Jump to content

godots_arrived

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    64

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by godots_arrived

  1. godots_arrived
    Since this is "The Random Thread," here's another thing I have been thinking about: When is Swan Lake not Swan Lake? Actually, what I really mean is when does a work of art stop being "genuine," or at least a genuine interpretation of the creator's intentions? The rolling of the ball on this thought was started by the Bolshoi's current Swan Lakes and FoPs, hence the chosen wording -- although I am not suggesting that I don't think either of those performances were not the ballets intended (although whether they are is precisely the point.) The question is, how much tinkering to the choreography (call it tinkering, revising, updating...as you will) and changing of the narrative (in the case of Swan Lake, the ending in particular) can you do without changing the "golden thread" so much that it starts to diminish what the intended Swan Lake is? I don't know FoP nearly as well, but someone in the closed thread wrote a lengthy and erudite post suggesting the present version is significantly different to the original. So is it still FoP? Just because the basic story and costumes are approximately the same, is this enough? Is a work of art what the creator intended, or is it what has become with each successive layer of interpretation? And what do we (or you) want to see? This gets even more interesting with music where at least as many, if not more, liberties are taken with scores, (particularly by certain conductors.) If you take scores literally, most of us will never have heard an authentically played Beethoven Symphony (because virtually no one observes his metronome markings. We play Beethoven considerably more slowly than it is written, perhaps with good reason.) Repeats are sometimes observed and sometimes dropped in many works...should following the composer's instructions be a literal process or is composition and choreography just a rough guide to a creative intent? And if yes, why are some recordings of the same piece as much as 15 minutes different in length (various examples) and some ballets barely recognizable in places to what you expect? One question is what do we, or what should we expect when we go to see Swan Lake (or anything else)? Should we expect an execution of what the original work is, or an interpretation, or a revision, or an update? And when do the latter three stop being Swan Lake (if they do at all?) If I'd said in my Bolshoi review "well, I enjoyed that but it wasn't Flames of Paris" would that observation have been justified. Might have I have been right? If I'm staging SL, am I allowed to reduce the fouettes by half because that's how I think it should go, or altogether change the ending? Just wittering but if anyone has any thoughts...
  2. godots_arrived
    This is an interesting point and raises a question: Whether you're a professional reviewer or an amateur posting here, aren't all reviews by definition simply an expression of the writer's opinion and impressions? If that's the case, and I would contend that it is, then whatever and however you write remains a "review." To give an example of what I mean, I lacerated the violin soloist for taking liberties with the score in the White Swan Pas de Deux. Was this my impression? Well, yes. But it's also fact. There's a printed score that doesn't have exaggerated vibrato written all over it. Or was this a review? Well, isn't my impression offered to someone else by definition a review? If I print my opinion you can accept it or reject it, but you consider it more or less as a review to which you have a personal response shaped by your own experience. This raises another issue: Whether you choose to use the word "review" or not, any commentary on a ballet we've seen tells you not just about the ballet but also about the reviewer. What each of us observes at the same ballet is digested through the prism of personal experience and knowledge and for each of us, that is different. And, inevitably, it shapes our response. The better we come to know reviewers -- or in this case posters on the forum -- the easier it becomes to make sense of their thoughts. Thanks for the thought-provoking thread.
  3. godots_arrived
    Not a stage door story but I once persuaded a new girlfriend to go to her first opera (mid-90s, from memory), at the Colosseum, promising I would help guide her through it. Such was my desire (to impress her), it was one of those very rare occasions that I bought expensive stalls tickets. We took our seats, I predictably became engrossed in conversation with her and as the lights dimmed and noise diminished immediately prior to the curtain I took the opportunity to look at my other-side neighbour. It was Mark Morris. Didn't pay much attention to girlfriend for the rest of the evening. Relationship didn't work out either (you won't be surprised to know that I'm much better at offending people than dating them!). But I did have a loverly conversation with Mark.
  4. godots_arrived
    Nice. I think when all is said and done it boils down to "use your common sense." As a rule to would seem that 95% of performers will be happy to sign/pose for polite audience members 95% of the time. Just have your pen/camera ready, know what you're doing, and do it quickly and politely. I'm rather tempted to stage door hang for the first time after Friday's Corsaire!
  5. godots_arrived
    James -- fair enough. I agree that I resorted to cliche. While there's a reason cliches exist, your point is taken. Also, I've had enough controversy :-) Anyway, on another subject and somewhat back to Swan Lake (and FoP,) when I wonder, is a review best written? Immediately after a performance when the experience is still fresh (which is when I wrote my first post about Swan Lake) or a day or two later when, perhaps, the ballet has had a chance to "settle" in the mind? Or even later, after that, by which time your thoughts may have matured. Or perhaps time has misled you into tempering or over-colouring your initial reaction. I say this with my responses to the Bolshoi season in mind. Ten days or so later, Smirnova's Odette/Odile has grown in my memory and while not mitigating some of my earlier criticisms about the performance as a whole, has made them seem less important in the end. Were I to write the review today, I would probably focus more on her compelling interpretation and execution of the role because, it turns out, a). It really was that good, and b It has (for me) to be the transcendent experience of the run. It really lives in the memory, something I perhaps did not expect it to on the night. Conversely, my somewhat more negative (although I did love the dancing as a series of "parts") review of FoP would not change five days later. Alexandrova didn't move me that night and this sense has not abated with time. She's a great dancer and her performance was as technically polished as they come but separation has not palliated what I think I saw on the night. Do others go through this process of evolving thoughts about performances or do you leave the theatre with a fixed and unchanging view of what you've seen? As the end of the Bolshoi run approaches, do you think now as you did then? Should we keep updating review threads over a long period aware that how our thoughts evolve is as interesting and valuable as our first perceptions? Is a really great performance only one that stands the test of time? All grist for the mill...
