Sylvie Guillem

[Bruce]

I'm rather saddened that nobody has said a thing about Sylvie Guillem's final London performances, either the ones at Sadler's Wells or last week at the Coliseum.

The forum has always been very ballet-ballet and Guillem having moved on is not the star for some that perhaps she was. But seeing her final London show on Sunday, all contemporary in style, you couldn't help but notice her ballet roots shining in all she did. One of the finest ballerinas and dancers of her generation, her moving on deserves to be marked because she made a difference. I also recall that when I started Balletco in 1996 one of the few other web sites around was Jim Fowler's Guillem appreciation pages and Jim came to dominate the Chat page (the first interactive forum part of Balletco) with his wit and wisdom. He and a few other ardent fans eventually had dinner with Sylvie - he was beyond pleased. And a side of Guillem not often seen.

Her work rate and commitment is legendary and seeing her dance on Sunday you were not seeing a 50 year old take it easy or on a downward path - she's getting out at the top of her game. One of my all time best weeks in ballet-watching was seeing Guillem dance Juliet 3 times, and every time she died differently and played with other aspects of the role, ever hunting for a better interpretation and yet all of them were brilliant.

Besides her drive to perform work at its best, I admire her commitment to the new - that feeling that dance goes nowhere by living in its past - and to see her perform in Forsythe's ballet company works on the ROH stage was a revelation. Forsythe makes good ballet dancers sparkle, but Guillem was from another planet in terms of technique and snap. While it's been terrific seeing her doing things backed by Sadler's Wells (and lucky for us in London), it seems such a lost opportunity at the Royal Ballet, that such a spearhead for the new faced, at that time, an organisation largely concentrating on its traditional knitting.

Although Guillem has said her farewell to London audiences there are still some UK performances: in Edinburgh (8-10 August) and then Birmingham (8/9 September). Say goodbye if you can and marvel at a body, a mix of sylph and steel, that can still hold you transfixed.

I'm going to end with a lengthy quote from 1966 that I used on a Balletco page - it's the Sunday Telegraph's Nicholas Dromgoole about Guillem dancing Grand Pas Classique. I saw a few of those performances and the next time I think I felt so happily elated was seeing Osipova and Vasiliev do their first Don Q in London - they brought the house down of course. Anyway here's Dromgoole...

"Sylvie Guillem had chosen a show-off piece by Victor Gsovsky to music by Auber, run-of-the-mill choreography to put it mildly, but when shot through with her gleaming intelligence, it was transformed. It became a vehicle through which she captivated us, conveyed the fun of moving with incredible virtuoso skills, wrenching the music out of context and making it a part of something else: dance, nothing but lovely dance.

Habitual readers of this column will know that I have this appalling tendency to wax lyrical over Guillem, over her feet, her arms, those incredibly high extensions, those fabulous balances, the body that not only looks deliciously erotic but also seems able to do impossibly athletic things with brio and a wonderfully imperturbable air. Gsovsky's steps really amount to little more than choreographic junk, a frayed piece of very old rope, but Guillem seems to be saying, "Yes, of course it is old rope, but just watch what I can do with it, and now, and this will surprise you, I am going to try this..." and her audience sits elated with surprise and delight.

She is a phenomenon, and we are extraordinarily lucky to have these chances to enjoy her."

[LinMM]

I was looking for a thread on these Guillem performances yesterday and couldn't find one so glad you started it.

I was there on Sunday and will make a comment tomorrow .....however am not at home this week and have to grab bits of wifi when I can coupled with have to get to the Coli now for La Sylphide and may have a bit of a walk.

 

I will say it was a very moving farewell and loved the last piece"bye" in particular she certainly got the standing ovation she deserved at the end. And what truly wonderful dancing still I hope she will be persuaded to do the odd performance now and again.

[alison]

I'm rather saddened that nobody has said a thing about Sylvie Guillem's final London performances, either the ones at Sadler's Wells or last week at the Coliseum.

 

Well, I might have written something, but I was in the middle of what appeared to be a particularly nasty virus/trojan infestation on both computers at the time

[barton22]

I thought her performance on Sunday afternoon was superb, but rather wish I had not seen it and treated her first "last" London show on May 31st as my last viewing of her dancing.  The atmosphere of that show was more electric (partly, I suspect, because so many participants in the London dance world had turned out for what they had been told was her London finale) - I felt that while she got a great response from the Coliseum audience on Sunday, it just didn't feel anything like the same as the response at Sadler's Wells.  I also thought the pieces worked better on the Sadler's Wells stage and, especially, the lighting really wasn't well done at the Coli whereas it was great (noticeably different) at Sadler's Wells.  It was still a great performance, but just a bit of a let down after the final one at Sadler's Wells.

 

I'd also say that while they were not bad, the new works by Khan and Maliphant really weren't their best work and she deserved better from them (especially for her final shows as a dancer).

Edited August 6, 2015 by barton22

[FLOSS]

Bruce, perhaps not everyone idolized Guillem in the way you clearly do. I know that while I admired her in some things I thought that her Marguerite was unidiomatic and a great mistake while her updated Giselle was,well, bizarre.Being a great dancer does not guarantee the ability to identify great choreographers a problem that Osipova is experiencing at present.As far as her post Royal Ballet career was concerned the problem for me was that so much of the new work that Guillem appeared in was pretty vacuous and only of interest because of her presence.On the basis of these works I am far from convinced that we would have seen much that was worth keeping if she had stayed on and become the spearhead of the new at Covent Garden.

 

The question about the work that the Covent Garden company should be performing is an interesting one. De Valois intended that her company would create its own repertory and only acquired the nineteenth century classics to establish and maintain the technical skills of her dancers.For its first sixty years it was a choreographer's company.Its first three directors made works for it and had very clear ideas about the major works that it should add to its repertory apart from those that were being created in house. The overall result is that its back catalogue is particularly rich.The question about what a company in this situation should do is of particular interest as Hamburg is about to experience the same problem as Neumeier who created that company's style is succeded by Lloyd Riggins.

