Poodle has seen her first ballet!!! December 17, 2006 - MooMoo, Poodle and I attended A Christmas Dream at Thalia Mara Hall!
She was wonderful, and enjoyed herself immensely. As soon as all the house lights went black, and the big red curtains opened, she was entranced. She had tons of questions (which was actually a problem as I will address in the critique later), was so happy to hear familiar music, and thought the dancers were wonderful. She even made it aaallll the way to the end of the show! Towards the end, she was all sorts of fidgety and ready to leave, but she did make it to the end of the finale. (Hopefully without disturbing those around us too badly).
One of the many questions she asked was "Can I go up there and dance?" Of course, my heart skipped a little at the thought of watching my own child dancing on stage one of these days, but all I said was "Not today, honey. But one of these days you can!"
As many of you who know me and my history, you can understand the importance of this particular event, at least for me. It was wonderful to be able to share this with the person who brought ME to my first ballet performance oh so many years ago. (And who carted me back and forth to years of classes and rehearsals, to boot).
NOW. I need to offer a critique of the show. This is where you can leave the post without feeling guilty, if you so desire. But I've gotta get this off my chest. The performance that we saw was Ballet Magnicat's "A Christmas Dream". Ballet Mag is a Christian ballet company based in Jackson, MS. And this performance was basically their "version" of the Nutcracker. Why did we go to this one? Two reasons. One, I missed the weekend of a "real" Nutcracker performance. Two, I was really, really curious to see how Kathy and Ballet Mag were going to interpret the Nutcracker.
Let's back up a bit, and let me admit something. I am a bit of a purist when it comes to many things surrounding the dance world. And, I don't think that the Nutcracker needs to be fooled with. AND, when I hear that music, especially at this time of year, I am instantly transported to my younger years. I have danced to almost every minute of the entire Nutcracker suite at some point or other. It ALL tugs at various heartstrings, and that music produces an actual physical reaction in me. (I apologize for the drama, but I'm actually not exaggerating). Thus, when I hear that music, and am looking at a stage, I need to see the Nutcracker in its true form.
Okay, so, back to A Christmas Dream. First, the dancing was wonderful. It wasn't as technically professional as I was expecting, but then, Ballet Mag isn't a tu-tu ballet company. Now, Kathy Thibodeaux is still dancing (at 51, thank you very much), and she is as nimble as someone in their 20's. And JUST as beautiful as she's always been. She is truly an amazing human being. She danced the role that in the traditional ballet would be Snow Queen. There was no Sugar Plum Fairy equivalent, so the Snow Queen equivalent (I think she was an Angel, maybe?) was reintroduced often thruout the 2nd Act. (KDBoo, stay with me. I know you're already shaking your head!) ANYway, Kathy was amazing and beautiful, and that needs to be said.
The choreography was very good, and so much of it was some of the traditional choreography that you would see at a regular company's Nutcracker performance. It was altered to fit the theme of this show, but overall, it did have a traditional flavor.
The costuming was good - especially the Waltz of the Flowers equivalent. However, Ballet Mag doesn't wear tu-tus, so their costumes have a different feel altogether. Side note, though, the Harlequin Doll DID wear a tu-tu. Not sure how that was justified, but I'm glad they did. I would have been 10 shades of annoyed if they had put a long skirted costume on that role.
The staging was excellent, the lighting was excellent. The scenery was lovely and appropriate for the theme of the ballet.
BUT. (You knew it had to come, yes?) I, personally, had to shoebox too much of it. (Shoebox'ing something is akin to eating the chicken and throwing out the bones). In those terms, there were just too many bones. Here is the gist of the ballet: It uses the traditional Nutcracker suite music. But, it is set in the Old South. The Clara character is named Kathryn, and she receives a Bible instead of a Nutcracker. Her dream is one where the Angels, led by Michael, defeat Beelzebub who is the Lord of the Flies. (And, thusly, the angels defeat the flies). She is then transported to Heaven where she sits on the right hand of Jesus Christ, at which point all the nations dance for and worship the Lord. The dream culminates in her marriage to Christ. (To symbolize Christ's marriage to His Bride, the church of the Lord).
Okay - right there, you see my problem. Firstly, I had to be very vague when I answered the "who is this" questions from Poodle. I didn't want her to equate this music with the non-traditional roles, and most certainly didn't want to say "that man is supposed to be Jesus Christ". I don't know where that would have gone in a 3 year old's head. Secondly, there were so many things going on there - and for me, I don't easily stomach a portrayal of Christ in this manner. It was done as respectfully as it could have been done considering the fact that they had Christ dancing with Kathryn. And I understand the HEART of these people who are performing. Their hearts would break if they thought they were doing anything sacreligious. So I feel somewhat bad by criticizing the story of the ballet. But, I just couldn't go where they wanted me to go.
I understand what they were trying to accomplish. They wanted to give their kids a chance to perform to the classical Tchaikovsky music at Christmastime. And they wanted to stick with the original storyline as much as possible. But, they wanted to keep with their mission of spreading the Good News through their dancing.
Okay. That's all well and good. But is this a doable thing? I don't know...... there were some extremely poignant moments. Seeing Michael standing behind Kathryn's chair at the end of the show. Watching Beelzebub being forced back into hell (i.e. - the character jumps into the perfectly lit orchestra pit from the stage). The latter produced an audible response from most people - it was very creative and very well done.
But, for me, I think there are some things that should remain secular. The Nutcracker is a beautiful story; a wonderful foray into a child's imagination. The music is magical. The dancing can accomodate the best of professionals or the most precious of children. And, for some, the setting is just as much a part of Christmastime as decorating the tree, sending Christmas cards, singing carols. In my opinion, I think some of the Christian message was lost because the message was trying to fit into a shoe that was the wrong size. And after walking around for a couple of hours in shoes that don't fit, this writer's feet were uncomfortable.
Will we go back next year? Probably not. I'd rather take Poodle to a traditional Nutcracker, even if it is done entirely by students. We may go back to A Christmas Dream when she is older and understands what she is seeing and is able to verbalize her questions about it all. But I'll cross that bridge later. With Sunday's packed house, I have a feeling they recouped their investment for the ballet's premier shows. So, this ballet will most likely be done each Christmas from here on.
And, in a way, I'm glad that it was a success for Ballet Mag, because I love the heart of what they want to do. And I'm so glad to live in an area that is so supportive of their mission.
I just don't think we'll go back. I want to see the Sugar Plum Fairy dance with her Cav. I want to see the Nutcracker defeat the Mouse King and turn into the magical Prince.
I need tradtion.
I need to keep the Holy separate from the "profane". (I don't think either the Nutcracker or ballet in general is profane - but you know what I mean).
I need to end this post, because if I don't, I'm going to start repeating myself!
Posts
