Dancing Narratives: An Analytical Approach to the Narrative of the Ballet Fantastique.
Originally published in Dance Today The Dance Magazine of Israel, Issue 14, November 2008.
Also available via Dance Voices:
http://www.dancevoices.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=59:dancing-narratives-an-analytical-approach-to-the-narrative-of-the-ballet-fantastique&catid=21:dance-discourses&Itemid=90&lang=en
© Astrid Bernkopf, 2008
To dance stories means to tell stories to an audience. Astonishingly
enough, despite the large number of story ballets and works of other
dance genres narrating plots, dance analysis has neglected this side of
the theatre performance. Thus, current research practice shows a clear
focus on issues relating to choreography, movement and the performer.
Moreover, the opinion, expounded by Italian lecturer Marco de Marinis
(1993) and English dance analyst Janet Adshead (1988), that a
performance can only be analysed via audio-visual recordings has
resulted in a dogmatic treatment of dance analysis and its methods. The
analytical model introduced with this article seeks to leave such
established dogmatic paths of research. Firstly, the narrative of the
performance is the centre of attention and will be seen as reflecting
theatre-specific modes of storytelling as well as literary ones.
Secondly, the materials analysed are not audio-visual recordings of
performances, but the written text of the scenario or libretto. The
ballet scenario is treated, in this study, as hybrid form lying between
literature and performance. The simple fact that a text is written to be
performed influences its written representation (Elam, 2002) and, thus,
the ballet scenario can be seen as containing elements of the
performance, which can be detected in its text. The main notion of this
study is constructed upon this concept and, therefore, does not propose a
method to analyse the live or audio-visually recorded performance, but
the content of the programme note. Consequently, this article will draw
upon examples from Cyril Beaumont’s libretto of Giselle (1841), which can be found in his book The Ballet called Giselle (1969, p. 39 – 52). It is hoped that this version of the narrative of Giselle (1841) is easily accessible for comparison.
Narrative analysis has a long-standing tradition in literary
studies. Since this article is based on notions of this area, a few
terms need explanation before venturing into theatrical narrative
analysis. A clear distinction between story, plot and narrative has been
established by literary theory (Forster, 1974; Prince, 1987; Jahn,
2002; Cobley, 2004). The term story refers to the chronological order of
events of the narrative. These events are not connected and may be seen
as single episodes that need to be arranged. The links between such
episodes are generally referred to as plot. Here, logical-causal
connections between the single events of the story are created and
explain why a situation has come about. The underlying notion is that
something happens, because something else has happened. Narrative, in
turn, is the arrangement of these episodes and their logical
connections. The chronological order of events as found in the story is
usually not followed in the narrative. It can, therefore, be said that
narrative is the individual portrayal of the arrangement of events and
their logical-causal bonds. By changing the sequence of events and
establishing new connections between them, a new narrative is created
from the very same story. Having set up this distinction it is possible
to distinguish between different elements of the narrative and study the
theatrical representation of the ballet plot.
Theatre Conventions.
The long tradition of theatrical storytelling has brought forward conventions
concerning the treatment of onstage stories. In his Poetics
(355 BC, 1973), Greek philosopher Aristotle outlines the structure of
the performance as consisting of exposition, knotted middle section and dénouement. Furthermore, he identifies the reversal of action in the péripétie, which marks the turn from good to bad fortune and takes place between knotted middle section and dénouement.
Each of these elements has its own narrative agency, and so it has
become an established fact that the exposition introduces the most
important characters and leads the audience into the fictional world of
the plot. At this point of the performance, background information on
the characters and their individual characterisations are given. Drama
studies distinguish between a beginning ab ovo, in medias res and in ultimas res (Jahn, 2002). The first starts the plot with the birth of the hero/heroine and, then, continues. The beginning in medias res, as advocated by Roman poet Horace (13 BC, 2005), sets the point of attack close to the péripétie, or the open outbreak of the conflict, whereas in ultimas res refers to a point of attack set after the péripétie; namely in the dénouement. In this case, the main parts of the story may be told in backflashs or “analepses” (Genette, 1998, p. 25).
The example of Giselle (1841) shows the most commonly presented exposition. The point of attack is set close to the péripétie and so constitutes a beginning in medias res.
In these opening scenes, the most basic information about the main
characters, their emotions and relationships is given and the reader
learns about their individual weaknesses. The performance commences with
peasants leaving for work and has the gamekeeper Hilarion outline his
emotions for Giselle and Albrecht, his rival. Furthermore, the two
lovers are introduced and their relationship is shown to the audience.
With Hilarion entering Albrecht’s hut, the middle section of the
performance begins. In this part, the evil character starts to mesh a
web of intrigues, in which the main character or main characters are
finally caught. The final outbreak of the conflict is delayed by an
interplay between delay and continuation of the plot. In Giselle
(1841), Albrecht’s hiding from the hunting party forms one part of the
middle section, whereas Hilarion’s suspicion and spying is the second
major element in this part of the plot, which creates curiosity and
suspense on behalf of the spectator. For most of the first act, Albrecht
succeeds in evading the royal hunting party and keeping up his
relationship with Giselle. However, Hilarion has discovered evidence of
Albrecht’s high birth and waits for the best moment to take revenge.
