Bolshoi Ballet: The Flames of Paris, London, August 2016

[MAB]

Anyway, can’t wait for Le Corsaire (assuming I snag a ticket!).

 

I wouldn't bother if I were you, you won't enjoy the music at all.

[MAB]

For the record, Flames of Paris (in a slightly different form) WAS Stalin's favourite ballet, he was something of a ballet fan after a hard days purging of the population.  Soviet isn't the dirty word you assume when referring to ballet as the art form flourished during the Soviet period which spanned pretty much the entire 20th century.  Romeo and Juliet was a Soviet era construct, is that foremost in your mind when watching the ballet or listening to the music?  As to the score, there are actually two composers in there, did you pick up on that?  Quite a few of us low-brow balletomanes are early music fans too, so spotted that immediately, clearly you didn't.

Went to both the matinee and evening performances on Saturday and only the stellar nature of the Alexandrova/Lantratov partnership gave the evening  show the edge.   Kristina Kretova was a lively step perfect Jeanne and Mikhail Lobukhin was the most plausible soldier in the role of Phillipe that I've seen so far.  In a straight comparison with Lantratov, one was a lover and one was a fighter (a reference here to the typical balletomane familiarity with Paul McCartney & Michael Jackson).  Gorgeous Nina Kaptsova was Adeline at both performancess and although the spectacular pas de deux of Jeanne and Phillipe is rightly famous, the pas de deux for Jerome and Adeline is a beautiful, lyrical contrast with the young couple expressing their love amidst the turmoil around them.  Little to choose between the Jeromes of Lopatin and Savin, both understand the complexities of the role and your heart bleeds for both of them.

How I love the Bolshoi's corps de ballet!  They don't simply stand at the back watching the action, each and every one is a clearly defined character in their own right, a perfect living, breathing backdrop to the action centre stage, the character dancers come to the fore in this here too, indeed even the principals can be considered character dancers in this ballet.  All contributed to creating a feeling of excitement  and total enjoyment that in the evening spilled over into the curtain calls, that seemed to include the audience in the fun.  What is OTT for some is an expression of shared happiness for most.

[Sim]

The only reason you would rain on anyone's parade, Godot, is your statement about this being more like a fan site than a critical forum.  You couldn't be more wrong.  There are many people on this forum who are incredibly knowledgeable about ballet and its history, and who write in very considered ways.  When we want to criticise, we criticise.  You wouldn't know this because you are new to this forum.  May I suggest that you spend more time looking back over past threads before making such insulting statements;  if everybody praises something it is because it has generally been seen as something good across the board.  If you look, for example, at the Frankenstein thread, you will see that some of us loved it and some of us certainly did not.  No matter which side we were on, it was written about with knowledge and care and consideration.  Likewise the recent Bolshoi Swan Lake thread;  some people certainly did not like it.  You are free to express on this forum whatever opinions you like about what you have seen (indeed, we encourage that and always say how much more interesting it is when people disagree), but they would be much more welcomed by everyone if you just drop the holier-than-thou attitude.  You should also note that not everybody who goes to see art then wants to intellectualise it and analyse it.  Many people go for the pure emotional response it elicits within them, and they then want to share this.  If they are excited about something, or very happy about the effect a performance has had on them, those opinions are just as valid as yours, and we don't expect them to be referred to by anybody as 'hagiography' or 'histrionic' .

 

Oh, and the music from Flames "would appeal to those balletomanes who are more inclined to Les Mis than art music".  Really?  I hate Les Mis but quite like the Flames music.  And no, I wouldn't listen to it without it being accompanied by a performance, but I can say the same for a lot of ballet music.

 

I do apologise if we aren't all up to your very intellectually advanced perceptions of art.

[capybara]

 What is OTT for some is an expression of shared happiness for most.

 

I, for one, absolutely loved Alexandrova and Lantratov diving under the falling curtain. In my view, they had not milked the applause at all during the performance and I was delighted to celebrate with them at the end of the show. I was also so pleased that, although it was not a first night. Alexandrova and Tikhomirova received bouquets and that someone was throwing flowers onto the stage.

 

I tend to think that the RB rushes its curtain calls and ENB doesn't seem to go in for individual calls at all. I want to see the artists again and applaud them. It's a kind of shared experience which rounds off a performance and sends me on my way happy.

[LinMM]

Sometimes I think we just need a bit of OTT fun in our lives!

