(Rant Warning: very strong opinions ahead.)
So, Matthew Bourne's Swan Lake is one of those "Visionary Re-imaginings" of a much beloved classic. Considering how much I love Béjart's Sacre du Printemps,
that does not mean I will automatically hate it. I'm picky about
"reimaginings" and believe you need to respect the source material to do
it right, but I don't dismiss them out of hand.
A good while ago, I spent way too long on YouTube comparing versions of the Danse des petits cygnes pas de quatre. From what I remember, aside from squeeing over the precision in the Paris Opera Ballet video, I started pondering the different presentations of gender in the Trocks version and in the Matthew Bourne version. I found a lovely quote from the artistic director of the Trocks, talking about how they weren't mimicking femininity in dressing in tutus and dancing en pointe, but that they were expressing variations of masculinity.
"The company is not trying actually to emulate females. It's a company of fifteen male dancers who are, and however you want to define the word "male". But , the male dancer in Ballet is really known for an aggressive attack, and that's how we try to approach these roles. So, just because we're in a tutu doesn't mean we're not male. It doesn't mean that we're not expressing different kinds of masculinity. And that masculinity can be a very wide range."
--Tory Dobrin, artistic director of the Trocks, interviewed in a radio interview in Brisbane in 2002. http://www.trockadero.org/from-the-director.html
I
just generally love the Trocks to begin with, but I found this statement really insightful in its commentary on gender portrayal in interaction with the traditions of Ballet and of Camp.
In the meantime, I
wasn't as impressed with, the Matthew Bourne version, because the
complete lack of straight lines pretty much came off like a stereotyped
"limp wrist" expression of gay masculinity. There's nothing inherently wrong with that expression of masculinity, but the fact that what is
basically a comedy drag act (that is also a group of excellent dancers)
seemed to have a far more nuanced portrayal of gender in dance kind of
bugged me.
So more recently, I saw the whole ballet on TV. My opinion stands. The Trocks are a much better, less reductive examination of gender in ballet form. When it comes down to it, Bourne, in (re)creating a gay Swan Lake, creates a misogynist narrative with serious "mother issues" (come on! stereotypical overpowering, controlling mother much?) plus a gauche and annoying -- and then dead -- rejected girlfriend figure. Yay for reductive stereotypes. And Bourne's choreography all too often epitomizes "limp wrists". In this ballet at least, Bourne seems constitutionally incapable of allowing straight lines into his choreography. Some of the lines are beautiful, but can we have variation please? One of these things without the other might be acceptable (again, there's nothing inherently wrong with a limp wrist), but the overall effect is not positive for anyone. Particularly when you add in the Prince character having a mental breakdown. There's a tragic love story, and there's a tragic love story that makes homosexuality an impossible to survive tragedy, with Mommy Dearest as the villain and a dead disposable girlfriend to top things off.
And now to get to what really pissed me off . . . well two things:
1.) From watching his Swan Lake, Bourne doesn't respect ballet. I'm not saying I expected him to work in the mode of classical ballet when "re-imagining" one of the most famous ballets of all time -- it's pretty hard to escape Petipa -- but Bourne chose to create a ballet within a ballet section in which he had a wonderful opportunity to create a tribute that would highlight his difference from the overshadowing tradition, and which could have been a lovely commentary on the different styles and the development of the art form. Instead, Bourne gave the most hideously ugly broad caricature of ballet that I've seen on stage.
Another funny thing: One of the reasons that 20th century ballet moved away from the story ballet into more abstract "pure" dance -- we dumped the traditional sequences where the dancing stops for stylized mimed explanations of the plot because it stopped the dancing and ballet should be able to stand on its own. (What was Balanchine's quote? "The important thing in ballet is the movement itself, as it is sound which is important in a symphony. A ballet may contain a story, but the visual spectacle, not the story, is the essential element.") This Swan Lake, however, had less actual dancing than the "traditional" versions. It had lots of walking and exaggerated "acting" that took up a lot more time than the traditional mimed bits of convention. And you know what? The walking and mimed "acting" were boring. I want dancing.
2.) Which brings me to what pissed me off the most: Bourne doesn't respect Tchaikovsky.
