# Ballet - a bit weird?



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

I've only seen one ballet, and haven't listened to much ballet music, but I do love Tchaikovsky's and Prokofiev's. Still, this seems to be _despite_ the dancing.

I mean, after all, watching people jump and turn and twist and float, with staging but without words, without speech, without songs, without surtitles telling you what the prancing means, is just a bit strange, isn't it? It reminds me of watching Ray McCooney's interpretative dance...


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Polednice said:


> I mean, after all, watching people jump and turn and twist and float, with staging but without words, without speech, without songs, without surtitles telling you what the prancing means, is just a bit strange, isn't it? It reminds me of watching Ray McCooney's interpretative dance...


Any artform that isn't much popular these days may seem strange. Go ask people on the street, they will give you weird description of how they see opera and then ask you "isn't that just strange thing to watch"?. Not quite strange, at least not as much as impressive number of people who easily dismiss something as strange without putting any effort to understand what it's all about.


----------



## kv466 (May 18, 2011)

"Is it modern?" lol...from about 3:30 on it is pretty darned 'weird'.


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I have to admit, I haven't gotten into ballet as far as the dancing. But I'm glad others have.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

Whenever I see ballet, I don't feel like it fits with the music very well....so I don't understand it.


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

I think the original dance lashup of Swan Lake goes together with the music. Can't say I enjoy it, but... it goes together.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Is there an element to ballet where certain moves actually mean something beyond what you can already pick up through normal body language?

That's my main issue with it - it doesn't really seem to communicate anything.


----------



## Aramis (Mar 1, 2009)

Polednice said:


> Is there an element to ballet where certain moves actually mean something beyond what you can already pick up through normal body language?


Is there an element to poetry where certain words and sentences actually mean something beyond what you can already pick up through common language?


----------



## Igneous01 (Jan 27, 2011)

Aramis said:


> Is there an element to poetry where certain words and sentences actually mean something beyond what you can already pick up through common language?


excellent point.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I like modern ballet, I don't like the traditional or old-style ballet, I find it boring & cliched. I'm talking about watching ballet here. Our own Aboriginal dance companies have done some interpretations of classical pieces, eg. _The Rite of Spring_, I watched one of these productions ages ago on TV and I really enjoyed it. But things like _Swan Lake _with the girls in tutus just bore me to death, I see little point in that, I see it as really old hat, to say the truth. More old hat than wierd, and kind of outdated and silly.

Generally, though, I do admire ballet dancer's athleticism and flexibility, agility, etc. It can be a joy to watch just for that. But if they're performing as they would in 1880 or something I see it as a waste.

As far as listening to the actual music goes, I like both older and newer stuff in that area, but probably more the newer stuff (although I rarely listen to it, mainly due to the earworm factor, ballets have some of the best tunes in the repertoire, and they dig themselves inside my skull very easily)....


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Aramis said:


> Is there an element to poetry where certain words and sentences actually mean something beyond what you can already pick up through common language?


Thread closed. I am enlightened.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

I have to admit, some ballet is really weird, and kind of awkward to watch. But here's dancing I found that I think is extremely excellent and evocative. See what you guys think, look at any section:





Not to mention some dramatic music!


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Polednice said:


> Thread closed. I am enlightened.


I am very, very far from being a ballet expert. My understanding, such as it is, is that most of them are based on a story (ahem - in some language), and the dance and music are a joint effort to present the story in a dance&music format. So... the dance represents elements of the story. The music - besides adding drama - gives the dancers something to dance to.

Does this concept help your comprehension, _Poley_? [Even if my 'understanding' sucks walleyed woodpecker eggs, it is a way to survive the 'night at the ballet'.]


----------



## Dodecaplex (Oct 14, 2011)

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I have to admit, so ballet is really weird, and kind of awkward to watch. But here's dancing I found that I think is extremely excellent and evocative. See what you guys think, look at any section:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


^ I randomly decided to put it at 0:44:32. Nice (the music, that is. Not the weird spastic people).