 

The options available to a choreographer's company which is no longer led by a choreographer are at one extreme to follow the NYCB and the Balanchine Trust route and preserve every choreographic nail clipping and at the other to wind up the company and abandon its repertory. There is also the via media of the Danes who started out in 1870 with seventy Bournonville ballets prepared for preservation and performance and which by the nineteen thirties had lost the bulk of them because they did not fit in with, the then, director's ideas about the Bournonville repertory.

 

Guillem like all dancers is the product of her birth, background and training in Paris.The Paris Opera, in its pursuit of the novel and fashionable ended the nineteenth century with only Coppelia to its name. In the twentieth century Giselle was restored to it and Lifar made some works which are performed from time to time. When Nureyev became its director he gave the company the nineteenth century classics that the Royal Ballet had acquired fifty years before.The other important factor in all this is the size of the Opera's subsidy.France rarely stints when it comes to the arts and la gloire.

 

The Covent Garden company is in a very different position.It performs in a country which is cheerfully philistine or at least does not regard the word as an insult. It is required to cover its costs.As it came close to being reduced to a part time company and at one point faced threats of being disbanded it comes as no surprise to me that it concentrated on its "traditional knitting" rather than pursuing the nebulous new choreography that so many express enthusiasm for and say that it should be doing.It is not entirely clear which sort of dance works those proposing new choreography have in mind; who the choreographers are and where the audience for these works are going to come from since they can not be at Sadler's Wells and Covent Garden on the same night.Sometime ago Guillem gave an interview in which she said that she left when Mason became director because unlike Nureyev, Mason lacked vision.As far as I am aware Guillem never got as far as saying what she thought the company should be dancing.That information would have been interesting but in all of this she never addressed the different situation the two directors were in.Nureyev became director of a company with a glorious past but precious little to show for it by way of repertory. Mason became director of a company which although only a quarter of the age of the Opera Ballet has a an extraordinary repertory. She also had a number of significant anniversaries during her time in charge should she have ignored them?

 

I think that the Royal Ballet is over reliant on the three MacMillan works and would be happy to see them rested for several years but I know that is not going to happen any time soon given the effect of Lady M's threat to withdraw the performing rights to them during Stretton's tenure.I think that it is overly reliant on the nineteenth century classics and that there are far too many performances of them in a run.But I can imagine the indignation that would be expressed here if the company reverted to the policy it pursued in the sixties when dancers were cast according to their suitability for a particular role so no one danced everything.There needs to be a better balance between the nineteenth century works and the Ashton classics which are just as testing.I fear that the bulk of the Ashton repertory is in danger of being lost because unlike the MacMillan works they have no active advocate.

Edited August 6, 2015 by FLOSS

[Jan McNulty]

I assume from your comments Floss that you didn't go to see any of Ms Guillem's performances at the Coli last week.

[FLOSS]

Something strange happened while I was typing so I did not finish what I was saying about Guillem.

 

Her retirement will be mourned more by some than by others.But that is true of all dancers on their retirement.Someone once said that a ballerina is someone who can do everything but has the taste not to. So for me Guillem was a great dancer but not a great ballerina. I'm afraid it's the foot in the ear,six o'clock arabesque stuck into the nineteenth century classics that leads me to that opinion. Although I find it ugly I don't have a problem with it if that is what the choreographer intended. But where it is totally out of character with the style of the choreographic text I think it is the balletic equivalent of performing Mozart as if it was Puccini.

 

In the late nineteenth century it was acceptable to re-orchestrate and update eighteenth century music.People used to justify this by saying that Bach would have used the late nineteenth century orchestra if only it had been available to him.The same thing has happened in ballet during the last thirty plus years. In the absence of major choreographers able to channel and control technical exuberance dancers have, for good or ill,transformed not only the content of new works but the look of the classics in performance.

 

It is strange to think that while a musician performing re-orchestrated Bach today could not expect to be taken seriously dancers frequently express the view that being required to reproduce a choreographic text as set by its creator is a denial of their artistic freedom and impinges on their artistry. According to MacMillan's biographer Guillem told him that he was only the choreographer when he objected to the changes she had made to his choreography. But there are some indications that the tide is turning.Ratmansky has just mounted a new production of the Sleeping Beauty for ABT which attempts to reproduce not only the text recorded in the Stepanov notation but to dance it in period style. His Pacquita for Munich is not merely an exercise in period appropriate style and technique but a revival that restores lengthy mime sequence.

 

Yes Janet you have caught me out. I did not go to the Coli last week. A friend of mine who did,said that the pieces that Guillem danced were not particularly memorable and that the only reason for going was to see her.She added that she thought Guillem's choice of new works over the years had done little to advance the idea that dancers should have a say in the choice of repertory.

Edited August 7, 2015 by FLOSS

[Katharina]

Guillem like all dancers is the product of her birth, background and training in Paris.The Paris Opera, in its pursuit of the novel and fashionable ended the nineteenth century with only Coppelia to its name. In the twentieth century Giselle was restored to it and Lifar made some works which are performed from time to time. When Nureyev became its director he gave the company the nineteenth century classics that the Royal Ballet had acquired fifty years before.The other important factor in all this is the size of the Opera's subsidy.France rarely stints when it comes to the arts and la gloire.

 

 

I´m sure R. Nureyev had a big influence on the POB´s performing history and and appreciation of the 19th century classics but the POB did not aquire all their 19th century ballets because of him:

they had been performing Bourmeister´s Swan Lake production since 1950 (according to French wikipedia & famous disagreement with POB dancers about which version to perform),

Sleeping Beauty (complete version) was danced by POB since 1974 (ok that´s late but was a decade before Nureyev´s arrival as a direcor).

During the 19th century they also danced the premières of La Sylphide (1832, but was danced till the later 19th century, there are photos), Giselle (dropped in 1868), Le Corsaire, and, as you said, Coppélia. And so on ... (they had the original "Les Deux Pigeons" (1886), and original "Sylvia"(1876)).

Of course some of the later 19th ballets from Paris are not so well known outside of France, but the decades after Giselle weren´t entirely empty ... some of those ballets are still perfomed, although in new productions (La Source, Paquita, Sylvia).

POB did acquire the complete La Bayadère and Raymonda because of Nureyev.

