„La Bayadère": Bavarian State Ballet, Munich (Bayerisches Staatsballett, München), May 27th, 2023.

First of all, I would like to make some apologies for being so late with this review. There was some some trouble with the photo material and after that was solved, I caught a cold. Nevertheless, here my critique, a bit delayed but with many details you will not want to miss.

To be able to watch „La Bayadère" is always a kind of „treat". Being one of my favourite Ballets, it is, in many ways, neither difficult nor tiring to seat through the (approximately) 75' of the first part (which combines Acts I and II) and the nearly 60' of the second in which Acts III and IV are presented. Even if Minkus' music for the first two acts is mostly „not his very best":

This time the „treat" (to watch the Bavarian State Ballet) was „a notch above". I had decided, in full concentration, to take the Ballet under my magnifying glass and analyze, not technical but also the artistic, progress and situation of the company, under the direction of Laurent Hilaire. This „new" direction period (since more or less one year), which returned to the Western World (because of Russia´s „geopolitical situation") the depth of Laurent Hilaire´s profound knowledge after his direction period at the Stanislawsky and Nemirowitsch-Dantschenko´s Music Theatre in Moscow (A position in which he replaced Igor Selensky whom he, by coincidence, also replaced in Munich!). I could not have been more content. But let us describe this very special situation and Evening with the Bavarian State Ballet in Munich a little bit more slowly. As it looks like, you will have to be once more indulgent with me.

Nowadays, younger generations (Dancers included) are not even aware that the IV act of „La Bayadère" production had been „lost" (I shall report about the details of that in a future article). Reports, back in 1980, that went around the globe described the three principal dancers (Makarova, Sir Anthony Dowell, and Cynthia Harvey) more like „scientists in a laboratory", so involved were they in this extremely creative and historically accurate “reprocessing” of a ballet that delivers a simple plot filled with the richness of a not so complicated but very emotional Story. No question that Makarova's version changed the ballet world with this landmark production, which opened new „ways" also to Nureyev and Patrice Bart in their versions.

Unlike many colleagues, who enjoy „questioning" the (increasingly boring) political correctness of things, I prefer just to relax, lie back, „put my feet up" and enjoy. To those who are for „The Nutcracker" being banned and describe Operas as Delibes' „Lakmé" and Ballets as „La Bayadère" with (cliché) words, such as „colonialistic cliclé" (I wonder when „Turandot" will be referred to as „Chinoiserie cliché"), I have no words.

All this sounds imposingly grand (and aim to „make an impression" with its pseudo-intellectuality). But they are nothing more than Clichés. How was the saying in the bible? „Let him who is without sin cast the first stone"?

Internationality brings openness. Understanding. „Banning" things ( as it was tried with „Gone with the Wind" in the U.S.A.) just gives the impression that some historical facts have never existed. I can only say, that it is just another way of trying a kind of „Changing History" (The brilliant Stephen Fry made a point, in his homonymous book, that this does not really work).

I would like to remind you of a headline in „The Guardian", a few years ago, which I quote here: „ Arguing over Art is right but trying to ban it is the work of fascists"!

Therefore I prefer to consider „La Bayadère", just a glittering, from another era, historical and entertaining extravaganza of Indian temple dancers, bejeweled Brahmins, an opium-aided “trip” to the afterlife and an earthquake that is interpreted as the „wrath" of the Gods. And what a lovely, dreamy, fairy-tale extravaganza it is.

I had to mention the quite questionable behavior of my colleagues but as a ballet critic, I find it more and more necessary to dedicate my time to the analysis of a performance, all factors that contribute to it, ballet technique included, than to exaggerated pseudo-ethical values which are now fashionable with the general public (and „sell" papers). Let us put it plainly: If one writes for a printed medium, the long soliloquy discussing political correctness will take at least half of the space given to the critique and therefore be able to conceal, and disguise a certain lack of ballet knowledge. Do you know what I mean?

Before I start with the Production and the cast, I would like to share with you a thought from the point of view of „one average everyday Ballet-goer to another", just to enlighten another point of view:

Normally we always put Gamzatti in „the shoes" of the villain. Yes, we assume that she is the „bad girl" of the story. Let us think more openly. Let us look at things differently. The relationship between Nikiya and Solor was not socially „fit", or accepted. She was „just" a temple dancer. He, a warrior. But not only Nikiya can be described as a social climber. Solor, also. Just a warrior, therefore „socially inferior" to the Rajah and his daughter, he was on the way to „marrying well". Both Nikiya and Solor, acting opportunistically in „the name of Love " are perhaps the real villains of the Story, and Gamzatti the victim, just a woman trying to survive. Exactly as I also see Bathilde in „Giselle", just as another victim of Albrecht. She and Giselle are opportunistically used by “him”. Bathilde and Gamzatti have, to my way of thinking, this in common. Think of that.

Despite the fact that I had already seen this production quite a few times, I am always anew impressed (and delighted) by Tomio Mohri's set and costume designs. Beautiful and becoming lines for the dancers combined with the „know-how" for ballet costumes that only experience can bring. The „richness" of the fabrics and adornments (For example, the High Brahmin´s headdress is indisputably a work of art), as well as the inventiveness (How could I miss a reference to the brilliantly staged temple destruction by the wrath of the Gods on Act IV?) are examples of great costume and set designs which are, on the purest sense of the word, enduring.