  6. godots_arrived
    Great post. Although I don't generally "do stage doors," I have a similar story though musical rather than ballet that I will recount for what it's worth. I had just seen Solti conducting his Chicago Symphony in Mahler 9 at the Kennedy Center in Washington. DC some years ago. Solti was then, and remains, one of my musical heroes. Anyway, the Stage Door person was actually an acquaintance of mine at the time so the girlfriend and I thought we'd stop by and say hello to him after leaving the concert hall. As we stood there chatting to him (and we really had no intention other than that) one of Sir Georg's entourage came out into the foyer and, assuming we were there in the hope of seeing Solti (which hadn't even occurred to us) asked us if we'd like to meet the maestro? Do pigs fly? Obviously, we replied "yes." We were promptly taken into his (large) dressing where he was seated on a couch, next to a grand piano. He invited us to sit down beside him, tea was served, and he proceeded to interrogate us with regard to our thoughts on the performance, taking interest in our replies. To make various points, he'd go to the piano to underline his explanations of how or why something was interpreted this way or that. We must have been with him for half an hour and we left with his baton as well as autographs. Sadly, those were the days before selfies. It was a once in a lifetime experience I never have and never will forget.
  7. godots_arrived
    Vicky it isn't a big thing. Why do you think this is personal? I couldn't care less about what happens at the stage door. Myself, I don't even go there most of the time. It's simply that someone raised the topic and I threw out a response. That's all. I might be right and I might be wrong in my response/opinion but it's not life and death...it's not even an argument. I only commented further subsequently to clarify what I had meant so I wouldn't be misunderstood...not to defend what I'd said. I don't even feel strongly about stage door protocol myself.
  8. godots_arrived
    Thanks, Anna. Well, at least there is one offense on this board that I can't be blamed for :-)
  9. godots_arrived
    Does the topic include the issues at the stage door that someone raised and which has started a sub-discussion or is the topic related only to the performance itself? Please clarify!
  10. godots_arrived
    Janet - won't reply in detail but I think you're taking my thoughts literally rather than generally. I simply meant that if, somehow, a "class" of people (say, those in first class seats) suddenly and visibly demanded something, they would more likely get it than those in economy class. I also wasn't trying to say everyone at the stage door is an "autograph hunter." I just used that as a convenient catch-all term to cover the general mood. Anyway, you may be right (about equal treatment.) Opinions are what they are!
  11. godots_arrived
    Totally agree with everything (except your thoughts on the finale but my problems with that related to the music -- or lack of it -- rather than the drama.) For me, too, (and as I have said before) Smirnova has also been the revelation of the season. Her swan endures in the memory; it's what I instantly recall when I think back on the last month and I doubt I could have articulated why that is so as well as you have. I will say, slightly changing the subject, that musical performance of Swan Lake did really pain me. There were problems of intonation in the brass throughout the performance. And the White Swan violin solo was sugar-coated in unnecessary (almost vulgar) vibrato. A swan, surely, is a reflection of icy elegance?...the music speaks for itself and the dance interprets it. Turning the solo into a crude, heart-tugging, crowd-pleasing folk song detracts from the essence of Odile's character and insults the audience by implying they couldn't work it out without an explicit push from the chair. It doesn't enhance it. You don't represent a swan with schmaltz. Well, that's how I saw it anyway. But Smirnova? Utterly fantastic.
  12. godots_arrived
    I don't think there's any argument at all that we should be treated equally regardless of what we pay. That was exactly my underlying point too. But that rarely happens. The point I was making is that in any entertainment (and for whatever reasons), the really devoted fans tend to be in the cheap seats. Not always, but as a rule. Whether it's the terraces at football or the amphitheater in the ROH, that's where you find the noise in the former and the impoverished ballet students desperate to see the performance in the latter. And by and large, in either instance, those you find at the stage door waiting to greet the performers an hour after the show/game tend to be drawn from that core of devotees. The wealthier patrons tend to be long gone by midnight. What I would contend is that if there was suddenly some sort of recognizable upsurge in expensive seat holders seeking autographs, that the ROH would suddenly become more accommodating in the management of the stage door. If your 150 pound seat holders want something, in my view they're more likely to get it than those of us who stand or sit in the slips. I may be wrong, but that is/was my contention. How anyone can read "sugar daddies" (I know it wasn't you) into my assertion frankly says more about the way their minds work than anything written in my thread. That was a truly pathetic and offensive response.
