In the Spartacus thread, zerbinetta makes a paradoxical point -- but one that has the ring of truth.

This set me to thinking: there must be others.

Are there any other ballets --or bits of ballets -- that strike you as being "bad" work" (cheesy, tasteless, over-the-top, ludicrous, pompous, sophomoric, or whatever "bad" means to you") but which have "greatness" in them, or which you personally enjoy a lot, in spite of or maybe even because you know they're not great work?

Right now I can only think of an opera -- Fanciulla del West in each of the several productions I've seen. Despite some beautiful music, the English title -- "Girl of the Golden West" -- makes me cringe. Ditto the bizarre images of frontier life and the recurrent cries of "Minnie," "Minnie". (Mouse? Mouse?) I've returned several times to see if anyone can really get it right.

Any similar reactions to ballets or ballet-parts?

Puccini did some rather strange things in his operas. For example, he has Manon Lescaut and Des Grieux die in a desert in Louisiana. Perhaps the Louisiana topography has changed a good deal since the early 20th century. :rolleyes:

In terms of ballet, I really like Le Corsaire even though the plot is utterly ridiculous, I love it anyway.

Okay, I'll bite I actually think Roland Petit's "Carmen" is NOT a bad ballet. Not a great one, but "very good for what it is." But saying that at a dance critics' conference causes lots of sniffs, and people suddenly remembering that they need to feed the meter.

So I'll say "Carmen." It's got a great pas de deux, two great roles and three good small parts, solid construction, and it's a crowd pleaser. So it's a superficial treatment of the book -- it gets to the heart of things!

Great topic, Bart. Hope there are other brave souls out there....

Well, Polovtsian Dances, for sure! Even with a chorus & well done it's still the height of kitsh. But I love it.

Also Marguarite & Armand, though to a lesser degree. I don't consider that to be a bad ballet, just not a great one. But with the right cast it's pretty irresistible

I almost put "Marguerite and Armand," because some have written that it's a bad ballet, a view with which I disagree. I really think many don't understand it -- they expect a linear storytelling ballet, and that's not what Ashton set out to do. But it was irresistible!! (I haven't seen a right cast since the original, but I think there are many dancers who could be interesting in those roles.)

Alexandra, thanks for mentioning Petit. I've seen (on video) the last scene of his Cyrano de Bergerac. Petit danced the title role. The death scene is a masterpiece of obviousness, with Petit -- unwilling to admit to Constance that he has been mortally wounded -- does several courtly steps, then staggers a bit, then does more courtly steps, and on and on. Meanwhile, Constance does virtually nothing.

The scene in Rostand's play is so wonderful, you can't help but admire this sincere but ridiculous attempt to turn it into dance. Turn off the music and you have a rather touching 20s silent film.

I just thought of a ballet that more people will credibly think is bad that I enjoy--Maurice Béjart's création mondiale from early 2002. If I just saw it "cold" I'd probably hate it too, but some of my personal friends and classmates were in the original cast...and I really do find many of the concepts quite interesting.

Alexandra, I just watched Marguerite and Armand with Fonteyn and Nureyev, and I thought it was so beautiful. Has it ever been danced by anyone else, and is that a possibility? I, too, have some dancers in mind.

I have a thing for Spartacus, especially Maris Liepa's Crassus from the film. He's just so baaad. (The character, I mean.)

bart, the few Petit ballets I've seen have been performance pieces -- very dependent on the dancers. With powerful performers, it works (the Danes were known for their productions of "Cyrano" and especially "Carmen," which was a core rep piece for them, and several leading dancers, for more than a decade. AND his "L'Arlsienne" in Paris (I've only seen a tape) was wonderful. BUT if you "just dance it" they're, well, awful

Giselle05, the Royal Ballet revived "Marguerite and Armand" a few seasons ago for Sylvie Guillem who danced it with both Nicolas Le Riche (POB) and Jonathan Cope -- and perhaps someone else.

I didn't think much of those casts (they danced at the Kennedy Center a few seasons ago) but I do believe that the ballet could sustain other casts. I've read that Lynn Seymour and Christopher Gable were to be the second cast, but that the ballet was so identified with Fonteyn and Nureyev that there was no second cast.

Helene, I have a soft spot for "Spartacus" too, but I don't think it's a bad ballet. Again, I think it might depend on the cast. There's a perfectly valid argument that ballets that are cast dependent are bad ballets; I just don't happen to agree with it

This is heresy, I know, but I'd also cast a vote for Balanchine's "Adagio Lamentosa".

When Ballet Review had their category list for reviewing, this ballet fell into the "insufferable masterpieces" box.

A special case, perhaps worth a category of its own; it was wrenching & dreadful & made me blub. Mr B, with diminished means, letting us know we would survive his passing.



I think Massimo Murru was also one of Guillem's partners for M&A.