The péripétie as the reversal of action turns good fortune
into bad. So far, the lovers, Giselle and Albrecht, have been happy,
but, the moment Albrecht kisses Giselle after the divertissement,
“Hilarion’s pent-up jealousy can no longer be controlled” (Beaumont,
1969, p. 43). He denounces Albrecht as impostor, and thus is the
character to bring about the turn of action about. Drama has two
distinct ways of dealing with this situation (Pfister, 2001): firstly,
the audience may already anticipate what happens and is kept in suspense
as to when this will happen. Secondly, the plot conceals what happens
so that the enactment of this situation has an even greater impact. In Giselle (1841), the first variant has been chosen.
The dénouement provides a place where the conflict can be solved and a conventional ending may be reached in the closure. The ballet fantastique usually presents the white act as dénouement.
In this section, the characters are tested and, according to their
successful completion of the task, they may or may not be united in a
relationship. For Giselle (1841), it can be argued that
Albrecht manages this task, but, because Giselle is not the socially
acceptable woman, he is not allowed to marry her. In this case, the
adventures of the night have resulted in insights into matters of life
and the duality of woman for the male character.
The conventions outlined above show the structural composition of
the theatre performance and may be considered as reflecting a
macrostructure. Nineteenth-century theatre tradition tends to always
present them in this order, but their duration may vary and so give an
emphasis on either the middle section or the dénouement. Such emphasis is created by locating the péripétie either at the end of the first act or well in the second. Whereas in the first case the dénouement becomes longer by shortening the first part of the story, the second variant allows a long and complicated knotted middle.
The theatrical microstructure is composed of monologues, sequences for the corps de ballet
and the soloists, mimed and danced scenes and the traditional white
act. All these elements are an essential part of the nineteenth-century
ballet performance and, therefore, have to be considered. Here, the
focus on the ballet scenario results in uncertainty concerning the
precise location of these elements within the narrative. Although
sections for soloists and the corps de ballet are generally
indicated in the libretto, the ambiguity of textual hints does not allow
for these scenes to be clearly identified. Moreover, these conventions
are not bound to any hierarchical order as the one displayed in the
theatrical macrostructure. They may appear at any point in the plot and
so are the factors that attribute individuality to the ballet narrative.
A different pattern of the succession of these elements may be found
for each case study.
Narrative elements.
In regard to the narrative side of the performance, two different
structures can be observed. Firstly, there is a narrative
macrostructure, which corresponds to the theatrical one. Secondly, a
narrative microstructure arranges the various actions of the characters
in a, for each case study, specific order. The macrostructure’s
overlapping quality stems from the common use of Aristotle’s work for
literary analysis and theatre too (Barry, 2002; Jahn, 2002). In their
earliest beginnings, literary studies encompassed plays besides works
now clearly identified as literature such as novels (Barry, 2002). The
microstructure of the ballet narrative is, in return, constructed by the
actions executed by the various characters of the plot. However, these
actions need to contain a certain narrative agency, since otherwise the
most important features of the ballet narrative would be found in
lifting an arm or dancing. A focus on key-actions is in this sense most
promising, as it discriminates superfluous elements and does not lead to
an overwhelming number of actions. Such key-actions are considered
functions in literary studies (Propp, 1975; Barthes, 1977). Only actions
changing the course of the storyline should be considered as functions,
which results in all main events being considered in an analysis.
Hence, to leave the house at the beginning of the story represents a
function, whereas another can be found in the fight.
For the case study used in this article, this means that Giselle
declaring her love for Albrecht carries out such a significant action.
Furthermore, Hilarion denouncing his rival as impostor changes the
storyline and the curse of having to dance until the character dies
represent such key-actions, which help to develop the plot. In the case
of the narrative microstructure, no true structural solution to the
arrangement of narrative elements is discernable in the ballet plot. Any
action can appear at any point within the storyline and, therefore, no
hierarchical order of such actions is attempted.
Characters of the ballet plot.
One of the most important elements of a story are its characters.
Ballet tradition has brought forward several distinct stock characters,
which are shown in ever changing combinations and conflicts. They can be
divided into two distinct groups. The representatives of the first
group are clearly connected to one or the other gender, whereas
characters belonging to the second group are not bound to one particular
sex. The first group encompasses the Hero, the Unthreatening Woman and the Threatening Woman, who all may be the main character of the plot. The Hero
is depicted as a young man in search of his ideal partner and falls in
love with any of the two women. However, the traditional ballet plot
only supports relationships between the Hero and the Unthreatening Woman. Were he to love the Threatening Woman, the lovers separated in the end of the ballet. The Unthreatening Woman represents the docile side of femininity by refraining from a sexually active life and too sensual pleasures. Conversely, the Threatening Woman
indulges in erotic innuendos and chooses her lover herself. She is the
active predator and is generally shown as bacchante. In regard to Giselle (1841), it can be said that Albrecht represents the plot’s Hero, whereas Giselle embodies the Threatening Woman and Bathilde, Albrecht’s aristocratic bride, the Unthreatening Woman.
