[capybara]

2 hours ago, Fonty said:

Not sure if a couple of pounds would make that much difference to that kind of outfit.  It does sound like an excuse to me!

 

Like Bluebird, I saw the piano dress rehearsal for that Onegin and this ballerina looked absolutely fine in a role which she had excelled in a few years earlier. Something else was clearly afoot!

[Angela]

Normally with the Cranko Estate it's not about the look of the ballerina, but they care very much if they change steps (Evelyn Hart did), if they overact, if they change the acting or the personality of the character (Margaret Illmann's mistake) or if the ballerina and her fame are "huger than the role" - that was the reason that Sylvie Guillem never did Tatiana.

I only repeat here what I heard and read during decades of watching Cranko ballets, please don't hold me responsible for these decisions.

[Fonty]

9 hours ago, Angela said:

Normally with the Cranko Estate it's not about the look of the ballerina, but they care very much if they change steps (Evelyn Hart did), if they overact, if they change the acting or the personality of the character (Margaret Illmann's mistake) or if the ballerina and her fame are "huger than the role" - that was the reason that Sylvie Guillem never did Tatiana.

 

  Well, I think most representatives would object to most of those things, although in the case of overacting, surely that is a subjective opinion?  But Guillem seems to have been prevented from playing the role because she was extremely successful in her chosen career!

[alison]

12 hours ago, Angela said:

Normally with the Cranko Estate it's not about the look of the ballerina, but they care very much if they change steps (Evelyn Hart did), if they overact, if they change the acting or the personality of the character (Margaret Illmann's mistake) or if the ballerina and her fame are "huger than the role" - that was the reason that Sylvie Guillem never did Tatiana.

 

Interesting, particularly since I recall one ballerina dancing Tatiana early on whose characterisation I thought was entirely wrong - more of an Olga - but who was allowed to continue dancing the role.  Although admittedly her characterisation was greatly improved after the initial run.