 

Sorry to divert from Sylvie Guillem, but couldn´t resist ... being a fan of POB.

Edited August 7, 2015 by Katharina

[Nana Lily]

I thought her performance on Sunday afternoon was superb, but rather wish I had not seen it and treated her first "last" London show on May 31st as my last viewing of her dancing. The atmosphere of that show was more electric (partly, I suspect, because so many participants in the London dance world had turned out for what they had been told was her London finale) - I felt that while she got a great response from the Coliseum audience on Sunday, it just didn't feel anything like the same as the response at Sadler's Wells. I also thought the pieces worked better on the Sadler's Wells stage and, especially, the lighting really wasn't well done at the Coli whereas it was great (noticeably different) at Sadler's Wells. It was still a great performance, but just a bit of a let down after the final one at Sadler's Wells.

 

I'd also say that whiles they were not bad, the new works by Khan and Maliphant really weren't their best work and she deserved better from them (especially for her final shows as a dancer).

A friend and I decided to treat ourselves and went to the performance on the 29th July paying £90 each for tickets. was relieved to read this post. While I am still learning to understand what contemporary dancing is all about I was rather underwhelmed by Miss Guillem. From the performance that night I can appreciate her amazing facility, and she communicated well. Of course we both love a tutu and while we knew that we weren't going to see one but we were disappointed in the evening generally. For me the highlight was the male duet. I didn't keep my programme so can't reference who they were.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Nana Lily

[ambros1a]

I missed it, but Deborah Bull interviewed Sylvie on BBC Radio (I think) last Friday as part of their Edinburgh International Festival Conversations series.  Their webpage says it will be on iPlayer shortly:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/19mgFqGwFhpZCW2gyfnbHcb/eif-conversations-1-sylvie-guillem

[Bruce]

A friend and I decided to treat ourselves and went to the performance on the 29th July paying £90 each for tickets. was relieved to read this post. While I am still learning to understand what contemporary dancing is all about I was rather underwhelmed by Miss Guillem. From the performance that night I can appreciate her amazing facility, and she communicated well. Of course we both love a tutu and while we knew that we weren't going to see one but we were disappointed in the evening generally. For me the highlight was the male duet. I didn't keep my programme so can't reference who they were.

 

Oh what a shame. It wasn't the greatest night of works she has ever danced or that any of the choreographers have created. But, for me, it was still a last chance to see the quality of her movement and I think 'Bye' is a very good piece for her. Bul if you are not sure about the choreography or choreographers then I suspect cheap seats is a probably a good way to go generally - if no help to you at all now I know.

[Nana Lily]

Thanks Bruce, wise words. I usually watch a performance and wished I had been able to get better seats or had spent more money.

[JennyTaylor]

Sylvie Guillem is the greatest ballerina I have ever seen and though her "ballerina" days have gone, for me, seeing one of her last performances ever in the UK is an absolute must.  I have booked for Birmingham in September.

 

I was lucky enough to see her last Manon at the ROH so was able to show my appreciation then for her Royal Ballet career. I want to celebrate her again in September. Just tragic how little film there is of her in ballet roles. 

 

For those doubters, just take a check on how many dancers have stated that sharing a stage with her was the highlight of their career.

[capybara]

I remember, long ago, seeing her as Cinderella at the ROH. Everything about her performance was amazing, especially the natural detail of her relationships with all the other characters. But it was the juxtaposition of her portrayal with that seen at the matinee only a few hours before (by a much lauded dancer whom I'd better not name) which emphasised just how very special Sylvie was.

[Jacqueline]

I went to see Sylvie's final show at the Coliseum. I have only seen Sylvie live, in the latter part of her career and have tried to see as much of her as possible before the inevitable retirement. I would love to have seen her when she danced the classical roles, as I struggle to like much of the modern stuff. As Sylvie says in the programme notes though, she felt she had done all that, so why do it again. She didn't want the final shows to be the standard gala, bit of this and bit of that. While of course, that is her wish, for me the result was, in my opinion, only partially successful. 

She is a hugely charismatic dancer and riveting to watch, no matter what she does. It is hard to believe that someone who is so clearly still at the top of their game is giving it up. But as she also said, she wanted to do so why she still loved what she does and can give of her best. Amusingly, she adds that she has given a friend 'licence to kill', should she go on longer than she should, and she wanted to spare them the task.

As for the four pieces on offer, the Khan presented some striking imagery but didn't amount to very much. For me, the best piece was Maliphant's Here & After. This was more varied, with interesting lighting, some beautiful movement by Sylvie and La Scala's Emanuela Montanari and that ingredient so often missing in modern dance - a sense of humour. 

Here & After followed Forsythe's DUO2015 for two male dancers.  I gather this is a reworking of choreography originally for two female dancers. It was quite intriguing at first, but I am sorry to say the novelty quickly wore off and with a running time of around fifteen minutes, for me it was about five too long. There was also some incessant coughing from the audience throughout this piece, otherwise performed in almost total silence, which did not enhance the experience.

Finally, we had Mats Ek's Bye. I first saw this as part of 6000 Miles Away at Sadler's Wells. I do not recall being particularly enamoured of it then. Its meaning is supposedly ambiguous, but with its leanings towards change, age, exploration and so on, it is an obvious choice for a farewell performance. I didn't really like it any more this time, but it did carry extra 'emotional' pull with being time to say au revoir to Sylvie. 

I do agree with reviews that have commented on what a low key and almost downbeat show this was. I understand, that much as I would have loved to see a dash of Raymonda or Manon along with the modern works, it was unlikely to happen. This was Sylvie's show and she did what she wanted. It just seems rather a pity that with the possible exception of Here & After, the pieces weren't really worthy of her. 

She has such a huge presence, I wonder, much like the Alessandra 'Ferri' dust sprinkled over Woolf Works, what these works would be like performed by somebody else. Even with Guillem they were wafer thin.

Anyway, I think Sylvie would have been pleased with the audience reaction. She is clearly much loved. I hope she will be happy in whatever she decides to do next and I am very glad to have been lucky enough to see her in action. She is unique and people like her only come along very rarely.

Apart from seeing Sylvie Guillem, I would also like to say it was a great pleasure meeting LinMM!

