How much has ballet changed over the years? Would a ballet audience from 1830 or 1890 or even 1915 recognize the work of a modern ballet company as being ballet? Or would they find it unusual? What would modern ballet audiences think of ballet as it was performed in the past?
Have you ever been to a ballet before? Do you have a favorite?
bump
looked a bit different
Ballet goers from the 1800s would certainly recognize ballet today, but obviously it would be different. More unusual moves, more unusual music.
Today there are 2 types of Ballet - the old standards (mostly Tchaikovsky), and contemporary ballet. Contemporary has a lot of unconventional movements and obviously contemporary music.
For example, here's a section of a more recent Ballet by Lera Auerbach:
youtube.com
>Have you ever been to a ballet before?
yes, it was a mix of traditional Tchaikovsky in the first section and contemporary in the second section. The second section had a part that involved 2 newlyweds in underwear and used a mattress as a prob. Although it was well done, and easily accepted by the audience, (although a bit risqué) this kind of thing might come as a shock to someone from 1830.
The Royal Opera House has a really great series on the evolution of ballet, including visual demonstrations.
youtube.com
It's changed profoundly from the 17th century until now. Someone in the 17th-century would not recognize modern classical ballet as ballet. They might recognize some of the foot positions, but our concept of ballet differed greatly from theirs.
It's changed substantially from the 19th century until now. It's changed significantly from the 1920s until now.
Ballet audiences from the 19th-century and early 20th-century would recognize modern classical ballet productions as being ballet, however they would probably find it unusual, perhaps even garish at times. Assuming they could get over any reservations regarding any pancake tutus on stage being scandalous, they might marvel at the exceptionally high extensions and moves like fast, crisp pirouettes and fouttes. They would be surprised at the differences in the body of ballet dancers has changed as well. The typical ballet dancers in the 19th century and early 20th century were not willowy, tall and thin but muscular and even somewhat stocky. They would probably be shocked at the athleticism which in modern classical ballet focuses on using the entire body ,whereas in the 19th century the focus of athleticism was on your lower legs, feet and arms.
It depends on the modern audience, but, some modern ballet audiences would probably find 19th century style ballet to be underwhelming. They did not do as much pointe work, their extensions were quite low, they did not do as much intense technical techniques like constant fouttes and pirouettes or giant athletic leaps. Moves and techniques which modern ballet considers base standard, 19th-century ballet considered to be the "ooooh, ahhhhh" moments. For example, in the original 19th-century The Sleeping Beauty, penché arabesque (pic related) was used after much build-up and was intended to be the "oOoohHh" moment for then-contemporary audiences. Today a penché arabesque, while still requiring great technique, is not considered to be a show-stopper by audiences.
And I should clarify, I'm talking about modern classical ballet, not modern/contemporary ballet as in ballet that incorporates modern dance is or "avant garde" in any way.
Are you ballet-user who makes that great ballet threads? I have a question if you can spare some time to answer it.
From your post and my own knowledge it appears that art form of ballet is getting more and more beautiful as centuries advance. So I believe that in a century, ballet will be even more beautiful art form than today.
So, to the question,
Have you ever come across ideas, books or videos that talk about the future aesthetics of ballet, what beauty could they make in a 100 years from now on? Do you have some ideas of your own perhaps?
And yeah, I am talking about modern classical ballet and how will it look in the future. I am not interested in ballet that incorporates modern dance.
yep I've made ballet threads on Sleeping Beauty, Romeo & Juliet and such, I'm glad you like them!
The most extensive book on ballet history, Apollo's Angels, talks a bit about the potential future of ballet... I'll have to go dig it out so I can quote it in a minute. From what I remember that author wasn't particularly optimistic about the artistic development of ballet, though.
As for me... I don't know about 100 years from now, but recent trends point to a few things that I think we will definitely see more of in the future.
1) Reconstructions of classic works, with lavish costumes and sets; especially with choreographers like Alexei Ratmansky and the late Sergei Vikharev, who see not just historical importance in restaging historic productions to preserve choreography for future generations, but who also understand the appeal of "old world" and even "imperial" ballet to audiences. It also makes audiences feel like they get more "bang for their buck," which certainly doesn't hurt sales. I don't think that the sparse style preferred by Balanchine is going to disappear entirely, but I think productions that go all out will become less rare.
2) Re-imaginings of classic ballets. Matthew Bourne took the Nutcracker and made it into a morality fable about the violent and oppressed lives of poor orphans in Victorian London. Alexei Ratmansky took Cinderella and made it a war story, set in London during WWII. Akram Khan took Giselle and made it into a bleak metaphor for the oppression of medieval peasants by the uncaring nobility. While new ballets will certainly never go away, and many of them are successful, I feel like more directors will turn to reworking the classics because of audience familiarity which makes it a less risky venture, and because of the great potential that so many of these classic ballets have to be fleshed out and explored anew.
1/2?