Russian Orchestras/Russian Ballets

the company tours under the name Kirov, although they perform
domestically under the name Mariinsky.
I have the sneaky suspiscion that only Americans are so ignorant
they require the use of the old name Kirov.

Nope.

http://www.viewlondon.co.uk/whats_on_112206.html

A friend of mine is the chief administrator for their European operations.
It's Mariinsky for the theatre company (almost unknown in the West until
the 1990s, so no historical inertia), Kirov for the opera and ballet.

============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/ for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557

spamfree wrote:

Have you traveled to Piter? It is an amazing place.

Is Piter a slang reference to St. Petersburg? (It is according to one
site I Googled.) If so, the answer is "yes." I'd happily go back for a
second visit.

Having been a writer for the Kennedy Center for many years,

I am immensely jealous of anyone who has an interesting job.

It was a completely fascinating experience. I used to write Cuesheets,
study guides for school groups who would be attending performances at
the KenCen. I'd do research, including interviewing the performers, to
figure out what students needed to know before the curtain went up and
what to look for during the performance. Over the years, I came in
contact with people I never would have had access to, and this was
totally amazing. (For example, when I wrote the Cuesheet for AND THEN
THEY CAME FOR ME, I had contact with the post-humous step-sister of Anne
Frank and the Anne Frank Foundation.)

I could only do this for five years. The job was very stressful. Working
to publishing deadlines would become even more exciting when the
companies would change their program. Occasionally, the performers or
the administrators representing the performers wanted PR pieces. My job
was through the Education department and our goal was instruction; we
were supposed to write about the substance of the performance and not
make subjective comments.

My years at the KenCen were amazing, but I have no regrets about having
left such a stressful, burn-out job.

Karen Selwyn

Luca Logi wrote:

And, of course, Wagner wrote that music thinking to the sound
of German trumpets, German oboes, etc.

Fascinating explanation snipped for brevity.

Thanks!

Karen Selwyn

Luca Logi ha scritto:

There are a lot ...

A very valuable, and technical, answer of yours indeed.

However, I would maintain that of ever greater importance for their
performance are the attitude, the atmosphere and the general feeling
that orchestra musicians experiment.

In contrast to that, soloists do enjoy much more liberty, from an
artistic point of view, of course.Two notable cases spring to mind.
The exhilarating, joyous, historic concert given by the late Horowitz
when he was allowed to come back to Moscow and the exceptional activity
of my all time favourite fiddler, Gidon Kremer.

Sergio
Pisa

Icono Clast wrote:

[Cross-posted to rec.arts.dance]

Karen Selwyn wrote:

We've had Evelyn calling people idiots for not inherently recognizing
the superiority of Russian orchestras. We've had someone explaining
Russian superiority by supplying an analogy referring to musicians I've
never heard of. So far, I sincerely haven't been persuaded that Russian
musicians are superior to the best of American or British or German,
etc. musicians.
...

However, if I want to see a Balanchine ballet, I'd much rather watch the
New York City Ballet or American Ballet Theatre than either Russian
company. If I want to watch a MacMillan ballet, I'd much rather see the
Royal Ballet instead of either Russian company. The list goes on.

Karen Selwyn


I went to see Ballet Russes (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436095/) this
week. It's the story of the Ballet Russes de Monte Carle, after Sergei
Diaghilev's death, with interviews from many of the dancers during a
reunion in 2000, including the last of the dancers from the Diaghilev
years, who died in 2004. It's a fantastic movie, and I highly recommend
it if you're a lover of dance. There's some great comments in there by
some of those dancers on what they perceive to be an over emphasis on
technique in current ballet interpretations, at the expense of emotional
expression. It also shows the beginning, with Balanchine, of the
fascination with the small, ascetic, baby-ballerinas.

But I think what really was a shocker for me was the expectation, at the
time, that the ballets would have new choreography every year.
Ballanchine and Massine produced choreography for a completely new
ballet season every year, often with costumes and sets designed by great
artists in their own right, like Matisse.