Edited August 10, 2015 by Jacqueline

[MAB]

I saw her at Sadlers Wells a couple of months ago but didn't post because of the lack of enthusiasm here towards modern dance (still smarting over a comment I read here not long ago about Pina Bausch).

 

Thank you Bruce for raising this, but sorry that some have used this thread to criticize Guillem rather than celebrating a remarkable career.

[Sunrise]

I watched Sylvie in much of her later career with the RB. I didn't enjoy her transition to modern work as much so I didn't book tickets for her last performances, but she was on tv on Hardtalk in the early hours this morning, and having caught a glimpse of the program, I kind of wish I'd seen it after all (and dragged my partner along with me just so he could have seen her just once). Her quality of movement is still amazing. 

[Anon2]

I watched Sylvie in much of her later career with the RB. I didn't enjoy her transition to modern work as much so I didn't book tickets for her last performances, but she was on tv on Hardtalk in the early hours this morning, and having caught a glimpse of the program, I kind of wish I'd seen it after all (and dragged my partner along with me just so he could have seen her just once). Her quality of movement is still amazing.

Birmingham Hippodrome 8th/9th September?

[alison]

I saw her at Sadlers Wells a couple of months ago but didn't post because of the lack of enthusiasm here towards modern dance.

 

What a shame you didn't   We don't have nearly enough coverage of contemporary on here.

[LinMM]

I saw the show at the Coli on the Sunday and Guillem was in very fine form indeed.If I had been half her age I would have been glad to have had that much style and technique!

I do like Contemporary Dance but I think with such a fine dancer as Guillem I did find myself yearning for at least one more balletic piece just a nod to her past in that direction.

 

However she has chosen the final choreographers and dancers she wanted to perform with for her farewell.

The first piece techne by Akram Khan had her seemingly dancing around and to a sort of sacred tree object on the stage. She did manage some very weird shapes in this piece almost like some primeval insect the way she placed her hands and wrists on the floor and the very quick strange walking in crouch position. I was expecting the tree to suddenly move and do something like envelope her at the end or to suddenly start growing in size in response to her touch etc but no such luck a quite static prop for her to relate to and dance to. It was an okay piece and showed the wide range of movement Guillem is capable of.

The second piece was by William Forsythe Duo2015 a duet for two,male dancers in this instance Brigel Gjoka and Riley Watts both with this company. At first this piece was quite intriguing and witty in the reflexions and repetitions and developments of each other's movements but when they weren't relating and seemingly doing their own thing around the stage I did start to lose interest a bit but then towards the end pulled me in again. But a lot of dancing and no music or soundscape so such pieces I think should be shortish to be effective. It probably was just about the right length 10-15 mins is enough for a piece like this.

The third piece Here and After by Russell Maliphant was a duet with Guillem and a Scala dancer Emanuela Montanari. It was very lowly lit to start with and was glad this changed as however atmospheric I can't bear to be struggling to see what the dancers are doing!

There was then like a huge chequer board projected onto the stage and the dancing seemed to,take place within this framework. This was a much more balletic piece and it was at this point that I yearned to see her do something from Cinderella or similar!! But beautifully danced by both and difficult to tell apart at times.

The last piece Bye by Mats Ek was my favourite of the afternoon. I found this interesting and very touching and again showed of her extraordinary range of movement but in a bit more of an emotional context. She was in a room with filmed projections going on outside the room and seemed to be in an angst about staying within or going outside. Perhaps an analogy with her decision to give up dancing she wanted to go on but wanted to leave it behind and start a new life. I did love the dog walking past and wondered if it was hers in real life and whether the other people were just random or real people important to her in life.....there was no help with this in the programme. Anyway I loved this piece and especially in this context and felt a bit tearful right at the end.

 

There is a rather endearing picture of Sylvie on the front of the programme a rather shy and sweet looking four year oldish with no hint of the illustrious and wonderful career to come which I think many of us have very much enjoyed and have been extremely thankful for.

 

Sylvie Guillem has been the only dancer I could get my partner up to London to the ballet to see and it definitely wasn't just about the high legs etc. He was picking up something far more special than that .....as often non frequent ballet goers do with their fresh eyes!!

 

I do hope she will give the occasional performance from time to time but I do know that ballet is a hard task master and hard to get back to once left.....although she has said she will continue to do a daily class for a while yet!!!

 

It was also really lovely to meet Jacqueline and have someone to commiserate with ....on a difficult day getting around to and from London because of the bike race thing. But it was well worth the walk from a diverted bus From Marble Arch to see this show for me.

[Jacqueline]

Well, I might have written something, but I was in the middle of what appeared to be a particularly nasty virus/trojan infestation on both computers at the time

I would be interested to know what you might have written, if you feel like writing it now?

[John Mallinson]

I missed it, but Deborah Bull interviewed Sylvie on BBC Radio (I think) last Friday as part of their Edinburgh International Festival Conversations series.  Their webpage says it will be on iPlayer shortly:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/19mgFqGwFhpZCW2gyfnbHcb/eif-conversations-1-sylvie-guillem

 

A very good interview. Should be watched. Link.

[alison]

I would be interested to know what you might have written, if you feel like writing it now?

 

Afraid I can't remember well enough now, a couple of weeks on

[Jacqueline]

Afraid I can't remember well enough now, a couple of weeks on

Fair enough. I don't want to labour the point, but do you think your not remembering well enough a couple of weeks on, may be down to the performance not having made much impression on you? Almost two weeks on now myself, I can barely remember any of it. 

Slightly off topic about the Coliseum. I sat in the front row of the dress circle, an expensive, treat seat. I was however, disappointed by the lack of comfort, particularly leg room and  I am not particularly tall or wide. The ROH Grand Tier certainly wins the comfort stakes.

[alison]

Never, ever, sit in the central front row block of the Dress Circle at the Coli if you have even the slightest legroom problems.  It amazes me that those are the "Super" seats!  I did it once, and was in agony by the end of act 1.

[zxDaveM]

A very good interview. Should be watched. Link.

 

This was heaven. I could listen to Sylvie talk all day - and watch her dance all night!