 

 

Now I'll probably get into deep water as I love ballet but my knowledge only comes from my own experience mostly and am not as well read as I probably should be and definitely others on this forum have this in depth knowledge.

 

I think any Art if it is valuable has to enhance our humanity in some way.

 

There are many aspects to being human so Art has a broad spectrum to influence us (or not )

just being able to put us in touch with the joyful ness of Life may be one of Arts greatest achievements!

 

The Bolshoi Company did this for me ....via art form of ballet.....last Wednesday and many thanks to them for that experience!! Albeit a different ballet

 

 

But I might equally go and see a performance of Les Mis and be very moved by that performance and understand the precariousness of Human Life a little better....who knows?

 

I'm not keen to compare art forms in this way because on any one day you may be open to something and the next day not.....within all Art forms not just ballet.

[godots_arrived]

1.  Soviet isn't the dirty word you assume when referring to ballet as the art form flourished during the Soviet period which spanned pretty much the entire 20th century. 

 

2.  As to the score, there are actually two composers in there, did you pick up on that? 

 

3.  How I love the Bolshoi's corps de ballet!  They don't simply stand at the back watching the action, each and every one is a clearly defined character in their own right, a perfect living, breathing backdrop to the action centre stage, the character dancers come to the fore in this here too, indeed even the principals can be considered character dancers in this ballet. 

 

4. What is OTT for some is an expression of shared happiness for most.

 

Well, that put the cat among the pigeons.

 

I've number the points I want to respond to for clarity only, since I lack the technical skills to excerpt particular quotes. So, here goes.

 

1.  There's a difference, I would say, in terms of flourishing in terms of sheer output and prevalence versus flourishing in terms of quality. You could argue that Soviet art (particularly folk art) "flourished" in terms of volume in the Soviet period, but it didn't flourish in any other sense.

 

2.  My comment about the score related to Swan Lake, not Flames of Paris (please re-read, although I may not have articulated that clearly enough). The removal of the section I highlighted pertains to Tchaikovsky's score.

 

3. Very good point. Agree. And nicely put.

 

4.  Hmmmmm. Debatable (not that I'm trying to start a debate.) There are, surely, absolutes in terms of what constitutes a great performance? That doesn't preclude everyone having the right to their own tastes though, I agree.

[SusanR]

Having let the peformance settle and given myself two days to think about it rather than respond histrionically, my thoughts on Flames of Paris (Saturday night) are somewhat at odds with those of other posters. Putting my neck on the block (particularly as a newcomer here), a lot of the reviews on the forum seem to me to be more suited to a fan club magazine than an objective bulletin board (albeit one where devotees gather.) Some posts on hagiography.

 

From a dancing perspective, just as in the Swan Lake, the technique and sheer virtuousity of both soloists and corps cannot be faulted. The ensemble dancing, in particular, has struck me as riveting and near unrivalled in my experience of watching ballet. In so far as characterisation goes it’s, well, Russian. On Saturday, Lantratov in particular was compelling; athletic and graceful at once although “dancing for the crowd” seemed to be at least as much a priority as staying in character/driving the narrative. Yes, he’s a star…but in terms of sheer charisma he’s no Nureyev.

 

Narrative, for me, has been an issue in both the performances I’ve seen. Particularly in Swan Lake; narrative-free and presented as a series of virtuoso set-pieces with, to add insult to injury, unforgiveable cuts to the score (the end was a crime against humanity, let alone ballet) I found the dancing absorbing but the performance hard work.

 

With regard to Flames, I had mixed feelings. It’s a thinly veiled excuse for showstopping dances and Soviet-era propaganda so far as I can tell…I can well imagine Uncle Joe smiling in his Bolshoi box as he watched the audience being fed the approved party line. Soviet realism goes to the ballet, if you like. The lightweight score doesn’t help its appeal; it has few redeeming features musically (although no doubt it appeals to balletomanes more inclined to Les Mis than art music.) Gosh, I must be a complete Philistine, I love Les Mis & ballet! You could never imagine this being played in a concert hall, something you wouldn’t say about most of the other traditional ballets.

 

Maria Alexandrova, I thought, was somewhat listless early in the ballet but took off particularly in Act 2 where her dancing matched and provided an exciting foil for Lantratov. The crowd-milking, while expressions of joy are always welcome and many of you clearly enjoyed it, was simply misplaced and too OTT for me. It took the performers outside the context once too often and, as I’ve said, turned a story-ballet into a random event. I’ve seen plenty of great dances express joy through dance, not through mugging for the crowd and skidding under the descending curtain.