----------



## Huilunsoittaja (Apr 6, 2010)

Dodecaplex said:


> ^ I randomly decided to put it at 0:44:32. Nice (the music, that is. Not the weird spastic people).


Yes, that's the tango, which I think is one of the best parts of the whole ballet (music-wise).


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Hilltroll72 said:


> I am very, very far from being a ballet expert. My understanding, such as it is, is that most of them are based on a story (ahem - in some language), and the dance and music are a joint effort to present the story in a dance&music format. So... the dance represents elements of the story. The music - besides adding drama - gives the dancers something to dance to.
> 
> Does this concept help your comprehension, _Poley_? [Even if my 'understanding' sucks walleyed woodpecker eggs, it is a way to survive the 'night at the ballet'.]


Although the thread has a clear jokey premise, I sincerely thank some members for their patronising responses to my genuine question at post #7. :tiphat:

Should anyone be inclined to give a straight answer to anything, does anyone know exactly how the compositional process of ballets works? My specific question is whether or not a composer actually considers choreography when writing the music, or is that purely someone else's retrospective job after the music has been finished?


----------



## Ukko (Jun 4, 2010)

Goes both ways; egg > chicken or chicken > egg.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Stravinsky did consider the choreography in depth with Nijinsky for those three earlier ballets of his. While he was composing, Nijinsky would move around like a firebird or whatever, and then Stravinsky would go off the bat of that.

But of course, I'd say that for really old ballets we don't have the information we have about ballets in the modern era.

I am not an expert on ballet and choreography but I do remember reading that like music itself, choreography has changed immensely over the centuries (of course, it's obvious what I'm saying).

A contemporary composer would consider choreography, eg. if he's working to a commission by a dance company, etc. But if a dance company is working with music that 100 or more years old, then of course they are not collaborating with the composer. They can be creative and use artistic license. This is why I like the more modern ballet. It's not just based on cliched conventions like the tutus of the 19th century but on being imaginative and doing exciting things...


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Polednice said:


> I've only seen one ballet, and haven't listened to much ballet music, but I do love Tchaikovsky's and Prokofiev's. Still, this seems to be _despite_ the dancing.
> 
> I mean, after all, watching people jump and turn and twist and float, with staging but without words, without speech, without songs, without surtitles telling you what the prancing means, is just a bit strange, isn't it? It reminds me of watching Ray McCooney's interpretative dance...


It's all relative. Ask Joe Blog from the local pub what he thinks of men dressing up in tights and dancing like they do in ballets, you might get a homophoic response. Likewise about opera or classical music in general. I like ballets. I don't watch / listen to them as much as other genres, but I do enjoy them when I experience them, usually via DVD / Blu-ray.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> It's all relative. Ask Joe Blog from the local pub what he thinks of men dressing up in tights and dancing like they do in ballets, you might get a homophoic response. Likewise about opera or classical music in general. I like ballets. I don't watch / listen to them as much as other genres, but I do enjoy them when I experience them, usually via DVD / Blu-ray.


I'm not calling them weird because... oh **** it. I want some morphine.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

An issue that's coming to me is what my parents said about this. They liked the modern choreography of Gene Kelly, not the old style of Fred Astaire. Both were great dancers, but it was Gene who really modernised ballet, on the silver screen at least. Try to watch the about 20 or 30 minute long dance sequence in_ An American in Paris _(the movie). For his choreography in this film, he won an Oscar. Compared that with the more cliched and conventional style of Astaire and you will see how much Kelly revolutionised this genre. He was not cookie cutter, he was responding to what's in the music, & I made the connection in what I remembered about the Stravinsky/Nijinsky partnership in my post above...


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Polednice said:


> I'm not calling them weird because... oh **** it. I want some morphine.


Haha...