[Jacqueline]

Never, ever, sit in the central front row block of the Dress Circle at the Coli if you have even the slightest legroom problems.  It amazes me that those are the "Super" seats!  I did it once, and was in agony by the end of act 1.

At least  I sat in an aisle seat so I wasn't hemmed in on each side. The lack of leg room is really bad and I suppose gets worse the further along you go. I can't imagine what the situation is like in the seats marked as having restricted leg room or what it would be like to sit through a lengthy performance.

I agree the BBC interview with Sylvie is well worth watching. She always comes across well, her obvious intelligence and humour make her very likeable.

Deborah Bull is also a very adept interviewer, she asks good questions and actually listens to the answers. If only more interviewers could learn that skill, instead of being desperate to interrupt and get onto the next item or make it all about themselves.

The two women seemed relaxed in each other's company and I wish I could have seen this interview before I saw the show, as it shed quite a bit of light on proceedings.

[Nina G.]

Fantastic interview by Deborah Bull (I wish she would present the RB Live Cinema!). 

 

I have followed Sylvie Guillem's career since she came to the RB, and Ms Bull's last question made me quite emotional. 

Edited August 18, 2015 by Nina G.

[Mary]

Seconded Nina, I have suggested  Ms Bull to present the live relay myself more than once, such an intelligent, knowledgeable and thoughtful interviewer. A series on the radio with her interviewing dancers would be a good second best.

[northstar]

Very interesting to read about these performances of Guillem's Life in Progress final tour. I went to see it not in London but at the Birmingham Hippodrome, it was on two nights Tues and Wed 8th and 9th September, I was there on the first of those days.

 

I've been aware of Guillem's fame as a star dancer for many years - before I ever went to a ballet, before I became a classical ballet fan, and had a sort of admiration for her despite the fact I'd seen very little of her dancing. It was probably some television documentary, probably BBC, years ago that ignited this admiration. With the advent of YouTube I was able to see some of her dancing. Like many others I was and am dazzled by her physical facility and charisma. But in fact when I first saw her dancing the classics I thought she lacked warmth and was quite clinical, although spectacular. As I've seen more classical ballet, live and recorded, I've really come to appreciate her artistry and acting ability, so I've changed my mind - she has an exquisite ability to interpret and communicate classical pieces. I'm not yet a contemporary dance fan and haven't taken much interest in her transition to that.

 

Undoubtedly it was the effect of her legendary classical reputation that made me go to see her in Birmingham. I'm still pondering the performances from Guillem and the other dancers in this programme. I cannot say it gave me the thrill and joy that classical ballet gives me, but of course I realise it is a different art form with different aims. Again there was much to admire and respect in the different pieces, but I did watch it all with a curious, analytical eye, most of it did not move me greatly. The first piece Techne by Akram Khan started out with a sense of primal physicality which I thought faded away as it went on. Forsythe's Duo with the two male dancers was my least favourite, the only other work of his I know is In the Middle Somewhat Elevated and I do like that. Duo felt long and lacked excitement, although I heard someone else say it was their favourite as I was leaving the theatre, and I've no doubt it was danced excellently by the performers. I enjoyed Maliphant's Here and After more, it had more of the excitement I didn't feel in Duo, but my main memory is again not being fully engaged with the undoubtedly fine movement on stage.

 

I do remember being moved by Mats Ek's Bye. What I love so much in classical ballet is the mutual enhancement of movement and music (as in the Red Shoes - 'nothing matters but the music!' ) and I felt Beethoven's last sonata really enriched by Guillem's dancing of Ek's choreography, and vice-vera, in that inexplicable and magical way that happens when I watch classical ballet. That pose which Gullem strikes (a photo of which the Guardian has used in Luke Jennings' review), reclining, legs raised, bringing her hand with curling fingers to her face, seemed to perfectly match the music, and I am still seeing in my mind days after the performance.  I thought Ek's curt description in the programme was perfect - about a woman entering a room and after a while leaving it, 'ready to join others' - I didn't see it overall as a sad, poignant piece; rather it was hopeful in an unsentimental way, more about progress than farewell.

 

I'm very glad I went. Although we will never see Guillem's like again, and to see her perform a classical role live must have been an experience to treasure, it is a constant source of wonder to me that there are so many brilliant dancers performing today, and all so individual, offering complementary facets of style and facility. Despite her retirement there are still other dancers offering magical performances to be seen on a routine basis all around the country. These thoughts about are just my initial reaction to the pieces. I've changed my taste in other art forms enough to know that I may well change my mind on these pieces, and modern dance in general, in future. I also realise that I'm forever comparing my reaction to that joyful enjoyment I get from ballet, which is perhaps not a fair or sensible way, and a result of my own limitations of perception.

 

I was very interested in Floss' detailed thoughts on ballet style, and would agree in part, I'm not sure about 6 o'clock extensions either. But I'm not sure I'd want the tide to turn, and to reverse technical prowess just for the sake of it. Yes, probably technique is often used as a substitute for communication, and Guillem's dancing probably encouraged this trend, but I do think she had exceptional artistry as well. I've seen Ratmansky's Sleeping Beauty that Floss referred to (I wrote about it in a older thread) with the curtailed extensions and insistence on demi pointe, but again the individual dancer's interpretation and communicative qualities are what I think matters most, in some ways I agree with Guillem's 'just the choreographer' comment, although it's obviously too extreme to be taken 100% seriously. 

 

I very much enjoyed reading the thoughts of other who have seen this as well, I would love to hear of any other reviews from the Birmingham performances or elsewhere.

Edited September 11, 2015 by northstar

[alison]

Thank you, northstar, for that long and considered report.

[nakisfrance]

Those who were unable to see Sylvie Guillem's farewell shows in England, France or elsewhere, there will be an added performance of "Life in Progress" on October 29th in Milan, Italy at Teatro Arcimboldi. Tickets are on sale with ticketone.

http://teatroarcimboldi.it/event.php?id=533

[nakisfrance]

The following article  is my personal tribute to the incomparable Sylvie Guillem who on December 31^st will perform her very last show as a dancer in Tokyo (with "Béjart's "Bolero").

