Here's the Tamara Rojo version. It's definitely more "Spanish," or at least the 19th century ballet version of Spanish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5x1HBQ_t5YThe version of the music that she and Osipova uses seems more exagerrated as to dynamics and phrasing than the relatively dainty version used by Salenko. But Rojo seems to add movement -- especially upper body movement -- that brings out whatever genuine Spanish feeling and content the music contains.
QUOTE (Hans @ Apr 20 2008, 09:18 PM)

What really interests me, though, is the idea of taking a variation out of context and turning it into something else entirely--is that really a good idea, and what does it do to the variation? The music of this Esmeralda variation implies something dramatic and mysterious. Does "abstract, pure, and innocent" work with that?
These are fascinating questions, Hans. I have no problem with it, as an exercise in pure dance that can be seen with fresh eyes. It would be interesting to hear what others think about this.
QUOTE
I recall that in character dance classes, my teacher would tell us that when we did a gypsy-style dance, we had to do it with pure emotion, as if no one was watching and that even if someone was, we didn't care what we looked like. Thus, although one must always be beautiful in ballet, I feel that during this variation, as classical as it is, one must dance with a bit of abandon, not kicking oneself in the head because it pleases the audience but rather with an energy that reaches to the highest balcony and beyond.
I an certainly understand this if the variation is performed as part of the complete ballet. Is it necessary, however, to dance the "character" normally associated with the part? I'm not, for instance, entirely convinced that the music by itself -- despite it's Spanish references -- is all that abandoned, let alone mysterious.