Maybe unnatural could be a way to describe the painful tiptoe dance? Looks ever so graceful and light but to support the whole body on one's toes, sound painful to me.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Haha...
> 
> Maybe unnatural could be a way to describe the painful tiptoe dance? Looks ever so graceful and light but to support the whole body on one's toes, sound painful to me.


A quick reformulation: by 'weird', I don't mean strange or off-putting, I mean incomprehensible, seemingly pointless. It may well just be a problem of mine - I've always known that I've never enjoyed pop music, but I've never _understood_ why anyone ever dances. Sure, I tap my foot or swing about a little to fun tunes, but complicated, co-ordinated routines? I mean, just w-t-f is that all about? It's no doubt just that dancing is to me what music was to Freud.

Over and out.


----------



## NightHawk (Nov 3, 2011)

Hahahahahahahaa!


----------



## StlukesguildOhio (Dec 25, 2006)

I absolutely love this dance of the Montagues and Capulets (The Dance of the Knights) from Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet. It surely conveys both the formality and the fierce competitiveness of the Italian Renaissance families... force to put on an air of civility in public... in spite of the seething hatred lurking beneath... which is quite contrasted by the beauty and gentle loving dance of the star-crossed lovers and the other children of the bloodthirsty ruling lords who first enter at 2:15 and then take control of the dance from approx. 3:30- 5:45 when the M&G's return brandishing swords. I don't know what to say if you cannot fathom the inherent "meaning" from this dance. Perhaps you simply aren't a visual person.


----------



## Taneyev (Jan 19, 2009)

I love ballet music, but hate to see it.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Polednice said:


> I've only seen one ballet, and haven't listened to much ballet music, but I do love Tchaikovsky's and Prokofiev's. Still, this seems to be _despite_ the dancing.
> 
> I mean, after all, watching people jump and turn and twist and float, with staging but without words, without speech, without songs, without surtitles telling you what the prancing means, is just a bit strange, isn't it?


I have to agree with you. A dancer dressed in what looks like feathers I can accept as a swan & can understand when the swan dies but I don't generally understand most of it. I usually like the music though.

I'd like to know if a certain movement or hand gesture indicates happiness, pain, love, jealousy etc. I could enjoy the spectacle & athleticism but I'd do that watching a gymnastic competition.


----------



## Meaghan (Jul 31, 2010)

I seem to remember learning that in classical choreography there are encoded meanings for particular gestures. I am with Sid James, though, in preferring modern ballet to the more formal, more classical stuff. The Balanchine choreography for Tchaikovsky's ballets bores me to tears. Ballet can go quite wrong for me and look rather stiff and goofy. But I find that dance, _if it is choreography I like,_ can be beautiful and moving. I like watching the power and grace and expressiveness of dancers' bodies; if they're good, they're like good musicians in their ability to communicate a feeling or idea non-verbally. And then there are the male ballet dancers, who are (if I may shed my veneer of culture for a moment) reason enough for me to go to the ballet.


----------



## sospiro (Apr 3, 2010)

Meaghan said:


> And then there are the male ballet dancers, who are (if I may shed my veneer of culture for a moment) reason enough for me to go to the ballet.




One of the new stars is Sergei Polunin.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Perhaps surprisingly, I find the male bulges rather unsightly.


----------



## MrCello (Nov 25, 2011)

I don't like most ballet, it has to be REALLY good to catch my attention. I'm just too ignorant of ballet to understand the subtleties that make it great, and I'm not about to go spend the time figuring out those subtleties, so I will remain ignorant.


----------



## Meaghan (Jul 31, 2010)

Polednice said:


> Perhaps surprisingly, I find the male bulges rather unsightly.


Oh, I don't fixate. I mostly just like watching the men move.


----------



## HexameronVI (May 9, 2011)

The weirdest ballet I know is one of my favorites: Stravinsky's infamous "Le Sacre du Printemps"


----------



## Meaghan (Jul 31, 2010)

Somebody started a ballet thread last summer, and I wish I could remember who it was so I could find it, because I seem to recall it had some interesting discussion and also cool ballet clips.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

With your extreme attachment to opera as 'THE' way to go, it should not surprise you that any other format of music, or music +, which is without text would at the least interest you far less. I'm guessing such works are more than likely to have you feeling more "rudderless at sea." This does not imply lack of understanding, but names what I think is your primary interest and approach to music - opera.