 

Au revoir Sylvie: The ultimate dancer brings down the curtain on her own terms

 

On December 29, 1984 after a memorable performance of “Swan Lake” at the Paris Opera, the great Rudolph Nureyev named an extraordinary 19-year-old into an étoile. Her name Sylvie Guillem. Nureyev’s instincts were as usually right. He may have been difficult at times, but he was also generous and had a true vision about the dance world, something cruelly missing in our days. Sylvie was the youngest dancer ever at the Paris Opera to accede to that highest honor and she also became the brightest star the ballet world has known. In two days on December 31^st, she will give her final performance as a dancer in Tokyo with Béjart’s “Boléro”. It is she who decided to bring down the curtain on her own terms at this specific point of her career while she is still at the very top of her profession.

The announcement of her retirement has made headlines around the world and for good reason. No other ballerina has marked the art of ballet like she did. She, like Baryshnikov, became the ultimate dancer, breathing new life into the classical repertoire and being equally mesmerizing in contemporary works.

 

I did not have the chance to witness her miraculous beginnings at the Paris Opera in the eighties. It took me 11 years after her consecration as étoile to first see her on stage. It was at the Théâtre des Champs Elysées in Paris in 1995 and she was dancing Béjart’s  (the first great master in Sylvie’s career) “Sissi”, “La Luna” and the “Bolero” as well as that breathtaking pas de deux of Forsythe’s “Herman Sherman”. Without the shadow of a doubt, I knew that I had experienced the same awe, the same wondrous amazement as the first audiences who discovered Sylvie at her beginnings in Paris. She was everything one secretly hopes to see on stage and so much more.

 

It is not an easy task to explain her genius. I suppose it was the way she occupied and commanded the stage, a creature from another planet, yet so utterly human and so in rapport with her audience. Each muscle of her body, each fiber, each expression was telling us volumes about the character she was portraying and the woman as well. Exquisite grace and musicality, precision and yet so much freedom of movement, steely control and passion, brilliant, unforced technique always used with intelligence and good taste to serve the part and the choreographies. Such was the mastery of her craft that her art was and has always remained ideally invisible. And that charisma which cannot be explained or analyzed. Once she entered the stage nothing else in the world seemed to matter and she drew the audience to her like a magnet. A true, rare star who brought a much needed air of glamour and chic, but also excitement, emotion and modernity into the often dusty world of ballet.

In retrospect, what is striking among other things about Sylvie is that she was a complete artist very early on in her career.  Think of the celebrated “Raymonda” variation which we have watched countless times on youtube or video. I can think of no other ballerina who brought so much vitality to this piece, so much charm and beauty, such majestic presence and authority. Then watch the film of “Cinderella” in the Nureyev version. She masters the choreography to perfection, yet she also gives so much of herself to the part, she is equally at ease whether portraying Cinderella in rags, or radiating with glamour and grace during the ball scene. And she shows a brilliant clown-like sense of humor in her imitation of Chaplin in “The Kid” as well as a breathtaking assurance and elegance worthy of Fred Astaire in the subsequent tap dance variation.

 

Sylvie had all the qualities which distinguished the very great ballerinas who preceded her, the masterful, heartfelt and intelligent approach towards characterization as well as a strong personality. But she was also a woman of our times with some special quality which made her a creature of the future as well. She was the past, the present and the future of ballet. The dance world would never be the same again after Sylvie and it was no wonder that like for Callas in opera, there was an era before Guillem and one after Guillem.

This inevitably caused quite a stir and there were detractors. Some critics said that she was cold. This might be explained as Sylvie has said in interviews because she took away what she felt was superfluous in ballet and her critics simply did not recognize the gestures they used to see on stage. Less is more, and so much more effective. If she did not feel like doing a certain gesture which meant nothing to her, she would not do it. What Sylvie gave on stage had meaning, truth, substance and beauty because it really sprang from her very depth and  because she was a believer in what she was doing.

 

A frustrated  Vittoria Ottolenghi called her « The icy Divine »  admiting that she could not « get » neither Guillem, neither Baryshnikov the two most admired dancers in the world. Without attempting an analysis of Ottolenghi’s arguments, by defining Sylvie as Divine, even an « icy » one, wasn’t she already  expressing some secret, suppressed admiration that she refused to accept, simply because Guillem represented a different image of the ballerina than the one she was used to ?

 

I also believe that her critics never forgave her independent spirit. “Too uncompromising” said the similarly frustrated Clement Crisp of “The Financial Times”. I suppose he, like others, preferred their ballerinas to be obedient little creatures and could not forgive Sylvie for being herself, supremely free and master of her own destiny. Guillem who could be the epitome of discipline and artistic integrity as far as her approach to her work was concerned but she could not be put under the scrutiny and dustiness of administrative institutions, otherwise she suffocated. She needed her freedom to make her own decisions and even occasionally her own mistakes. The art of dancing is an ephemeral one. Every day counts and Sylvie always knew that and had no time to waste.

Seeing Guillem in a classical ballet like “Sleeping Beauty”, “Swan Lake” or “Don Quichotte” would be a true revelation. I remember her in “Sleeping Beauty” with such awe and emotion! She took the part of princess Aurora, so one dimensional in the hands and feet of other ballerinas and gave it meaning, beauty and complexity. The technique was astounding, yet so natural and unforced and so in tune with the character. I especially remember that divine variation of Aurora’s vision. This was not just dancing, it was pure poetry and grace in motion. If Beauty could find its ultimate expression it would be in this precise, ideal moment. All of a sudden, people like me and so many others, by no means dance purists, felt that these often-called “academic” ballets came beautifully to life and the audience was allowed to live a full-fledged theatrical experience.

 

I also felt that strongly when I saw her unforgettable “Giselle” in Paris with Laurent Hilaire. Sylvie was not trying to be a romantic heroine.  She was timeless, a complex, fully alive, generous creature who could be of any century. One had to see her mad scene to realize how an intelligent artist can make all the difference and infuse new life into a ballet. I never saw heartbreak so eloquently expressed. When Sylvie presented, some time after, her own memorable version of “Giselle”, she explained that she was inspired by Jacques Brel’s song “Orly” for that particular scene, when the heroine all of a sudden loses love. It was that abrupt, terrifying realization that love has gone forever which made her portrayal so moving and shattering. And I can still see her at the end of the second act, an exquisite spirit disappearing forever into her grave, yet that  generous heart of Giselle and her undying love for Albrecht still shone through.

