hmm… interesting, this thought never actually occurred to me. I can partially agree with you. but that’s just a different ‘reading’ of the character, a different portraying. I think, if a dancer has a gift (and Sveta, imo, is a genius) he/she creates a new character on the basis of a story, and never copies what’s already been done by someone else, so her Aurora is this way. I can’t help drawing a comparison with Lopatkina’s Nikiya. when Uliana Lopatkina first danced this role many people accused her of being cold, but many sort of caught what she was trying to express: her Nikiya wasn’t emotionally stunned or frozen, she was trying to understand herself and her feelings towards Solor, she was analyzing herself and she looked cold not because the ballerina wasn’t able to act (on contrary) but because she was somewhere deep inside her mind and soul, and the events around her didn’t really matter to her, so that’s why she was so indifferent, but then in La Mort de Nikiya scene, when she understood everything within a matter of moments she was so expressive and realistic, that the audience was crying.
so maybe it’s not bad that Sveta’s Aurora looks mature? maybe Sveta is trying to make us see something hidden behind it?
guh, sorry for such a long and jshdsgudfguft answer.
Of course not! Obviously you have to consider that becoming professional is probably impossible but there’s no reason for why you can’t be ‘good’. I think ballet is so beneficial and lets you really use your body’s physical potential so there’s rly nothing but positives about doing it for yourself, regardless of age.
I still answered it dw! There are many things wrong with Mariinsky imo. The neglect of Vaganova graduates, no desire for them to grow in the company (Smirnova’s own words), the repertoire which needs desperate updating, rly strange promotions (Skorik and Askerov as first soloists….okay) (Novikova still not a principal) (Stepanova….I don’t even rate her as obsessively as some do but seriously her being stuck in the corps is almost laughable). All in all it remains the best company in the world because of the depth of talent, but Gergiev is really trying to raise the opera while not necessarily putting as much effort into the company. Fateev is…yeah. Not the best for the job.
Thank you so much :)))) Of next year’s graduates I like the obvious top ones (Lukina, to a lesser extent Strebko) but also I’m really, really interested in Olga Makarova (I’m almost sure she’s graduating next year at least). Nika Tskhvitaria imo is an interesting one to watch (even if she might be being pushed by Tsiskaridze?) As for Shakirova, she has beautiful lines but she just doesn’t do it for me, I don’t even know why. I find myself sometimes distracted by her feet (which are very long and pretty obvious when she forgets to point). She’s been given so many opportunities & roles already that I can’t imagine her not being part of the Mariinsky troupe (I know we thought the same thing about Ksenia but it was obvious in her graduating year things were really halting in terms of Fateev’s interest in her, and she was never given AS much attention as Renata) and somewhere I read a crazy statistic that said Shakirova has had the most roles pre-graduation at Mariinsky than anyone, even Vishneva (correct me if this is wrong, though). I’m not really sure why she’s considered the /top/ graduate when I find Lukina much more artistic and even polished at times (I can’t say I love Nastya as much as I did pre-graduation Ksenia though tbh).