|
By Patricia Boccadoro
PARIS,
2 April 2000 -
Lynn Garafola is a widely published dance critic and
historian, author of Diaghilev's Ballets Russes, and,
according to Yale University Press, one of the foremost authorities on
the period. All the more surprising then, that she has left herself
wide-open to criticism by sweeping generalisations and inaccurate
reporting in her personal contributions to her new book,The
Ballets Russes and Its World, a collection of essays which confuse
rather than clarify the impact of Diaghilev, the Russian genius who
changed the whole concept of ballet in the last century.
At
first glance, this appears to be an interesting work, with over two
hundred very beautiful illustrations, and an impressive listing of
Serge Diaghilev's ballet and opera productions.
The opening
chapter, by Evgenia Egorova (would she be any relation to Liubov
Egorova, the great Russian dancer and teacher who moved to Paris with
the Ballets Russes, but who never had children, dying alone here in
1972 ?), is of a certain interest, but difficult to read because of
the stilted translation .
John E. Bowlt's contribution,
concerning the early writings of Diaghilev to people including his
stepmother, Elena Valerianova Diaghileva, makes fascinating reading,
throwing light on the young Serge's gifts as a writer, and acts as a
reminder that first and foremost, he was an art critic before his fame
as an impresario.
Joan Acocella, Sally Banes, and, in
particular, Charles M. Joseph, in his compelling essay on Diaghilev's
tangled relationship with Stravinsky, perhaps the most important
composer of ballet music after Tchaikovsky, provide the highlights of
the work.
However, the credibility of any factual account,
however good, is inevitably compromised by the smallest error in
research, and in Garafola's case, the mistake is considerable. In
chapter twelve, Reconfiguring the Sexes, she wrote that Serge
Lifar was dismissed from his post as director of the Paris Opera for
collaboration with the Nazis.
If she had stated that he had
been unjustly accused of collaboration, or even accused of
collaboration, but re-instated shortly afterwards, it would have been
acceptable, but such a comment proves that Garafola did not refer to
archives in France, presumably relying on hearsay.
Claude
Bessy, director of the Paris Opera School, and who knew and worked
with Serge Lifar from early childhood said succinctly, "Lifar was
not sent away as a traitor; the court which dismissed him was illegal
and simply out for blood. The origin of the story, if Garafola had
done the minimum of research, lies on the fact that when Hitler
arrived in Paris he wished to visit the Opera. Soldiers marched to
Lifar's home, and escorted him back to the Palais Garnier where he was
obliged to show the Fuhrer round. There are still very many witnesses
to prove that by remaining at his post, Serge Lifar saved countless
lives, for each time the Nazis tried to round up the dancers many of
whom were Jews, the director refused to continue with performances if
the artists were sent to concentration camps. It's time an end was put
to malicious gossip".
Such an error inevitably put me
on my guard, and I subsequently read the declaration that Diaghilev's
revolution "dethroned the ballerina" in amazement. I beg to
differ. Granted, Nijinsky was the most famous star, but it is a
well-known fact that Diaghilev not only admired but adored his
ballerinas. He loved women. Has Lynn Garafola not heard of Tamara
Karsavina, for whom Fokine created Firebird ? Anna Pavlova,
for whom he created Dying Swan ? Olga Spessivtseva, possibly
the most exquisite of all classical ballerinas, guest artist in Sleeping
Princess ? Would Garafola really have us believe that the
ballerina went into eclipse because Ida Rubenstein (who was not a
classically trained dancer, but a young woman with a lot of money who
simply wanted to join in the fun for a time), left the company,
followed by Karalli (who danced in the famous programme at the Theatre
du Chatelet in 1909, marking the birth of modern ballet), Geltzer,
Preobrasjenska, Kchessinska, and others who went simply because they
were knocking on forty and wished to turn to teaching?
There
was a natural revolution towards working with people like Picasso and
Cocteau, and no such phenomenon as "dethroning the ballerina".
What happened was that the male dancer came to share the throne with
her. Did Rudolf Nureyev "dethrone" Margot Fonteyn in the
1960's? Of course he didn't.
Before continuing with the
author's not very new theory on homosexuality.... doesn't Garafola
know that there were homosexuals around in dance (and elsewhere)
before Diaghilev, after Diaghilev, today and tomorrow ? Is this really
an issue ? I decided to start again at the beginning and read the
introduction, believing I was going about things in the wrong way.
But
matters certainly didn't improve as I read that most of the works
produced by his company have supposedly gone out of repertory. They
certainly haven't in France, where Serge Golovine, the French dancer
and teacher, restaged Fokine's Petrushka in practically every
theatre in the country before taking it abroad . Les Sylphides
, regularly danced by most classical companies around the world
was recently programmed in Paris not so long ago, as well as the
complete version of Nijinska's Les Biches, and her
entertaining Le Train Bleu. Fokine 's Firebird is
being staged by the Opéra de Paris school in May, and I myself
saw Spectre de la Rose, Narcisse , Daphnis and
Chloe, L'après-midi d'un Faune, Sacre du
Printemps, Le Tricorne, and Till Eulenspiegel to
name but a few fairly recently.
Apollon musagète,
which was danced in Paris by Lifar, with ballerinas Tchernicheva,
Nikitina, and Doubrovska and hailed as the birth of neo-classicism is
constantly being performed all over the world.
But before I
put the book down in despair, I read yet another outrageous
generalisation, implying that all artistic directors today belong to a
"breed" who neither know what they want, nor how to bring it
about. I really don't know what people like David Bintley, artistic
director of the Royal Ballet of Birmingham, who has deservedly earned
himself a devoted following there since he took over five years ago
would think of such scathing criticism.. Is Lynn Garafola aware of his
achievements ? The same can be said forCharles
Jude, the 'local hero' of Bordeaux, pulling his troupe up to
international level, whereas in Madrid, Victor Ullate is accomplishing
miracles with his dancers, coaching them in his own home through lack
of rehearsal studios. And then furbishing the world's companies with
star dancers to the detriment of his own because of the bleak future
in Spain.
None are as flamboyant as the legendary Russian
impresario, except perhaps for Rudolf Nureyev, who took on the archaic
organisation and petty rules and regulations of the Palais Garnier
single-handedly to forge an unruly mob of dancers (yes, I'm afraid
they were), by fair means and foul into the company they are today.
What he wanted he most definitely got, and it didn't collapse after
his death.
I suggest that if people wish to know the basic
truth about the Ballets Russes, they read this offering with a great
deal of discretion, or, preferably, that they invest in Mary Clarke
and Clement Crisp's thoroughly researched and authoritative Illustrated
History of Ballet , first published in 1973, which gives a short
but accurate account of Diaghilev and the Ballets Russes. That, at
least is a work of reference.
Yale University Press published
The Art of Ballets Russes, by Alexander Schouvaloff two years
ago which I found a very reliable reference book for readers
interested in the period
The
Ballets Russes and Its World
Edited by Lynn Garafola and
Nancy Van Norman Baer
Illustrated. 420 pp. New Haven -
London
Yale University Press $45.00
Patricia
Boccadoro writes on dance from Paris. She contributes to The Guardian,
The Observer and Dancing Times and was dance consultant to the BBC
Omnibus documentary on Rudolf Nureyev. Ms. Boccadoro is the dance
editor for Culturekiosque.com.
|
|
Dance: Reviews