 

When Sylvie left the Paris Opera she flourished as a guest at the Royal Ballet in London and one has to be grateful to the wonderful Anthony Dowell for his vision, patience and sensitivity to the needs of this one-of-a-kind artist, giving her all the freedom she needed. He also opened new artistic horizons for her and she expanded her repertory with works from MacMillan and Ashton. 

It was the witty Dowell who named her “Mademoiselle Non” and she accepted it with good humor. For it is a very nice tribute indeed to someone who always had the guts to say no when she felt that a choreography or a partner were not right for her and who simply wished to assume her own choices. A life without compromise. How many other examples can we single out of an uncompromising free spirit defying conventions in a world where compromise reigns?

 

Sylvie could be highly critical when she did not like a choreographer, but she could also be equally enthusiastic and open when she admired someone, like besides Bejart, Mats Ek and William Forsythe. It was she who insisted and succeeded the entrance of Mats Ek into the Royal Ballet’s repertory. I remember clearly that moment when she starred in his “Carmen” at the Royal Ballet with Massimo Murru. She was a fiery, fearless, gutsy Carmen and she mastered to perfection the unique dance vocabulary of Mats. She had already marked our generation and subsequent ones when she first danced in the nineties two of his choreographies especially made for her “Smoke” and “Wet Woman”.  There was humor, gravity, irony, passion and a strange sense of elegance in these works and Sylvie threw herself completely into this universe and made it her own.

 

Forsythe was another master in her career and together they changed the rules of the game. No one danced his abstract, yet substantial choreographies like Sylvie did with such energy, such fearlessness, glamour and chic. From the ground-breaking “In the middle”, as well as “Steptext”, “Herman Sherman” or most recently “Rearray” she explored all the corners of the dance vocabulary and became the standard and the ideal towards which most other dancers strive hopelessly to attain.

During the years that followed, after my first introduction to Sylvie,  I had numerous occasions to see her on stage, mostly between London and Paris, especially during her triumphant returns to the Paris Opera as well as to other theaters and dance festivals in Europe. One particularly memorable occasion was in 1998 when she returned to the Paris Opera as a guest for 3 ballets (Don Quichotte, Nureyev’s Romeo and Juliet and MacMillan’s Manon).

 

Her Juliet was a truly Shakespearean creature. We could see before our very eyes this young girl growing into a formidable young, passionate woman, falling in love, defying the authority of her parents and society and meeting her death as a conscious choice, that of an uncompromising creature. And her partnership with Laurent HIlaire her Romeo was wondrous and magical! These two spoke with their breaths, with their eyes, their bodies. They made us believe in Romeo and Juliet not just as dancers who perform exceptionally well the steps of a choreography, but as human beings. In about 2h30 the audience had lived fully with them, loved, suffered, dreamed and knew all there is to know about life and death at once.

And then came Manon as they say and like many others I felt that my life would never be the same again. One day someone should write a book or an extensive essay about Sylvie’s Manon, one of the towering artistic achievements of the stage world of all times. So complete was her immersion to this part that to my mind she makes no other Manon imaginable (despite some remarkable performances from other exceptional ballerinas). It is as if the character was created especially and exclusively for her, both as Abbé Prevost imagined her to be in the novel as well as in the MacMillan ballet. Sylvie has the deepest understanding of this character. Manon is not evil or over-calculating, or over dramatic as many other ballerinas portray her. She is a supremely free spirit, with no consciousness about what is moral or not, delightfully light and carefree. And this quality is also what makes her downfall all the more moving, for she finds herself trapped and fights hopelessly for her freedom and her love for De Grieux (which she fully realizes when it is too late).

 

I remember my first Manon with Sylvie and Hilaire as they  literally set the house on fire with their passionate portrayals. When Sylvie rose to dance Manon’s variation at the brothel scene, I instinctively knew, although I had never seen the ballet before that this was an exceptional, privileged moment. There was such lightness in her dancing, such glamour and precision and musicality as well as an unmistakable and truthful sense of portraying and growing within a character.

 

Her death scene was heart wrenching with total freedom of movement and abandonment. We could feel her pain as well as her tragic destiny and at the same time we were in awe before this amazing, titanic creature defying death itself, with limbs and arms occupying space like some sort of huge wings in a desperate struggle for survival. Although doomed from the beginning, she fought valiantly for her life and her freedom with a most memorable tragic, epic grandeur. Even death would bow before this Beauty leaving her last breadth in the Louisiana swamps.

In 2011, after several years of absence from the big opera houses in Europe Sylvie returned to Manon at La Scala with Massimo Murru as De Grieux. I remember clearly how nervous I and many other spectators felt before the performance thinking. Will she be up to this challenge? Not only she was up to it, but with Murru’s magical support she gave the performance of a lifetime. It was during Manon’s variation that an awestruck Italian spectator screamed out loud what every single member in the audience was thinking. “Divina”. The echo of that word will always be engraved in our memories for years to come, a reminder of witnessing true greatness on stage. What a befitting word to describe Sylvie and her art!

 

Sylvie was also, as always, an expert in making an entrance as well as exit a stage and immediately suggesting what her character was thinking and feeling and its evolution as well. When she first came down from the carriage to greet her brother, she was full of innocent charm and liveliness. When she entered the brothel room in her long coat she was majestic and radiated beauty and sensuality. And when she made her appearance at the docks in the Louisiana, exhausted and worn out from the hardships of life, she was a tragic creature struck by destiny and the cruelty of men who had once adored her.

This infinite sense of detail she brings to her characters over the years, the limitless capacity of always wanting to do better, is also something constant with Sylvie. If you saw a performance of Manon, Sleeping Beauty or Juliet, or Marguerite, the next one, or the following ones would never be the same. She always strove to add more dimension to her parts and kept astonishing and challenging her audience. Her last Marguerite with Murru in Athens during Christmas 2013 was an unforgettable experience. I had already seen her first Marguerite in London with Nicolas Le Riche in the parts tailor made for Nureyev and Fonteyn. Wisely, she never attempted to portray Marguerite as Margot did. There was nothing too worldly or Grande-dame like in her portrayal. She quite simply became Marguerite Gautier, the young courtesan of the 19^th century who loves and dies for love.