There are two ballets which have been called "bad ballets" that I just love. One is Lew Christiansen's flyweight comedy, "Con Amore" and the other is Agnes de Mille's melodramatic "Fall River Legend". They both have their places in the repertoire, and they might even, with the right "middle", be part of a nice three-bill.

Tamara Rojo will be making her debut as Marguerite in RB's next season.

Corsaire for me (ABT version)

DonQ done for an audience of schoolchildren, the schmaltzier the better.

While the audience will not be schoolchildren, I have been claiming that Wolf Trap scheduled the Bolshoi to do DonQ the weekend of my birthday _just for me_.

Mel, I totally agree with you about both of those -- and I should say, Oakland Ballet made a truly convincing case for Fall River Legend.

but re Spartacus -- I don't agree that it's a bad ballet. It IS an ugly ballet, but I think it's a great thing, and its ugliness is absolutely necessary to the kind of greatness in it, like some twisted ancient tree that's growing in the desert or hanging onto some mountain crag....

"Spartacus" actually seems to be archaic, it has an epoch, a style, a "register" of images and rhythms that allows a kind of heroic ideal to get portrayed -- the tenacity is the point, Spartacus's ability to hold on and endure not just cruelty but massive indifference to human rights and not sink into despair. It couldn't be beautiful, but it can be sublime....

Tudor's 'Undertow' received many mixed reviews, but I loved it--especially when I figured out all the Greek names. If Balanchine's Don Q can be revived, surely 'Undertow' is more than deserving of another look.

Shucks Mel, I thought Con Amore was a great little funny ballet! I mean, Shakespeare it ain't but it was a lot of fun, did people really think it was bad?

I happen to love those old Soviet thrill-machines "Spring Waters" and "Walpurgisnacht Ballet".

Would Gsovsky's "Grand Pas Classique" fit into this category? I would give anything to have seen Cynthia Gregory dance it with a cigarette dangling from her lips...

If you want to see lots of bad choreography, check out some of the Paris Opera Ballet videos of contemporary works. There is one "Paris Opera Ballet: Seven Ballets" that has execrable choreography by the appropriately named Norbert Schmucki. These include ghastly clichés that you remember from high school dance recitals like a ballerina emerging from a paper chrysalis with tulle wings as a butterfly being born. There is another where two dancers are done up as Mickey and Minnie Mouse and mince around. Truly vile. That is not on my list of bad ballets I love...

Might there not be a difference between enjoyable trashy ballets & great bad ballets? Spartacus has a plot & tells a story clearly & efficiently. The characters are clearly delineated. There is no argument between the score & the choreography. It arcs to a climax & resolves in apotheosis. It makes sense. Its "badness" to me lies in the fact that it is outrageously manipulative & moralistic. It's characters are totally one dimensional. &, yes, it has a good deal of trashy choreography. But it is pure in a balletic sense.

Enjoyable trashy ballets (Petit's Coppelia comes to mind) don't pretend to greatness or purity. They are pure entertainment. The suggestion of Spring Waters & Walpurgisnacht (Bolshoi version) along with Diana & Acteon & that ilk would seem to me to fall into the trashy ballets that we love anyway category.

I hope this makes sense.

Moszkowsky Waltz! And besides, it's fun to dance!

Oh yeah, some critics used to really bomb it! But I love it!

I'll second Grand Pas Classique, especially with Sylvie Guillem. Guillem's rendition of the ballet, with Legris, is on one of the aforementioned execrable POB tapes with Schmucki ballets. One of them, with quasi-matador choreography, could be called "a bad ballet I sort of liked." Entertaining in the same way as a Dolly Dinkle recital, perhaps.

My favorite "bad" ballet for now, however, would have to be La Fille Du Pharaon, the plot of which makes Le Corsaire look simple and profound. (Of course, the dancers in blackface were rather painful to watch). But seeing so many steps and so many variations crammed into one ballet, with ridiculously opulent sets and costumes, set to over-the-top "Drinkus" music (Pugni, actually)...it's like the ballet equivalent of a pint of Ben & Jerry's. A guilty pleasure if there ever was one, and one of the most politically incorrect I've ever seen. I don't even mind Zakharova's extensions here; they're somewhat fitting.

Another one that deserves mentioning is the Barber's Adagio on the Mariinsky Ballet-Kirov Classics video, featuring Evteeva and Aliev in Vinogradov's attempt at fusion choreography, alternately rolling around on the floor and posing geometrically in sequined blue unitards. Vinogradov's avant-garde Petrushka, in the same compilation, is bad too, but just plain boring.

Diana and Actaeon is Petipa and therefore not trashy.

Oops, sorry. Another heresy. :-D

How do you feel about Miss Julie?

Arpino's "Trinity".

I couldn't stomach it but it usually brought the house down.