New choreography is still being produced every year, of course, but it's
mostly in modern/contemporary dance - which frequently fails to grab me
because of a lack of story or emotion - in favour of abstract movement.
Probably some of the most emotive dancing I've seen done in this form
lately was the bench dance with Travis and Heidi on SYTYCD.

So we wind up going to see re-interpretations of Balanchine, or
MacMillan. And to me that's a little sad, because I think that there's
no lack of stories from the last 50 years that could be explored in that
form.

So what's the story with Russian orchestras?
Are Russian orchestras better or worse? I'm not sure it matters as much
as the composers. Some of the great ballets were set to music by the
great composers of the time, including Tchaikosky. But modern music,
whether popular or symphonic, is rarely suitable for the production of
new ballets in the classical tradition. Nobody wants to revisit the
classical canon and risk being compared unfavourably to Balanchine or
Massine. In the end, I think that's severely restricted ballet's
relevance for 21st century audiences, and that's a pity.

Paul-Andre

Paul-Andre Panon writes:

Icono Clast wrote:

[Cross-posted to rec.arts.dance]
Karen Selwyn wrote:
We've had Evelyn calling people idiots for not inherently
recognizing the superiority of Russian orchestras. We've had someone
explaining Russian superiority by supplying an analogy referring to
musicians I've never heard of. So far, I sincerely haven't been
persuaded that Russian musicians are superior to the best of
American or British or German, etc. musicians.
...

However, if I want to see a Balanchine ballet, I'd much rather watch
the New York City Ballet or American Ballet Theatre than either
Russian company. If I want to watch a MacMillan ballet, I'd much
rather see the Royal Ballet instead of either Russian company. The
list goes on.

Karen Selwyn


I went to see Ballet Russes (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0436095/)
this week. It's the story of the Ballet Russes de Monte Carle, after
Sergei Diaghilev's death, with interviews from many of the dancers
during a reunion in 2000, including the last of the dancers from the
Diaghilev years, who died in 2004. It's a fantastic movie, and I
highly recommend it if you're a lover of dance. There's some great
comments in there by some of those dancers on what they perceive to be
an over emphasis on technique in current ballet interpretations, at
the expense of emotional expression. It also shows the beginning, with
Balanchine, of the fascination with the small, ascetic,
baby-ballerinas.

But I think what really was a shocker for me was the expectation, at
the time, that the ballets would have new choreography every
year. Ballanchine and Massine produced choreography for a completely
new ballet season every year, often with costumes and sets designed by
great artists in their own right, like Matisse.

New choreography is still being produced every year, of course, but
it's mostly in modern/contemporary dance - which frequently fails to
grab me because of a lack of story or emotion - in favour of abstract
movement. Probably some of the most emotive dancing I've seen done in
this form lately was the bench dance with Travis and Heidi on SYTYCD.

So we wind up going to see re-interpretations of Balanchine, or
MacMillan. And to me that's a little sad, because I think that there's
no lack of stories from the last 50 years that could be explored in
that form.

So what's the story with Russian orchestras?
Are Russian orchestras better or worse? I'm not sure it matters as
much as the composers. Some of the great ballets were set to music by
the great composers of the time, including Tchaikosky. But modern
music, whether popular or symphonic, is rarely suitable for the
production of new ballets in the classical tradition. Nobody wants to
revisit the classical canon and risk being compared unfavourably to
Balanchine or Massine. In the end, I think that's severely restricted
ballet's relevance for 21st century audiences, and that's a pity.

Don't forget that many of the great ballet scores were explicitly
commissioned by ballet companies. Diaghilev is known for giving a
young fellow named Igor Stravinsky his first big break, but he
commissioned new scores on a regular basis, from people like Ravel and
Debussy as well as a score of less well known composers. Stravinsky
only got The Firebird because Diaghilev's first choice didn't have
time to do it.

If someone wanted to try that today my guess is that finding a
composer would not be much of a problem. There are some talented
people writing music for Hollywood these days, because that's where
the work is.

--
Jim Janney