 

When she last played Marguerite in Athens her understanding of the character grew even deeper. With Massimo Murru she elevated her into the ultimate ideal of a noble soul sacrificing herself to the alter of love. There was such heartbreak in her performance, such beauty, such wonderful detail of emotion and warmth and pain in her final reunion and embrace with Armand during the death scene.  Sylvie’s Marguerite was as much a creature of flesh and blood as well as a magnificent, generous soul exquisitely evaporating into the air as she left her last breath in Murru’s desperate arms.

Sylvie always puts the very maximum to her work. She also chose her dance partners with great care. How could a Juliet or a Manon, a Giselle or a Marguerite click and come to life if they do not find their match in their Romeo, De Grieux , Albrecht and Armand? This is why her dance partnerships over the years with Laurent Hilaire, Jonathan Cope, Nicolas Le Riche and Massimo Murru were privileged and had some very special magic. And the same could be said of her fruitful collaborations with contemporary choreographers and dancers like Russel Maliphant or Akram Khan. She always established a constructive dialogue with her partners on stage and that dialogue managed to reach out and touch the audience.

 

Sylvie’s symbiotic relationship with her audience is to my mind the very essence of what makes a truly great artist. We all have such fond memories of Sylvie transfixed with emotion and joy taking endless bows after a performance, genuinely astonished by the love of the audience she is so rightfully receiving. No studied diva poses but a genuine, touching humility instead lighting up her whole being and a privileged intimate moment between her and her audience.

 

I still encounter or talk to people from Italy, the US, Greece, Japan, Spain who say with such awe: “I saw her in Manon at la Scala in 2011” and how that changed their lives with the same emotion with let us say, audience members recalling having seen Maria Callas in the Visconti production of “La Traviata” in 1955 at La Scala. How many times can we say that a dancer, a singer or an actor we saw on stage literally made a difference in our lives? Before seeing Sylvie on stage, I never, ever thought that this could be possible in ballet, but she did that in a most profound, exciting way.

I remember waiting for her with a friend after the first of her farewell performances with “Life in Progress” in Lyon during  the festival “Les Nuits de Fourvière” last summer. There was this woman next to us who spoke rather loudly and who did not seem to know a thing about dancing. But it didn’t matter. She was eagerly waiting to see Sylvie after the show simply to tell her how she was deeply moved by her as a woman after having seen her in Mats Ek’s “Bye”.

 

This is the essence of dancing, of all theatrical forms as a matter of fact, make a difference in one’s life, the ability to touch an audience, and to tell each member something which they will carry with them after the show, some emotion, some joy, some sadness as well and magic. Thanks to Sylvie’s presence, the lives of so many spectators around the world became infinitely happier and exciting and this in itself is possibly the greatest achievement any artist can strive for.

 

She leaves the stage which has been her home for decades, the dance stage at any rate, with an incomparable legacy, such diversity in her repertory and risky choices that no other dancer could match. We may regret for not having seen her dance for Pina Bausch,   perhaps some more Balanchine choreographies or for not realizing her life-long dream of portraying Cranco’s Tatiana. And I would have loved to see her in her mature years in Agnes de Mille’s “Fall River Legend” a part she had danced magnificently according to those who saw her many years ago. And how I longed to see another collaboration with that genius named Robert Lepage! They had already explored brilliantly the androgynous side of human nature, the almost invisible boundaries in sexuality one seldom sees on stage in their unjustly underestimated “Eonnagata”. One could only dream what they could achieve together in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”!

 

But no time for regrets. Sylvie’s career is complete and extraordinary and she has good reason to be proud of her achievements. Sylvie never took anything for granted. She approached the choreographies she danced with total commitment and artistic integrity, with passion and intelligence and she always deeply respected her audience. And she kept alive that wondrous curiosity of hers, always exploring new paths, taking risks. Even for her farewell tour, she did just that. No nostalgic pas de deux from classical ballet, no old favorites to please the audience but new works (with the exception of “Bye”). She was a force of nature in A. Khan’s marvelous “Techne”, a fascinating dialogue of Sylvie the woman with nature. And she was a joy to watch in a wonderful pas de deux by Maliphant, expertly exploring space and light with Emanuela Montanari as her partner.

 

During this year when she announced her retirement and during numerous performances with her latest show “A Life in progress” we all have shed many tears in the theaters, at the stage doors waiting to greet her and even secretly once returning home. The dance world and the world stage will never, ever be the same again after December 31^st of this year and the void she is leaving behind her is an abyssal one. From now on, we just have to learn to live with that void even if it is not an easy task. In the years to come, like some characters in Proust’s novels we will rely on our memories to recapture and relive the glory of her dancing and the extraordinary sensations and emotions she has left us through her stage performances. These will make the burden of her absence less unbearable and they can still give us much happiness as time goes by.

 

Sylvie has always been an unpredictable creature, which is part of her charm and she will most certainly keep on amazing us and herself as well with that new chapter of her life which is opening soon. She can enjoy more fully the simple pleasures of life. She also has many worthy causes which are close to her heart for the defense of the environment and animal welfare  (among others, she is an ardent supporter of the marine conservation organization Sea Shepherd and the seed foundation Association Kokopelli for the protection of planetary biodiversity, medicinal plants and the production of organic seeds) and I sincerely wish her all the very best in the future.

 

In two days, as she prepares to take her final bow as a dancer, we also bow before her with love and respect for allowing us to share a bit of her divinity, for allowing us to live a thousand lives  each time she entered the skin of Manon, Juliet, Giselle, Marguerite, Carmen or princess Aurora and so many other choreographies.  And that light, as radiant as her smile, emanating from her  whole being which has lit up all the stages around the world she has graced will always cast away the shadows of darkness and mediocrity which may surround us in the years to come.

 

by Nakis IOANNIDES,