 

Lest you think I am being over-critical, I have loved watching the dancing in both Swan Lake and Flames of Paris. But I haven’t enjoyed the peformances particularly in so far as the parts, for me, having been very much greater than the sums. I’ve seen many technically poorer dances deliver more emotional, in-character interpretations. I’m also pretty sure the phrase “less is more” has no Russian equivalent.

 

Anyway, can’t wait for Le Corsaire (assuming I snag a ticket!) Sorry if this is seen as raining on anyone’s parade.

I must be a complete Philistine, I love Les Mis & ballet! Edited August 8, 2016 by SusanR

[godots_arrived]

1.  The only reason you would rain on anyone's parade, Godot, is your statement about this being more like a fan site than a critical forum.  

 

2. You should also note that not everybody who goes to see art then wants to intellectualise it and analyse it.  Many people go for the pure emotional response it elicits within them, and they then want to share this.  If they are excited about something, or very happy about the effect a performance has had on them, those opinions are just as valid as yours, and we don't expect them to be referred to by anybody as 'hagiography' or 'histrionic' .

 

3.  Oh, and the music from Flames "would appeal to those balletomanes who are more inclined to Les Mis than art music".  Really?  I hate Les Mis but quite like the Flames music.  And no, I wouldn't listen to it without it being accompanied by a performance, but I can say the same for a lot of ballet music.

 

4. I do apologise if we aren't all up to your very intellectually advanced perceptions of art.

 

1. Actually what I said, or at least meant, was not that this site as a whole was a fan site but that the specific thread about Flames of Paris read like hagiography.  There's a big difference.  OK, perhaps everyone really did think the performance was in every way perfect. For me, it wasn't. But the level of adulation in this specific thread did not represent, in my view, the overall quality of the evening.  Otherwise, I agree with all your general comments about the site.

 

2.  Fair enough.

 

3. Yes, really.  As a piece of serious music with a life of its own, it doesn't stand up. The fact that some other ballets have weak scores is beside the point. I wasn't talking about other ballets; I was critiquing Flames of Paris.  It used to be said (if you lived in New York) that if you went to ABT the dancing might be bad on any given night but you'd always get a great show.  If you went to NYCB, the dancing might be off but you'd always get a great concert. Flames falls squarely into the former category (for me, anyway.)

 

4. You've rather shot yourself in the foot. In point 2 you defend the right of some to respond in a purely emotional way (and you are right to do so) but here you criticise me for responding in an analytical way. We either all have the right to respond based on our individual characters or none of us do!

[SusanR]

Sorry, moderators, I have made a complete mess in trying to reply to a quote of Godot...Please could you sort it for me? Thank you, Susan

[Anna C]

I must be a complete Philistine, I love Les Mis & ballet!

As do I, Susan.

[godots_arrived]

Sometimes I think we just need a bit of OTT fun in our lives!

 

 

Now I'll probably get into deep water as I love ballet but my knowledge only comes from my own experience mostly and am not as well read as I probably should be and definitely others on this forum have this in depth knowledge.

 

I think any Art if it is valuable has to enhance our humanity in some way.

 

There are many aspects to being human so Art has a broad spectrum to influence us (or not )

just being able to put us in touch with the joyful ness of Life may be one of Arts greatest achievements!

 

The Bolshoi Company did this for me ....via art form of ballet.....last Wednesday and many thanks to them for that experience!! Albeit a different ballet

 

 

But I might equally go and see a performance of Les Mis and be very moved by that performance and understand the precariousness of Human Life a little better....who knows?

 

I'm not keen to compare art forms in this way because on any one day you may be open to something and the next day not.....within all Art forms not just ballet.

 

Interesting concepts, whether I agree with you or not (and sometimes I do, sometimes I don't.)