No, Diana and Actaeon is Vaganova, and therefore possibly trashy.

Great teacher, not necessarily good ballet mistress.

Phew! That's a relief! I was afraid of offending Hans twice in one night.

Definitely Diana & Acteon!

What about the original Diana and Actaeon pdd? Vaganova wasn't around when it was choreographed. Is it notated?

I still don't see what's wrong with Vaganova's choreography--no press lifts, no weird jumps (unless the dancers interpolate them, which is not her fault) good structure. Besides, Vaganova also edited Ivanov's Swan Lake Act II pas de trois and you don't hear anyone calling that "trashy."

And don't worry--historical accuracy doesn't offend me.

My absolutely favorite guilty pleasure of Scheherezade. I adore it, but then I tend to love any ballet with harem pants (sort of like any movie with the word Shanghai in the title!).

I need some help here. I love the ballet, but am also aware how out of the accepted loop it is as regards plot of "style". Thanks, Paul, for clarifying this for me.

Zerabinetta, your original take on Spartacus actually gave me the idea for this thread, and thanks for that. What specifically in the choreography is "trashy," in your opinion? Do you mean extreme? obvious? limited in scope? exaggerated?
I'd appreciate other comments on this, too, since I don't seem to have the knowledge to give form or words to my very strong impressions.

P.S. Mel. I'm a big fan of Fall River Legend ever since seeing it long ago at Ballet Theater. Anyone know the dancer who originated Lizzie? The stepmother? They were phenomenal, especially all the externalized psychological angst. Ditto the more contemporary feeling Dance Theater of Harlem production which I saw on video.

The original production of 'Fall River Legend' had Alicia Alonso as Lizzie shortly thereafter, Nora Kaye); Diana Adams was the Mother, Peter Gladke the Father, Muriel Bentley, the step-mother, RuthAnn Koesun was Lizzie as a child, and John Kriza was the pastor. A great show

The two Lizzies were a great contrast: In Alonso's softer interpretation, Lizzie came off as a victim of her step mother and father; but with Kaye's performance, she was undoubtedly over the top and I had no doubt that she delivered the 41 blows.

At Hans's suggestion (with which I agreed!) I've split all the posts about whether Today's Young would think Petipa ballets were bad here:

http://ballettalk.invisionzone.com/index.p...=0&#entry163463


(Good to see you again, julip, and thanks for posting this!)

Having been brought up on Balanchine & then falling in love with Petipa, Ashton & Bournonville in that order, I suppose subtlety is among the virtues I most appreciate in ballet. In general, the choreography of Grigorovitch's Spartacus is in no way subtle. In particular, I'd point to the ooga-booga dancing of the male slave army, the chugga-bugga of the Romans & the general high level of testosterone among corps & principal men.

Then there's the stereotypical vamp of Aegina.

Then there are some of those unwieldy Phrygia-upside-down-in-the-arms-of- her-husband positions (Kenneth MacMillan must have really loved those) during their various pas.

All of this is, to my eyes, trashy.

But it's also marvelous. It's like a ballet vacation from the ballet. Extreme,yes; obvious, yes; exaggerated, yes.

But I love it.

Well, Zerbinetta, that's like making a flower-arrangement out of thistles, oak branches, blackberries, artichokes(ok, bigger thistles), etc -- it can be done beautifully......

the thing about Spartacus that makes it impressive is the intellectual rigor with which everything that's NOT appropriate has been omitted.

My favorite trashy ballet is Light Rain -- esp the adagio, with its ne-hooch-kooch music (it sounds like an X-Ray of "Shimmy Shimmy KoKo Pop") and all those legs wafting around like tentacles....

Oh Ho! There you go. A choreographer may be as manipulative as he or she wishes as long as the work is based on sound logic.

This is a fabulous construct. Need we limit it to choreographers, though? Might we not include composers (Wagner), painters (Magritte), architects (Gaudi), poets (Ezra Pound), etc.?


I like this concept so well I'm going to adopt it. Thank you Paul.

Paul, I'm trying to understand what you mean by "not appropriate." Seems like "not CONSISTENT (with the original premise or style)" might be more appropos. Whatever one thinks of Spartacus, there's a deep consistency in the movement vocabulary, the relation of movement to music, delineation of characters, and narrative methods.

Another thought. I was just browsing through my underlines in Terry Teachout's book on Balanchine and found this ----- "Instead of concocting redundant visual equivalents of the rhythmic surface of a symphony or concerto, he [Balanchine] plunged into its inner structure, moving his dancers in silent counterpoint to its unfolding action." Grigorovitch's choreography does what Balanchine tried to avoid. It rides the music. Illustrates it. There's always a place for that (done well) in dance. Think of the choreography for Mickey Mouse in Sorcerer's Apprentice !!!