Mariinsky Balanchine Evening, ROH, August 2014

[ENBlover]

Saw the bill on Saturday evening.  I'm still unable to fully appreciate Apollo as a piece, but found this performance much more enjoyable than the one last spring with Carlos Acosta as Apollo.  Shapran is a fine dancer, but I was absolutely taken by Sergeyev.  I simply loved his Mercutio and he didn't disappoint again.

 

MND - simply amazing!  This was the first time I saw Balanchine's version and I am now firmly in his camp.  Considering how much I love Ashton's The Dream, this is no small feat.  I feel that Balanchine's aesthetic appeals to me much more in a narrative ballet rather than in his more abstract works.  All that aside, the dancing was brilliant.  Lopatkina shined, Skorik and Zverev were great, Shumakov was an excellent Puck, the lovers were danced wondefully, Oberon, everyone - everything worked!  Can't wait there's only one week left. 

[alison]

I seem to remember that various people had significant reservations about Acosta's Apollo last time round, didn't they?

[MAB]

Go back further and there were serious reservations about Nureyev in the role too,

[ENBlover]

All I remember is that I was very far away and the whole thing just fell flat.  Not sure how much me being in the Gods influenced that. 

[Buddy]

Ismene Brown (Arts Desk) wrote today about Oxana Skorik:

 

“She has the standard willowiness of today, the graceful finesse and nobly presented beauty of a young classical Mariinsky ballerina, but physicality alone is not quite enough to be interesting when next to you Lopatkina is giving a master-class in why it all matters.”

 

http://www.theartsdesk.com/dance/apollo-midsummer-nights-dream-mariinsky-ballet-royal-opera-house

 

I’ve been fascinated by comparing Ulyana Lopatkina and Oxana Skorik.

 

I like to watch video clips of the same work by different artists, my favorite being the Act I White Swan duet from Swan Lake. I’ll watch Galina Ulanova, Ulyana Lopatkina and several other outstanding current dancers such as Oxana Skorik and Olga Smirnova in one sitting.

 

Ulyana Lopatkina is perhaps the one current ballerina that I consider an all-time great to be grouped with Anna Pavlova, Galina Ulanova and a very few others. Yet when I watch her and Galina Ulanova, Oxana Skorik does manage to hang in there. I’m not saying that I consider her as great, although it could happen, but she does have something very special. Olga Smirnova (Bolshoi, Vaganova (Mariinsky related) graduate) on the other hand seems on a faster track to glory and perhaps all-time greatness, but this is another story.

 

Ulyana Lopatkina, for me, is today’s world ballet queen, every bit as great as Ismene Brown says she is. What makes Oxana Skorik watchable alongside her and Galina Ulanova is Poetry and Expression. What I find most remarkable about Ulyana Lopatkina is her Gracefulness, her Fineness. As with Galina Ulanova her dancing is almost Transcendental.

 

Interestingly I also consider the once much discussed Alina Somova (because of her sometimes ‘abandon’) to be one of the most Graceful and Flowing ballerinas today. So I watch her and Ulyana Lopatkina, then Oxana Skorik, who although slightly different is still as compelling. Why? Once again it’s her Poetry, her touch of Subtly Heartful Expression. I would add to this, that I’ve noticed more recently an even finer airiness and flow in Oxana Skorik that might yet make her literally comparable to Ulyana Lopatkina and Alina Somova in this respect.

Edited August 11, 2014 by Buddy

[Ellie]

I speak as someone who has not had the opportunity to see either Oxana Skorik, or Ulyana Lopatkina live . Oxana Skorik is beautiful, but Ulyana Lopatkina breaks my heart (in a good way !) Age and experience almost certainly have lots to do with it, but there's also that certain *something* with Ulyana that makes even my non ballet enthusiast friends watch in awe....

[alison]

Well, yesterday’s performance reintroduced me to the delights – and frankly, the tedium – of Balanchine’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream, which I hadn’t seen since Pacific Northwest Ballet brought it to Sadler’s Wells at the turn of the century.  The Mariinsky’s generally attractive designs (from what little I could see of them) aren’t as cartoonish as PNB’s, but even so there’s still a touch of the Disney about this ballet, which really skates over the surface of Shakespeare’s play without acknowledging its greater depths.  Characterisation (and for that matter dramatic motivation – characters seem to do things simply because they occur in the play, without giving us any clue as to WHY) is for the most part shallow – or even non-existent - although I will admit to liking the sympathetic treatment of Bottom, if not the waste of the glorious Nocturne music for the pas de deux between him and Titania.  The character of Puck, though, completely sets my teeth on edge – I don’t think I’ve seen a more annoying one even from the worst excesses of the Royal Ballet in Ashton’s The Dream. 