 

I think pretty much all art does enhance someone's humanity in some way but that doesn't make it objectively "good art." To the mechanic in the Deep South of the USA, an image of Elvis painted on a black velvet background may well be life enhancing and have merit because of that. But it isn't "great art." It's kitsch. The fact is that any artistic output can provide an emotional response/stimulus for some viewers but there remains value in debating what, and why, "high" art differs from "low" art (not using those terms pejoratively, by the way.) It is the existence of, say, Flames that enhances the genius of, say, Don Quixote. I don't think anyone would pretend that enjoyable as it is (and it IS enjoyable) that Les Mis plumbs the same emotional depths as, say, Mahler 9. A musicologist could quickly spell out the reasons. So yes, there are many aspects to being human and yes, there are many aspects in all art forms that we respond to. But there are, nevertheless, ways in which we can judge the quality of an art -- be that technique in dance or otherwise. Which is why I said that I enjoyed Flames in a general way but I thought it had clear shortcomings as a ballet and as a result I felt some of the laudatory comments were simply OTT. That doesn't mean I don't think people have the right to make them. Sorry, but that's my view. If you choose to see that as an over-intellectualisation or criticism well, fair enough. But that wasn't my intention in writing.

 

Funnily enough, I think your point about preferring not to compare art forms runs counter to the main thrust of your argument. If emotional response is the most critical factor for you then it is precisely because of this that we CAN and should compare art forms because audience impact is the one thing, as you pointed out initially, that is common to the weighing up of any artwork. Besides, it's interesting to draw analogies, isn't it, rather than keeping any one artistic discipline in its own box? Understanding 20th century ballet is indivisible from context; what was happening in music, art, etc. All artforms tend to influence each other and express the same contemporaneous themes.

[godots_arrived]

As do I, Susan.

 

As do I, which I not only spelled out but must be pretty clear from my posts. But like anything else, that love is qualified by critical assessment. 

[capybara]

 I don't think anyone would pretend that enjoyable as it is (and it IS enjoyable) that Les Mis plumbs the same emotional depths as, say, Mahler 9. A musicologist could quickly spell out the reasons. 

 

The thing is, godots_arrived, that I respond to performances as 'me', bringing (I'll admit it) a whole load of personal baggage, including rose-tinted spectacles on occasion. I sobbed my heart out all the way through Les Mis the first time i saw it but remain unaffected by Mahler 9 and no musicologist could persuade me otherwise.

 

Incidentally, the Bolshoi did not engage me this season until Flames on Friday/Saturday and I still have a bubble of happiness around me as a result of those shows.

[SPD444]

Could be interesting now godots_arrived hope I don't come to feel it was better while I was still waiting for him.

[Anna C]

As do I, which I not only spelled out but must be pretty clear from my posts. But like anything else, that love is qualified by critical assessment.

 

That's where we differ - if I love a ballet/piece of music or indeed any other art I do it wholeheartedly because it sweeps me away on an emotional journey.

 

If I enjoy something but have the capacity to step back and view it with a critical eye then that's different.

 

I'd be a fairly useless critic because if I was asked to write a critical assessment of my favourite cast dancing Manon or R&J (or even Colm Wilkinson as Jean Valjean in Les Mis) I suspect the result would be garbled mumbling.

[LinMM]

Thank you for replying in such detail to my post.

 

Well I did say I might get into deep water as writing on a forum is just NOT the same as actually having a real conversation with someone where any misinterpretations can be sorted out fairly quickly and so on

 

When I mentioned" not wanting to compare Art forms in this way" I was talking about you seeming to .....though maybe not meaning to....rather denigrating audiences who might go to Les Mis!!

 

I was trying to say that when going to see a Company like the Bolshoi ....who are supposed to be a top level Company to go and see ballet .....you may have an enhanced experience both on an emotional and artistic level ( eg being aware you are seeing great Art) or you may not. And likewise you may go to .....what you seemed to be saying but I may be wrong....a lesser theatre art form like Les mis and have an enhanced emotional and artistic experience there.

I wasn't really saying don't compare ANY Art forms .....but this is pretty impossible to do don't you think?

 

Also there is the everyday self to contend with!!

 

You could go and stand in front of a truly great painting by Rembrandt one day and just get nothing and another day you can get drawn in and really connect. It doesn't mean that it wasn't great Art on the day you didn't connect and suddenly was when you did!!

 

Having said that there is of course more than an emotional response involved. After all I could get very emotional about a picture a friends five year old had painted but know it isn't "great art" in the "higher" order of one of Rembrandt's paintings.

Now I'm sure what I've been trying to say is about as clear as mud.

 

Even within just the Ballet World there are some ballets which are more light weight you could say( eg stupid story and definitely not Tchaikovsky level score) but in terms of dancing at least can be truly wonderful. For me for example Don Q is one of these ballets but when danced at the highest level is just such fun!! I don't always want to be reminded of the deeper things or more tragic things of life I just want to see some terrific dancing.

But I do agree with you that usually if I go on for long enough I'm bound to contradict myself!!

