Jump to content

Obsidian Tear (New McGregor)


Recommended Posts

 

You really have to hand it to the guy. Nearly a hundred posts and no-one's even seen the work! I guess that by today's PR standards where presentation is all, that makes a it major success already!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Bridiem, I agree and I think that is the point about McGregor's work.  It always stands on its own merits and you don't need the programme notes to 'understand' it.  Personally I don't mind his programme notes but I generally read them afterwards (you'd have to get to the theatre pretty early to be sure of finishing them before curtain up!). They provide interesting background to his thought process and enhance my interest if I decide to see the piece again.

 

I object more to things like the very lengthy synopsis for Frankenstein, without which it would have been very difficult for anyone who hadn't read the book to work out what the hell was going on.  That is a ballet which did not stand on its own merits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry buti will have to disagree with you there

 

there is much 'merit' in the ballet Frankenstein - some really interesting dance moves and some music that is most pleasant - just because it is not completely at the 'genius' standard (set by Ashton etc) it is good viewing for most people - you do not need to read the synopsis to understand the story - though it does help in places!

 

just because you personally disliked it ,the rest of the ballet world does not necessarily share your negative views 

frankenstein does definitely stand on its own merits - well done liam scarlett - give us more.......

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bridiem, I agree and I think that is the point about McGregor's work.  It always stands on its own merits and you don't need the programme notes to 'understand' it.  Personally I don't mind his programme notes but I generally read them afterwards (you'd have to get to the theatre pretty early to be sure of finishing them before curtain up!). They provide interesting background to his thought process and enhance my interest if I decide to see the piece again.

 

I object more to things like the very lengthy synopsis for Frankenstein, without which it would have been very difficult for anyone who hadn't read the book to work out what the hell was going on.  That is a ballet which did not stand on its own merits.

 

 

I agree with what you say, except for your final sentence.

 

I have, before now, heard people groaning when they have seen there is a 2 page synopsis of a narrative ballet in a programme.  They are most off-putting.  In most of the cases I am thinking about, the ballet has actually been quite easy to follow.

 

For myself, with an abstract ballet, I can watch the dance for the pleasure of watching the dance without needing to know the inner workings of the choreographer's mind.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is the much broader point here, though I find it difficult to express, that the Arts in all their forms are inter-related. Obviously an individual work, be it a ballet, an opera, a novel, a painting or whatever, must stand or fall on its own merits but serious works demand our time and effort, and our appreciation is hugely enhanced as one learns about their place in the wider context.

 

The Frankenstein Myth is a good example. Behind Scarlett's work lie the remarkable circumstances in which the original novel came to be written, its place not only in the Romantic Movement looking back to the past but also as marking the beginning of the new Science Fiction genre, its reflection of the scientific advances at the time, its influences in film history, particularly in the 40s and now, its philosophical obsession with the nature of life and death, the novel’s sub-title with all the classical associations that conjures up, and, most of all its writer herself and her place in the political and feminist movements of the day.

 

Programme notes can’t begin to cover the breadth of this context but the more one learns about these things, the greater the understanding and the pleasure. I have great respect for what Scarlett has attempted. I think his Frankenstein reveals the depth of his study and his understanding of this huge context and its complex inter-relationships across the Arts. I agree it may need some tweaking (so do many of the best works) but there is no doubt in my mind that with his team he has created a work that should find its place as a valued part of the Frankenstein Parthenon. And like Danny Boyle’s production at the National a few years back or Ridley Scott’s Prometheus, both of which in their widely differing ways drew upon the same deep well, it is more than the sum of its parts: it opens up a new and valuable perspective of the Frankenstein Myth with all its literary, cultural, philosophical and scientific associations.

 

Without wishing to become embroiled in comparisons about individual works, I would suggest that many other offerings are less ambitious and will endure only if they  “give delight and hurt not”! They don’t belong to this wider world. But Scarlett’s Frankenstein is part of a major thread across the breadth of the Arts that is as relevant and as active today as it has been for nearly 200yrs, nevermore so than in the here and now when the cloning of human life has become a realistic scientific possibility.

 

I think Scarlett has that wider perspective and understanding of context. His Frankenstein is hugely ambitious, remarkable in so young a man. We should value and cherish him.

Edited by David
  • Like 15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...