Let me back up to the beginning, and the basic history / common "everyone knows" wisdom about Swan Lake that I learned I don't know when. The first production of Swan Lake was an absolute flop. Tchaikovsky composed it quickly on commission, but (as I learned it) the choreography was done independently of the music and didn't suit the powerful, emotive score that Tchaikovsky composed at all. One of the things that made the Petipa / Ivanov revival such a success was the musicality of Petipa's choreography. It's iconic because it fits so perfectly.
A lot of Bourne's choreography pretty much ignores the music. He only pays attention to dynamic build or the sense of line or quality of movement that the music gives when it suits him. Instead, he actually has his dancers shouting "HOORAH!" and laughing over the music. Obviously, his concept is more important than the synergy of beautiful sound and beautiful movement telling a powerful story. Um, no. Just no. This kind of carry on pretty much destroyed any chance of me just getting to squee over a very strong cast of male corps de ballet dancers, which should always be a pleasure to watch, even if the women don't get much of a chance to dance at all.
So more recently, I saw the whole ballet on TV. My opinion stands. The Trocks are a much better, less reductive examination of gender in ballet form. When it comes down to it, Bourne, in (re)creating a gay Swan Lake, creates a misogynist narrative with serious "mother issues" (come on! stereotypical overpowering, controlling mother much?) plus a gauche and annoying -- and then dead -- rejected girlfriend figure. Yay for reductive stereotypes. And Bourne's choreography all too often epitomizes "limp wrists". In this ballet at least, Bourne seems constitutionally incapable of allowing straight lines into his choreography. Some of the lines are beautiful, but can we have variation please? One of these things without the other might be acceptable (again, there's nothing inherently wrong with a limp wrist), but the overall effect is not positive for anyone. Particularly when you add in the Prince character having a mental breakdown. There's a tragic love story, and there's a tragic love story that makes homosexuality an impossible to survive tragedy, with Mommy Dearest as the villain and a dead disposable girlfriend to top things off.
And now to get to what really pissed me off . . . well two things:
1.) From watching his Swan Lake, Bourne doesn't respect ballet. I'm not saying I expected him to work in the mode of classical ballet when "re-imagining" one of the most famous ballets of all time -- it's pretty hard to escape Petipa -- but Bourne chose to create a ballet within a ballet section in which he had a wonderful opportunity to create a tribute that would highlight his difference from the overshadowing tradition, and which could have been a lovely commentary on the different styles and the development of the art form. Instead, Bourne gave the most hideously ugly broad caricature of ballet that I've seen on stage.
Another funny thing: One of the reasons that 20th century ballet moved away from the story ballet into more abstract "pure" dance -- we dumped the traditional sequences where the dancing stops for stylized mimed explanations of the plot because it stopped the dancing and ballet should be able to stand on its own. (What was Balanchine's quote? "The important thing in ballet is the movement itself, as it is sound which is important in a symphony. A ballet may contain a story, but the visual spectacle, not the story, is the essential element.") This Swan Lake, however, had less actual dancing than the "traditional" versions. It had lots of walking and exaggerated "acting" that took up a lot more time than the traditional mimed bits of convention. And you know what? The walking and mimed "acting" were boring. I want dancing.
2.) Which brings me to what pissed me off the most: Bourne doesn't respect Tchaikovsky.
Let me back up to the beginning, and the basic history / common "everyone knows" wisdom about Swan Lake that I learned I don't know when. The first production of Swan Lake was an absolute flop. Tchaikovsky composed it quickly on commission, but (as I learned it) the choreography was done independently of the music and didn't suit the powerful, emotive score that Tchaikovsky composed at all. One of the things that made the Petipa / Ivanov revival such a success was the musicality of Petipa's choreography. It's iconic because it fits so perfectly.
A lot of Bourne's choreography pretty much ignores the music. He only pays attention to dynamic build or the sense of line or quality of movement that the music gives when it suits him. Instead, he actually has his dancers shouting "HOORAH!" and laughing over the music. Obviously, his concept is more important than the synergy of beautiful sound and beautiful movement telling a powerful story. Um, no. Just no. This kind of carry on pretty much destroyed any chance of me just getting to squee over a very strong cast of male corps de ballet dancers, which should always be a pleasure to watch, even if the women don't get much of a chance to dance at all.
. . . and I think that's about that. To say more I'd have to watch it again. There were bits I liked and absolutely beautiful moments, but they kind of got overwhelmed by my general irritation.