[SPD444]

I am looking forward to reading what he thinks of the dancing chickens in Fille.

[MAB]

For what it's worth, I think the emotional response to art is more honest than the intellectual.

[godots_arrived]

Could be interesting now godots_arrived hope I don't come to feel it was better while I was still waiting for him.

 

You might as well call me Vladimir :-)

 

Debate, surely, is healthy for any bulletin board? Who wants to be part of a mutual admiration society and what values your opinions if you're never forced to justify and think about them. That's how you make them stronger, isn't it. Anyway, you can always just put me on ignore!

 

My long-departed dad was an arch Conservative who spent his entire life reading Tribune and the New Statesman. He believed that immersing yourself in the opposition was the only way to solidify your own views. Well, I grew up into an arch Socialist who, ironically, subscribes to The Spectator! Go figure :-)

[godots_arrived]

That's where we differ - if I love a ballet/piece of music or indeed any other art I do it wholeheartedly because it sweeps me away on an emotional journey.

 

If I enjoy something but have the capacity to step back and view it with a critical eye then that's different.

 

I'd be a fairly useless critic because if I was asked to write a critical assessment of my favourite cast dancing Manon or R&J (or even Colm Wilkinson as Jean Valjean in Les Mis) I suspect the result would be garbled mumbling.

 

Yes, I understand this. My only "but" is that if you limit yourself to immediate emotional response then you risk missing out on a variety of genius. For instance, I don't think any of us would pretend that upon hearing Boulez or Stockhausen (random examples) for the first time that we were swept away on an emotional wave. But with time, analysis and understanding your response to such music can change markedly. Likewise, our responses to Delacroix' Liberty Leading the People (the canvas at the heart of Flames of Paris!) is always going to be pretty immediate. But Jackson Pollock can have a similar effect.  I think we're all swept away by great art, but each according to our own instinctive criteria.

[MAB]

. Likewise, our responses to Delacroix' Liberty Leading the People (the canvas at the heart of Flames of Paris!) is always going to be pretty immediate. But Jackson Pollock can have a similar effect.  I think we're all swept away by great art, but each according to our own instinctive criteria.

 

Actually the Delacroix was inspired by the revolt of 1830 (as depicted in Les Mis) whereas the events in the Flames of Paris refer to 1789.

[godots_arrived]

Thank you for replying in such detail to my post.

 

Well I did say I might get into deep water as writing on a forum is just NOT the same as actually having a real conversation with someone where any misinterpretations can be sorted out fairly quickly and so on

 

When I mentioned" not wanting to compare Art forms in this way" I was talking about you seeming to .....though maybe not meaning to....rather denigrating audiences who might go to Les Mis!!

 

I was trying to say that when going to see a Company like the Bolshoi ....who are supposed to be a top level Company to go and see ballet .....you may have an enhanced experience both on an emotional and artistic level ( eg being aware you are seeing great Art) or you may not. And likewise you may go to .....what you seemed to be saying but I may be wrong....a lesser theatre art form like Les mis and have an enhanced emotional and artistic experience there.

I wasn't really saying don't compare ANY Art forms .....but this is pretty impossible to do don't you think?

 

Also there is the everyday self to contend with!!

 

You could go and stand in front of a truly great painting by Rembrandt one day and just get nothing and another day you can get drawn in and really connect. It doesn't mean that it wasn't great Art on the day you didn't connect and suddenly was when you did!!

 

Having said that there is of course more than an emotional response involved. After all I could get very emotional about a picture a friends five year old had painted but know it isn't "great art" in the "higher" order of one of Rembrandt's paintings.

Now I'm sure what I've been trying to say is about as clear as mud.

 

Even within just the Ballet World there are some ballets which are more light weight you could say( eg stupid story and definitely not Tchaikovsky level score) but in terms of dancing at least can be truly wonderful. For me for example Don Q is one of these ballets but when danced at the highest level is just such fun!! I don't always want to be reminded of the deeper things or more tragic things of life I just want to see some terrific dancing.

But I do agree with you that usually if I go on for long enough I'm bound to contradict myself!!

 

I think there is some really interesting stuff here.

 

On this point: "You could go and stand in front of a truly great painting by Rembrandt one day and just get nothing and another day you can get drawn in and really connect. It doesn't mean that it wasn't great Art on the day you didn't connect and suddenly was when you did!!"