Ergo, it seems (just a statement of observation) that you are most at home -- and familiar / comfortable with -- music which has a contextual meaning.

[Ballet is mime to music. (Classical Russian ballet training includes a serious year's study of mime as well.) Some people just cannot stand or deal with mime, either ]

I am of the opposite camp. I believe even if music has a contextual setting that the words can not and should not be at all trusted to 'convey meaning or emotion,' and that one has to listen almost exclusively to the speaker's 'tone' and not the 'content' in order to possibly get some idea of the truth or sincerity of a work. (Ironically all 'relationships' in print, or in print / on-line which exclude this sense perception of tone, are, to me, potentially very misleading 

There are those for whom the composer's "Symphony No. X op. XX" must have some contextual tie, for them essential to understanding the music as having any 'meaning.' It must 'tell a story' or have a background story.

For others, "Symphony No. X op. XX" is already borderline as having more than enough 'data.' In Historic context, that is more than ironic, the most fundamental impulse of music (likeliest guess) being the voice, and 'communicating something.' But as author Doug Adams parsed it in one of his books, the history of civilization can be reduced to several simple phases:
"How do we eat?"
"Why do we eat?"
"Where shall we have lunch?"
~ so there 'tis 

In an interview I heard, Evelyn Waugh's widow mentioned that to Waugh, ALL MUSIC WAS HIGHLY IRRITATING. I extrapolated a hypothesis from that statement: to some who have an extreme literal / literary inclination, listening to abstract music must be analogous to having a person constantly speaking a foreign language, the listener recognizing it as 'language,' but a language they do not understand. To be listening to a stream of sound one senses / knows has meaning while not being able to 'translate' or understand has got to be irritating and exhausting.


----------



## Operadowney (Apr 4, 2012)

I think it's odd that music originally composed for ballets exists today on the concert stage rather than on the ballet stage. For example: I've heard more of Stravinsky's _Petrushka_ being performed in concert setting, rather than it's original ballet incarnation.


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

Operadowney said:


> I think it's odd that music originally composed for ballets exists today on the concert stage rather than on the ballet stage. For example: I've heard more of Stravinsky's _Petrushka_ being performed in concert setting, rather than it's original ballet incarnation.


The expense of producing the ballets is one of the issues. The only one of the twentieth century ballets that I have ever seen performed as a ballet in cultural backwater of Johannesburg, South Africa is Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune by Debussy. Even so, I have heard it far more often than the one production of it that I have seen.


----------



## science (Oct 14, 2010)

The ballet that did it for me was Adam's _Giselle_ with Fracci. Some weird stuff in there, but the dancing/acting was beautiful and really did express the story and music well. (Of course the story itself is disgusting, a legitimization of the nobility's right to sexually exploit the common people. But hey, it's touching. And ballet has always been about that kind of thing. Serfs in tights entertaining Russian princes, who will sleep with their favorites after the performance. Or Louis XIV illustrating the principle of social order.)

Since then, somehow I'm able to get ballet. Even things I'd seen before but didn't appreciate - like Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake with Nureyev.

So I think it might just be a matter of exposure and time.

By the way, my choice for "something completely different" is Chin's _Alice in Wonderland_.


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

sospiro said:


> I have to agree with you. A dancer dressed in what looks like feathers I can accept as a swan & can understand when the swan dies but I don't generally understand most of it. I usually like the music though.
> 
> I'd like to know if a certain movement or hand gesture indicates happiness, pain, love, jealousy etc. I could enjoy the spectacle & athleticism but I'd do that watching a gymnastic competition.


When one becomes skilled at watching classical ballet one can actually interpret the movements and gestures which ARE indicative of emotions, but that is only a very minor point of the whole.