Gamzatti's Aiya, played by Anna Beke, has a key role that should not be overlooked. Her fear of Gamzatti's rage against Nikiya must be combined with her premeditated action in giving Nikiya the flower basket which also contains the viper that will kill her. She tells Nikiya that the flowers are sent by Solor. Dramaturgically. The whole pantomime's mimicry and its outcome depend on it. On that „message". But, unfortunately, when the gesture is so indistinctively made, on such a small scale, it does not work because the dramatic effect does not show. It is, plainly said, “just not there”, nowhere to be either seen or felt. I, who know this ballet backward, could not really „see it" while awaiting it. This is unforgivable for the accomplishment of the storyline.

The female Corps de Ballet is in great form. The masculine, not yet quite „there", where they should be. In some variations, there was an apparent need for more work on the basic “stuff”, more precise definition of directions (Croisé, Effacé, Ecarté). They are, of course, jumping, turning, doing everything quite well but they could improve, also in terms of projection, significantly more, would they carefully exercise, and take more seriously the „basics".

The Variations of the three shades: the first one very well- executed by Margarita Grechanaia got a very well-deserved Applause. But it was the second one, that brought the house down. A show-stopper in the purest sense of the word and divinely interpreted by lovely Margarita Fernandes. Miss Fernandes combines the pin-pointed, quick technique of a „petite danseuse" with the fluidness and a dreamy, elevated quality. Looking forward to hearing (and seeing) more of this talented dancer. The third variation with Jeanette Kakareka, was what could be described as a „beautiful failure". Miss Kakareka, even if very correct, brought no dynamic into the piece and projected a very monotonous static „Persona" to the few first rows. All in all reminding us more of a Ballet school performance, not of a State Opera.

Norbert Graf, imposingly exquisite as the High Brahmin. How could anyone expect anything else from this most gifted and professional of Dancers who has been entertaining us for so many years?

Four soloists gave their début in „La Bayadère" on the evening of the 27th.

Ariel Merkuri, gave us a very good and precise „Golden Idol", but I still have the feeling that this was just the „preview" of his full pouvoir. There is room and substance for more. Much more. „Opening Nights" can be tricky, with the nerves of everyone involved.

Elvina Ibraimova gave us a very good reading of Gamzatti. Here and there there was this tendency, especially in the pas de deux with Solor, to be a tiny little bit ahead of the music, which is something that can be easily corrected. What cannot be easily „learned" is her projection of a gamut from A to Z, which turns Gamzatti, a normally most unsympathetic character, into a person made of flesh and blood. The contrasts she gives to her interpretation are mind-blowing. From „being more than apparently mean" going through „being gentle and sweet to Solor" to „being devastatingly hysterical when given a box of flowers". Strong moments, and by doing that, she turned her Gamzatti not into „a bad or a good woman" but into a woman of flesh and blood doing the best she can to fight and exist.

Jinhao Zhang, evidently nervous, needed Acts One and Two (accordingly to the programme, Act 1) to get into the role, which he conquered at last during Acts Three and Four (as per programme, Act 2). Here the „butterflies in the belly" seemed to have played a big role. He concentrated during the first two acts on the technical demands of the role, in which he also had a few troubles. Solor, the character, was not present. There was the dancer on stage doing Solor's steps, jumps, and Manége. Not more than that. He recovered beautifully, after the opium-aided trip to the Kingdom of Shades and finished the show in character.

Prisca Zeisel as Nikiya is the „gift" which I have needed for a long time and I do acknowledge Einstein's duality in the use of “Gift” as a word. I have been following the career of this most emotional of dancers since 2011- who can be also demanding and even cold-blooded calculating while learning a new role, as if her brain can define mathematically what she has to do or not - and how she has to do it. This performance of „La Bayadère" brought me precious mementos of times with her. Being one of the big swans in „Lac" or dancing the „Gran Pas Classique" in a Gala dedicated to „Young Talents" in Manuel Legris' era in Vienna. Yes, time has passed and this, still, very young dancer has achieved, thanks to her humbleness, sustaining power, fierceness, and emotional intelligence, a quality that is becoming very rare on stage. That was clearly noticeable when she entered the stage. Not only by the audience's reaction, with distinctive applause, but in the way how she has managed, within a few moments, to display her assets: incredible en dehors, beautiful cou-de-pied, and her musical arms. Yes, her magical, musical arms.

Miss Zeisel does not fall into the, by me so-called, „Sylvie Guillemisms", which became so common, and apparent nowadays, and in which dancers use (and abuse of) the vulgarity of doing everything with a touch of „over" (Over-Extension, of course, heading the list!). Intelligence is also knowing when and how to use what you have. Miss Zeisel, who obviously studied very deeply her „effect" upon audiences, knows how to play with her „persona" on stage. Yes, she does. She brought down the House. And just to think of it: During the past years, we have been used to seeing tall „Gamzattis" and fragile-looking „Nikiyas". On the 27th past, we witnessed a most fragile, tall Nikiya and an in a small frame, devilishly versatile Gamzatti.

It is more than a pleasure to realize what Manuel Legris saw in Miss Zeisel before he took her under his tutelage, his guidance. Her tendency of being a thousandth of a second „late" in the music, is something that I have already commented on during her Vienna days, and a detail which I personally adore. It makes all the difference in the phrasing that the dancer must take, musically, to the written choreography. Because movement can also be „interpreted" as a reflection, timely, to sound.

I will leave you with that, before strongly recommending this revival. Miss Zeisel is a true reason to buy a ticket to the Opera.

Ricardo Leitner

June 2nd, 2023