 

...I absolutely agree with you but would note two things. First, your response to art is as much about you and the experiences that have made you what you are as they are about the art itself. Therefore, it stands to reason that (dangerous ground here, I know) a person less experienced in or knowledgable about the arts will almost inevitably have less refined taste. The purpose of study, after all, is achieve some degree of enlightenment.  Secondly, you hit the nail on the head. You can not appreciate great art on any given day but it is still great. That's because great art can be formally defined (by technique, colour, style, harmony, whatever) regardless of whether an individual, no matter how cultured, responds to it or not. And that was kind of encapsulated in my response to the Flames music. Foot stomping? Yes, Enjoyable? Possibly. Great art? I would say no. To some extent I'd say the same about the choreography, at least in terms of the sum if not the parts. It was stunning if you took various dances in isolation but the development of the narrative wasn't really brought to life by the storyline. For me, anyway.

 

On this point: Even within just the Ballet World there are some ballets which are more light weight you could say( eg stupid story and definitely not Tchaikovsky level score) but in terms of dancing at least can be truly wonderful.

 

You are totally right. Hundreds of them spring to mind.  One random example that pops into my head is Tharp's Sinatra Suite which I saw Baryshnikov dance more than once. The music and, for that matter, the choreography are what they are but the sum is wholly greater than the parts. To my mind, anyway.

 

This point is interesting too: I was trying to say that when going to see a Company like the Bolshoi ....who are supposed to be a top level Company to go and see ballet .....you may have an enhanced experience both on an emotional and artistic level 

 

Should you have an "enhanced experience" due solely to the reputation of a company? Suppose their standards drop? Would no one want to point out that the emperor was naked because, well, the Bolshoi is the Bolshoi?  The dancing, as I have said many times was magisterial in my view but I responded the way I responded and I do think there were holes to pick in the performances, Boishoi or not.

Thanks for your considered response to my earlier post! 

[godots_arrived]

Actually the Delacroix was inspired by the revolt of 1830 (as depicted in Les Mis) whereas the events in the Flames of Paris refer to 1789.

 

But the imagery is clearly drawn from one to the other, regardless of the semantics relating to dates.

[SPD444]

You might as well call me Vladimir :-)

 

Debate, surely, is healthy for any bulletin board? Who wants to be part of a mutual admiration society and what values your opinions if you're never forced to justify and think about them. That's how you make them stronger, isn't it. Anyway, you can always just put me on ignore!

 

My long-departed dad was an arch Conservative who spent his entire life reading Tribune and the New Statesman. He believed that immersing yourself in the opposition was the only way to solidify your own views. Well, I grew up into an arch Socialist who, ironically, subscribes to The Spectator! Go figure :-)

 

If you think you can force me to justify my opinions, then you can think again.

 

I will not set you to ignore, you are entitled to correspond on here, just like anyone else is, but I will ignore your insults.

 

I am not interested in your or your families politics and neither is this fan club magazine.

[godots_arrived]

For what it's worth, I think the emotional response to art is more honest than the intellectual.

 

What is "honesty"? I think if you're going to toss that out there, you need to qualify what you're driving at to some extent. Is this honesty as in "true to yourself" or is it honesty as purely instinctive emotional honesty? Or something else. Pure emotion is, I think, not particularly "honest." It's deeply personal. It tells us more about the viewer, arguably, than it does about the quality of the artwork.

The truth is both are hugely valuable and the one mediates the other. "I love it, but I can still be objective about it."  "I can see it's brilliant, but I didn't really enjoy it" are both valid responses.

[godots_arrived]

If you think you can force me to justify my opinions, then you can think again.

 

I will not set you to ignore, you are entitled to correspond on here, just like anyone else is, but I will ignore your insults.

 

I am not interested in your or your families politics and neither is this fan club magazine.

 

What insults? I have taken the time to respond to criticism. I have done so as thoughtfully as I can. I have tried to explain why I think what I think. I am at a loss as to where these insults are. Either you are VERY think skinned or you're imagining things.

[LinMM]

My main experience of Ballet has been through doing it, performing it and lastly watching it....though of course now many years of all.

 

As an AMATEUR performer I know that in artistic and technical terms you would definitely want to see the Bolshoi 99 times out of a hundred believe me!!

 

However there is something else.

 

Sometimes with the great Ballet Companies there can be a few performances where you feel the dancers are just going through the motions ( they are only human after all) and on these evenings you may not connect that well with whatever ballet is being performed even if it's a great one like Swan Lake.