Just as there are (at least) two ways of actively listening to music, one being to let the glorious totality carry you along, while the other is to listen finely and interpret each musical clause in all the depth of one's musical knowledge and understanding, so too is this true of ballet (and all dance).

Watching dance is as much of a skill as is listening to music, perhaps even more so, for it has the musical element as well.


----------



## bigshot (Nov 22, 2011)

Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet on bluray convinced me. I was totally familiar with the music from the suites, but seein the ballet was a revelaion.


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

science said:


> The ballet that did it for me was Adam's _Giselle_ with Fracci. Some weird stuff in there, but the dancing/acting was beautiful and really did express the story and music well. (Of course the story itself is disgusting, a legitimization of the nobility's right to sexually exploit the common people. But hey, it's touching. And ballet has always been about that kind of thing. Serfs in tights entertaining Russian princes, who will sleep with their favorites after the performance. Or Louis XIV illustrating the principle of social order.)
> 
> Since then, somehow I'm able to get ballet. Even things I'd seen before but didn't appreciate - like Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake with Nureyev.
> 
> ...


I will be seeing Giselle on 12 April 2012 when the latest production opens in Johannesburg. I will post a review.


----------



## Operadowney (Apr 4, 2012)

Moira said:


> The expense of producing the ballets is one of the issues. The only one of the twentieth century ballets that I have ever seen performed as a ballet in cultural backwater of Johannesburg, South Africa is Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune by Debussy. Even so, I have heard it far more often than the one production of it that I have seen.


It's unfortunate that it's so expensive to produce these. It seems like in the future things will be deemed too expensive to produce and we will likewise lose them. Hopefully opera doesn't go this way.


----------



## Moira (Apr 1, 2012)

Operadowney said:


> It's unfortunate that it's so expensive to produce these. It seems like in the future things will be deemed too expensive to produce and we will likewise lose them. Hopefully opera doesn't go this way.


Opera in Gauteng, South Africa has already gone this way. 

There used to be several opera productions a year spread over three companies, Opera Africa, Pro Musica and Black Tie Ensemble) but now we are down to one company, Opera Africa, with a developmental company (Black Tie Ensemble VOISS) doing concerts only. There were always small independent groups doing things, and these still exist. Although I follow the arts in Gauteng as best I can I don't always hear about these. Recently Sempre Opera, a keen group, had their first concert, a highlights concert. That looks very promising as the singing was really excellent.


----------



## Stargazer (Nov 9, 2011)

I feel the same way about ballet....the music is fine, but the dancing is just a bit too weird for me lol. So, I just close my eyes and it all works out! Really I don't understand dancing much at all, even in other forms.


----------



## Polednice (Sep 13, 2009)

Stargazer said:


> I feel the same way about ballet....the music is fine, but the dancing is just a bit too weird for me lol. So, I just close my eyes and it all works out! Really I don't understand dancing much at all, even in other forms.


I can certainly understand the urge in most of us to move or dance to certain kinds of music, but I still don't get why anyone would watch other people doing it.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

Polednice said:


> A quick reformulation: by 'weird', I don't mean strange or off-putting, I mean incomprehensible, seemingly pointless. It may well just be a problem of mine - I've always known that I've never enjoyed pop music, but I've never _understood_ why anyone ever dances. Sure, I tap my foot or swing about a little to fun tunes, but complicated, co-ordinated routines? I mean, just w-t-f is that all about? It's no doubt just that dancing is to me what music was to Freud.
> 
> Over and out.


Pros:

Dancing is great cardiovascular excercise. 
It is a great way to lose weight and improve your physique.
Being fit and healthy improves your general level of happiness.
Learning a complicated routine is a rewarding challenge.
It's fun to move your body to some music.

Cons:

Dancing can practically ruin your knees/ankles/feet in the long run.
It involves looking like a bit of a tit.

But ballet is a bit weird.


----------