 

Incidentally, the Ashton comes out approximately quarter of an hour shorter than the first, narrative, act of this ballet, yet to my mind it contains everything of importance to the play – Ashton paring down to the essentials again, as he did with Symphonic Variations? - whereas Balanchine seems to have felt obliged to keep almost everything in, even including such trivia as Puck “sent with broom before, to sweep the dust behind the door”, which really puts the “long” in longueur.  (And frankly, having to stand for 70 minutes through something which doesn’t enthral you really makes you realise when something is too long.  I reckon there’s about 20 minutes of real quality choreography in Act I, and that’s definitely not enough, especially when one of the best bits, the pas de deux between Titania and her Cavalier, is so episodic, stopping and starting before it really gets anywhere). He introduces Theseus and Hippolyta a mere matter of minutes before the curtain falls on Act I, seemingly only as an excuse to hold the second-act wedding (the Duke of Athens dropping to one knee to propose to his love seemingly in a spur-of-the minute declaration at odds with the pomp and triumph and the long-awaited nuptials in the play).  Not only that, but he adds an extraneous Cavalier for Titania who has no purpose except to partner her: a dramatic motive for his inclusion might have been to stoke Oberon’s jealousy further, since he already believes her to be in love with Theseus, but there’s clearly no sign of that here – is Oberon even aware of his existence?  He’s certainly not the Golden Slave let loose in Scheherezade’s harem.  (Actually, this is an oddly asexual “Dream” all round – there’s certainly nothing here to frighten the children.)  And then there’s the completely unknown couple he introduces in Act II – and gives the lion’s share of the dancing to.  Huh?!

 

And then comes Act II, and I remember precisely what it is I love so much about this ballet.  To the strains of the Wedding March, Balanchine suddenly switches into Theme and Variations-ish mode, and all’s right with the world (not to mention that Act II is half the length of Act I).  And then we have that gorgeous pas de deux with the parachuted-in dancers, but who’s complaining?  I’m not, especially when the lovely Ms Batoeva is on display – did she remind anyone else of Belinda Hatley, or was it just me?  Sadly, it’s been said above that Act II is never given separately: I’d happily go and see it a lot more if I didn’t have to sit through Act I first.

[Buddy]

What more can be said about this review than

 

 

Clement Crisp -- Night One, August 8

 

"It was, on any terms, an evening of greatest pleasures."

 

(Five Stars)

 

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/86de8386-2139-11e4-b96e-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3A8mexJYm

Edited August 12, 2014 by Buddy

[jm365]

Oh, Alison, how much I agree with your statements about the first act of MND - almost total tedium, I thought.  I disliked almost everything about it - the heavy-handed humour, the twee fairies, the ghastly costumes.  The ballet was just slightly redeemed by the second act - but the bareness of the set, the lack of any sense of celebration of the three weddings ....  In comparison with the Ashton version, such a lack of a proper structure.  It was interesting to see it once - but never, never, never again.

[Jan McNulty]

Alison you have articulated beautifully my feelings about when I saw Act1, but I think I was so disillusioned about that I didn't enjoy Act2 either!  And I didn't like it any better on a second viewing the following evening.

 

Just as well we are all different and I've been glad to see that a lot of people do like it.

[Shade]

How views differ - I thought that MSND was sublime. However, I was disappointed that Titania and Oberon had so little dancing compared to the Ashton that I saw earlier this season at the RB. It was a thrill to see Lopatkina again and the whole cast was on top form.

[Buddy]

I have to say again that I've not been able to attend these performances and all that I say should reflect this. I've seen the Balanchine performed by the Mariinsky over a year ago and liked it very much. I like both the Ashton and Balanchine versions very much. I've seen ABT do the Ashton with the absolutely amazing and perhaps definitive performance of Puck by Herman Cornejo. The ABT Ashton and the Pacific Northwest Ballet Balanchine can both be seen on dvd.

[Petit Jete]

Yes isn't it interesting how views vary? I have been to the Royal Opera House many times before to see many ballets, but this production of MSND, despite me not being able to see the whole of the stage, left such a magical lasting impression on me! I loved it. However, I am only a lowly ballet teacher looking for artistry, technique and a special magical quality that this company, on this occasion, certainly had for me. Wonderful. 

[Buddy]

I'd like to add to my post above that I consider the Balanchine MSND Act II Divertissement duet to be one of the most beautiful and enchanting ballet sequences that I've ever seen. It's performed wonderfully by Louise Nadeau on the Pacific Northwest Ballet dvd.

[Jan McNulty]

Petit Jete, you, as a ballet teacher know a lot more about ballet than me! I've never been to a dance class and know nothing technical at all about ballet.

[Petit Jete]

Janet, all I know is that this production had me captivated throughout and that I wished I had had a better seat! 

[Jan McNulty]

Janet, all I know is that this production had me captivated throughout and that I wished I had had a better seat! 

 

PJ - the best of performances to be at!

[Bruce Wall]

Here is another young interpreter's take on Balanchine's Apollo.  One who has guested in the production we saw with the Mariinsky.  (Maria Kowroski is seen here as Terpsichore.)  

Edited September 2, 2014 by Bruce Wall

[Bruce Wall]

I was excited to find this clip on Youtube.  It is ALL in Russian and shows - delightfully - Balanchine completely at home when speaking his native (as opposed to his adopted) tongue on the occasion of NYCB's visit to Moscow in 1962.  It also shows some new class footage (well, new to me at least) and the glory that is a peak at Lincoln Kirstein (who did not like to be filmed) towering proudly over the table shared with Mr. B.)  What a treat.  Anyone who ever came into contact with that resounding profile never forgot it.  It was entirely Ashtonian in its pride of scale.