  13. godots_arrived
    Good God, looking at that photo I'm so glad I wasn't there. I'd still be in recovery now if I had been.
  14. godots_arrived
    No. I meant that if the stage door was regularly frequented by expensive seat-holders (half of whom are interested in the social occasion rather than the dance) then I suspect the stage door staff would soon improve their social skills. Or be told to.
  15. godots_arrived
    I bet the customers in the 150 quid seats who aren't the ones at the stage door at 11pm aren't treated like that.
  16. godots_arrived
    For Goodness sakes, please read my posts carefully before replying with angry retorts. The OP had written "lexandrova and Lantratov looked at each other as if to say "are we doing this? Yes let's"" and I was merely responding to that by pointing out that the spontaneity he suggested wasn't the case. Nowhere did I say that it mattered that it was planned and repeated. Nowhere did I say that it was wrong to do what they did. I simply replied with a fact in response to a statement. That is all. Please drop it. Thank you.
  17. godots_arrived
    The audience did indeed love it. However, as the same stunt was pulled in more than one performance, I doubt it was quite as spontaneous as you imply!
  18. godots_arrived
    Despite my (severe) reservations about the production as a whole, Smirnova's Odette/Odile has been a highlight of the run for me. Those going tonight (Tuesday) are in for a treat in my view. TBH I am almost tempted to go down to London and linger around the box office in the vague hope that someone shows up with a spare ticket such is my wish to see her again.
  19. godots_arrived
    S -- thanks. Your take on emotional vs. learned response was fascinating and the point about received learning was bang on and one I should have made myself. You did what I had hoped would happen all along: I wasn't ever trying to say that my view (or any view) held supremacy...just that a discussion of our different responses to art was interesting and it'd be engaging to hear what people thought. You picked up and covered all the areas I was hoping everyone would dig into. It's a fascinating subject. With regard to the curtain-ducking episode, your justification is beautifully put and, I think, rather makes me eat my words. You are right. As for my thoughts about Nureyev, you're right about that as well but as I can't come even close to talking objectively about him he's a subject I'll avoid. I think as I said some time earlier, our response to a performance does tell us a lot not only about the performance but about ourselves, too.
  20. godots_arrived
    FAO Mods. Surely an open admission that SPD444 has written multiple posts simply to bait someone they disagree with is against the conditions of membership? "...abusive...language will not be tolerated" Further, I note that a number of mods have "liked" these endless unfounded personal attacks which rather calls into question both the integrity of the board and its policing. Let's sum this up. I posted a review about FoP. One line was condescending. I have admitted that and quickly apologised for it. Those who disagreed with my review and said so I have responded to politely, thoughtfully and carefully almost one-by-one. And mostly in a friendly manner. Yet one person, SPD44, has from the start has not offered a single constructive response to my observations...he has just provided a stream of what amounts to one personally abusive retort after another ending with an admission that he has simply been trolling me. And this, apparently, is fine. Can you explain what is going on here, and if you think the above summation is unfair then let me know why?
  21. godots_arrived
    If we're going to discuss ballet technique, at the FoP performance it was actually a knee-skid under the curtain from a running start. Was the same choreography used in Don Q, or was yours a full-length run? :-)
  22. godots_arrived
    Great post, FLOSS. I think you have managed to capture more or less what I said/felt but without offending anyone or being (unintentionally) patronising. I could not agree with you more and thank you for articulating a number of important points so clearly.
  23. godots_arrived
    Yes, I think you're probably -- well, definitely -- right. Agree there have been some really interesting side discussion though but it has veered significantly from Flames of Paris. I think the line that I've highlighted above is bang on as a discussion point (and I suspect we'd take opposite sides of the debate!) If you'll feed me a bowl of Scouse I'll head north immediately and we can have at it. :-)
  24. godots_arrived
    I actually think we agree with each other completely in the substance of our views. Where we differ is only the words we use to summarise them. What you call "honesty" I simply call a "deeply personal" response but I think we're describing the same thing and we both agree that it's entirely valid. The only point I was trying to make earlier is that there's a difference between forms of honesty: "personal honesty" -- how something affected me, and "dispassionate/objective honesty" -- where the goal is to assess quality based on various metrics, not emotional response (example: a dancer with poor technique nevertheless reduces you to tears with their performance.) What I meant to say, and probably didn't do it very well, is that I didn't think "personal honesty" is, on it's own, an adequate means of assessing the quality of a performance. It's a component, yes, but you need both personal and objective responses to really get to the heart of things. "I absolutely loved it" does not equate to "it was a brilliant performance, perfectly executed." It's the difference between "perfect" and "perfect for me." I will accept that some accuse me of over-intellectualising and that's fair enough but for me while personal emotional response is an important component of enjoyment of the arts, I still want to be able to make dispassionate judgments about what I've seen.
  25. godots_arrived
    Once again, a personal insult but you ignore the substance of the post where I explicitly pointed out why I justifiably used the word "mugging." You appear to like baiting me but to intensely dislike objective responses to your taunts. Troll? How do you work that out from my post, or is anyone who expresses a qualified opinion that differs from yours a troll?
×
×
  • Create New...