Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A few days ago we were asked whether the audience liked the works of McGregor , wheeldon and Scarlett. I think that  it would be presumptuous to answer that question as if I was speaking for anyone except myself and before I set about answering that question I think that I need to acknowledge that it raises the question of what sort of new works we should expect to see on the Covent Garden stage ?

 

I doubt that anyone would argue with the statement that ballet is an international art form but what does that mean in practice? Does that mean that the artistic management of a company like the Royal Ballet which was established as a creative company and not a dance museum should abandon its support of local choreographers in favour of pursuit of  the latest fashionable international choreographer? If it should support the work of local choreographers or at least those with a connection with the company and the school at what point should it abandon its support of the individual? Should the artistic director take greater care with his commissions and exercise more oversight of what he his paying for ? Is it always better to commission new works from established choreographers, when you run the risk of acquiring a dud, rather than acquiring works which have been deemed successful ?

 

I think that before management starts filling in the extensive gaps in the London audience's experience of late twentieth century choreography it needs to give careful consideration to what the balance of its repertory should be between the nineteenth century classics and the many masterpieces in its twentieth century repertory most of which have been subjected to appalling neglect in favour of the regular revival of a very limited number of MacMillan dramballets. Once it has got that balance right it can begin to think about new commissions and acquisitions. I think that we need to remember that the RB has a corporate habit of swimming against the fashionable artistic tide. It acquired nineteenth century ballets in its earliest years and its choreographers made narrative works when no one else was doing so and the fashion was for abstract ballets. I think that the point is that what the company was doing at that time was in pursuit of a well considered artistic policy of acquiring and performing the very best of the old and creating theatrically effective new works. It was not an exercise in throwing money at a project and hoping that it would achieve some sort of artistic effect which is often what it feels like now. 

 

  I will answer the initial question after I have seen the second cast of Symphonic Dances. I should like to think that some others will say whether they think that by commissioning and supporting local choreographers the company is merely supporting the superficial,  the second rate, colleagues and former colleagues or whether it is doing something more beneficial for the art form as a whole.   

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely the answers to all your questions are not black and white - neither wholly one nor the other, but a balance? And that balance is going to be down to a series of decisions made by the artistic leadership RB. You may agree, or not, but they are the leadership, with expertise & wide knowledge of the international scene. 

 

The problem with "nationalism" in ballet is that, as you say, it's an international art from its very foundation. In Britain in the ballet-mad 1830s, the stage was dominated by French, Italian & German dancers. If we start to look at nationality and localism, we wouldn't HAVE  the "nineteenth-century classics" - and anyway, hasn't the international mix been very fruitful? An French-Russian working in Petersburg for the Russian Tsar, using a largely French movement vocabulary made a ballet seen all over the world, countless times.

 

So I'm not sure what you're asking really? New work will always be risky, and the new is more scary than the familiar. We can sink into the familiar, compare this Coppelia with that, think about the Paris Opera Ballet Swan Lake in relation to Graeme Murphy's re-make for the Australian Ballet (for me, both were a revelation), and so on. New work challenges us to se differently.

 

And then there's the view that the RB is not the sum of British dance - there are the BRB and ENB to start with, as well as many many small companies really breaking boundaries & new ground - Richard Alston, Jasmin Vardimon, Charlotte Vincent. If all an audience sees is the RB, then new works may be less attractive - if what one generally sees is a variety of dance, then the categorisations you're seeking in your questions may be less urgent.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Supporting talentability and quality was, is, and ought to be, the principal criterion for the repertoire decisions. This means, of course, supporting and steering towards excellence also locally bred talent, it does not mean, on the other hand, providing an avenue for staging works, whatever their quality, by choreographers who may have distinguished themselves by their prior work, but who are either limited or unable to produce high quality work on a sustained basis. Unfortunately, this is what we witness on too many world stages every year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kate_N

On the thread started by Ivy Lin about performances in the US she said that she had been disappointed by Wheeldon's Winter's Tale and American in Paris.and she asked the following question. "Do British audiences really enjoy Wheeldon's full length works?"That question prompted a discussion about the new works which have been staged at Covent Garden. That discussion was cut short by a reminder that the thread was intended to be a discussion about what was happening in the US not a discussion about the new works being performed here and whether or not we like them.

 

During that discussion we were told that "Dance is an international art form". a statement with which few would disagree. It sounds very magisterial and suggests that an impartial and disinterested view is being taken of the repertory decisions being made by the RB's artistic director but it does not take the discussion very far. Kate,I will accept your assessment of the artistic taste and all encompassing knowledge and expertise of the artistic director of the company resident at Covent Garden and ask a number of direct questions.

 

1) In commissioning local choreographers is the company's artistic management merely supporting the superficial and the second rate? 

 

2) Do the currently favoured choreographers  commissioned by the company produce a sufficiently consistent number of interesting and outstanding works to justify continued support?

 

3) Should the company spend more on existing works which have been successful elsewhere to enlarge the local audience's experience of the developments and repertory which has been created in the last  forty years? For example would it have been better if the company had acquired a couple of Ratmansky's best works rather than commissioning a new work from him?

 

4) Are the artistic team at Covent Garden too "in awe" of the choreographer as a creative artist to exercise sufficient quality  control over what is being created and staged for them?

 

Please understand my intention in focusing on the RB was not intended to suggest that no one else is commissioning new works or that what they are producing is not of interest. I concentrated on the RB because of the money that it has available to it and the enhanced artistic profile it may be thought to confer on those who make works for it. I did not intend this discussion to be one about parochialism versus the international but one about quality versus mediocrity. I hope that this makes things a bit clearer. If still in doubt read the last few comments posted on the thread about what is happening in the US.

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is interesting that the world of dance is producing a number of choreographers ranging from classical to modern but I do wonder how many of their works will last or be regarded as works of genius.  My own personal list of choreographers of genius or near genius level would include Petipa,  Bournonville,  Fokine, Ashton, Balanchine, Tudor, Cranko and Macmillan.  Most of these are either contemporaries  (Ashton and Balanchine, Macmillan and Cranko) or overlap.   

 

From my limited standpoint it seems to me that we have a lower bar these days.  When you get a very good choreographer, such as Mcgregor or Ratmansky, they become deeply fashionable and everyone wants their work but their staying power has yet to be established.  From what I have seen of Christopher Wheeldon's work I would describe it as pleasant rather than touched by greatness.  I would say much the same if David Bintley's current output but both of these choreographers are having their work produced by a number of companies around the world presumably for want of any serious competition.

 

Regarding the last two named I would say that they are certainly very good producers and have good teams of designers to call on.  I think the choice of music is a bit more curate's egg at times but that is probably a subjective view.  

 

Given that ballet (rather than general dance) is far more international and widespread at the moment than it was in the late 19th and 20th century it is my personal opinion that choreographically speaking we should be better served than this.   I do appreciate that many of the great choreographers I have listed produced their fair share of duds but I would ask how many of the current crop could producing lasting works such as the Petipa classics ( in whatever genre) or those of Balanchine and Ashton?   I just about sat through Frankenstein, mainly for the committed performances, but with all it's flaws I would have taken Onegin over it every time.  We live in a time of the most amazing depth of talent dancer wise and certainly the appetite is there to encourage new choreography but the consistently good results are just not emerging.

  • Like 2
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...