In the same week you may go,and see an Amateur performance .....but all the dancers are giving their all!! And you can pick this up. You could end up enjoying and be moved by the Amateur performance more in the circumstances outlined above. So which one has the more artistic merit? Interesting area I think!!

I wonder if this is because Ballet is a "live" performance Art .....it's very ephemeral. But something has to be communicated which touches the audience.

 

Well of course the more reputation a Company comes with the more critical we will usually be of it.....we do expect the Bolshoi to be good but if they are not we can usually see it!

[SPD444]

One of the great joys I have taken from this forum is the respect we show each other in accepting each other's views at face value. I love reading how people have enjoyed a particular performance without them having to justify why, the fact they enjoyed it is good enough for me. If I disagree then I keep it to myself, I have no right to expect them to tell me why they enjoyed it and certainly no right to make them feel their joy is misplaced. It will be a sad day if this forum becomes that way.

[godots_arrived]

In the same week you may go,and see an Amateur performance .....but all the dancers are giving their all!! And you can pick this up. You could end up enjoying and be moved by the Amateur performance more in the circumstances outlined above. So which one has the more artistic merit? Interesting area I think!!

I wonder if this is because Ballet is a "live" performance Art .....it's very ephemeral. But something has to be communicated which touches the audience.

 

Yes, great point (and really interesting topic.)  It's a difficult one because I know you are leading me towards concluding that in this example the amateur performance probably has more artistic merit even though technically it's not even close and that appears to be the opposite of what I was arguing earlier. I think I would say that probably neither of these performances was great but the amateur one had the singular advantage of being more enjoyable and there is merit indeed in that. But your point is well made.

 

One of my lasting ballet memories is Marcia Haydee dancing Tatiana (Onegin) well into her 50s, as I recall.  I doubt she possessed the physical faculties she had in her prime and characterising someone less than half your age would seem to be problematic. But she was spellbinding. To my mind, that was great art, technically perfect or no. Equally, I recall a by then rapidly declining Nureyev in the Lully dances (can't remember the exact name of the piece) at the Met. Arguably, at that point he could no longer dance in what we understand the word to mean (which is why that ballet became more or less his valedictory piece) but I would contend, perhaps for entirely emotional reasons, that his performances somehow remained great.

[godots_arrived]

If I disagree then I keep it to myself

 

A number of people wrote positive reviews of Flames of Paris. I went to see it and found that my experience differed from theirs. Does this mean I should keep my thoughts to myself and not post on the board because I disagree with the majority?  This is what you appear to be saying. I think the board WOULD become a fan board if we all kept any contrary thoughts in a homogenised box.

[SPD444]

A number of people wrote positive reviews of Flames of Paris. I went to see it and found that my experience differed from theirs. Does this mean I should keep my thoughts to myself and not post on the board because I disagree with the majority?  This is what you appear to be saying. I think the board WOULD become a fan board if we all kept any contrary thoughts in a homogenised box.

Your post #52 says what value is my opinion if I am not forced to justify it. Disagree by all means but do not expect me me to care one iota what you may think of it.

[godots_arrived]

I have to add that I have re-read my original review and cannot see why anyone would have been offended with the exception of one, single line -- the one about Les Mis, which I agree was snotty and unnecessary. Apologies for that. Other than that I qualified every opinion I gave and simply explained why I felt how I felt even though others clearly came to different conclusions. Were I to rewrite the review after the flurry of criticism that has followed I would change nothing other than re-phrasing that aforementioned line, the point of which stands but could have been made less offensively.

[godots_arrived]

Your post #52 says what value is my opinion if I am not forced to justify it. Disagree by all means but do not expect me me to care one iota what you may think of it.

 

I think we differ there. I recognise that my knowledge of ballet is not encyclopedic. I write a review to summarise my response to a performance and that is obviously written through the prism of whatever knowledge about ballet/music/the arts that I have. Writing the review, especially a contrary one, was/is somewhat intimidating because I know that on a forum such as this, many people considerably more knowledgable than me are likely to hold opposite views. But if I can't express what I feel, then I'm never going to graduate to a greater understanding or discover why I might be wrong if I just keep my thoughts to myself. So while it's entirely up to you not to care one iota what others think of your reviews, I have to say that I care a great deal which is why I've tried to take the time to respond thoughtfully to everyone who criticised what I wrote. Personally, I think you're missing a trick being so close-minded but that's entirely your right.