The second group of characters shows Parental Figures and Trickster Figures. The Parental Figures
encompass all parents caring for their child and supporting it. Such
parental feelings are not only connected to mothers and foster mothers,
but may also be exhibited by fathers, who care for their child. It is to
note that Parental Figures support the relationship of the lovers and seek to prevent their child from harm. On the other side, Trickster Figures
are the ones who cause havoc among all others. They plan intrigues and
seek to separate the lovers. In the underlying case study of Giselle (1841), Berthe, Giselle’s mother, clearly represents a Parental Figure that seeks to protect her daughter from harm. The Trickster Figures
of this ballet may be found in Hilarion, the gamekeeper of Act I, and
Myrtha, Queen of the Wilis. It is to note that the evil actions of the Trickster
are transferred from Hilarion to Myrtha, who continues to block the
lovers’ way to find to each other. Also other ballets tend to distribute
the sphere of the Trickster Figures on several characters, which all hinder the lovers in their relationship.
The conflict between the various characters arises from clashing
interests and the strivings of each character to undo any lack or
discomfort. One feature of the ballet plot is that it shows a
distribution of the action according to one underlying notion; the
conflict. The characters are divided into two groups: one supporting the
lovers and one preventing them from achieving their goal. Such division
is well-known from Greek theatre tradition and may also be found in the
practice of Commedia Dell’Arte. Greek theatre divided the
chorus into one group siding with the protagonist and another supporting
the antagonist (Abbott, 2004). Hence, the characters of the play were
separated into groups according to their position in relation to the
conflict. Commedia Dell’Arte shows a similar distribution of
action on the characters. Here, however, two pairs of lovers can be
observed. One serious or ‘tragic’ couple seeking a relationship and
another comic one, which has all actions go ‘wrong’ and so creates
laughter. The distribution of action on the characters of ballet
tradition is very close to the above-mentioned theatrical phenomena. In
some cases, two pairs of lovers can be found and thus also a plot
composition according to the example of Commedia Dell’Arte.
The characters and their individual strivings and desires may,
therefore, be understood as representing another microstructure each.
The clashing interests of these characters form the conflict, which can
be labelled as the overarching macrostructure. Through the conflict the
story’s development is ensured. This results in the conflict becoming
the main notion of the ballet plot. It is inserted into the theatrical
structures and expressed through the narrative ones.
From this outline, it is apparent that the analytical method
presented is based on the notion of three distinct layers of analysis.
Firstly, a theatrical layer has been identified that regulates the
theatrical presentation of the narrative. It is composed of a
macrostructure giving the structural outline of the performance and a
microstructure that operates within the single parts of the
macrostructure. This microstructure is not bound to any hierarchical
order and, thus, all its elements may occur at any point and are
frequently repeated. The second layer has been identified as the
narrative one, which again consists of one macro- and microstructure.
The narrative macrostructure overlaps with the theatrical one.
Concerning the narrative microstructure, the outline and arrangement of
key-actions provides an individual pattern of actions for each case
study. In a third step, the characters and their conflict have come into
foreground. Each character has his/her own personality and, therefore,
can be seen as having a microstructure through his/her desires, plans
and emotions. The entanglement of characters through their clashing
interests results in the conflict, which can be understood as
representing the macrostructure of this third layer.
The narrative model outlined in this article is, therefore, a
connection between these three elements. They may be used in connection
with each other or can be taken on their own to investigate either the
theatrical or narrative structure of a particular work. Moreover, it is
to note that this method has been composed to analyse the ballet
scenario and not the audio-visual recording. Hence, textual analysis
forms the basis of it and restricts it to the programme note. Finally,
it is hoped that through the introduction of a method of narrative
analysis the dogmatic focus on mere choreographic analyses will be
broken so that this model can stand as equal next to other
already-existing ones.
Abbott, H. [no further name given] Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Adshead, Janet (ed.). Dance Analysis. Theory and Practice. London: Dance Books, 1988.
Angiolini, Gasparo. Lettere di Gasparo Angiolini a Monsieur Noverre sopra i Balli Pantomimi. Milan: Gio. Battista Bianchi, 1773.
Aristotle. Poetics. London: Heinemann LTD, 1973.
Barry, Peter. Beginning Theory. An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory. Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press, 2002.
Barthes, Roland. Image Music Text. London: Fontana Press, 1977.
Beaumont, Cyril William. The Ballet called Giselle. London: Dance Books, 1969.
Bennett, Toby; Poesio, Giannandrea. Mime in the Cecchetti ‘Method’ in Dance Research Summer 2000, Volume 18, Number 1, p. 31 – 43.
Cobley, Paul. Narrative. The New Critical Idiom Series. London/New York: Routledge, 2004.
De Marinis, Marco. The Semiotics of Performance. Bloomington/Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1993.
Duchartre, Pierre Louis. The Italian Comedy. The Improvisation Scenarios Lives Attributes Portraits and Masks of the Illustrious Characters of the Commedia dell’ Arte. New York: Dover Publications, 1966.
Elam, Keir. The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. London/New York: Routledge, 2002.
Forster, Edward Morgan. Aspects of the Novel. London: Edward and Arnold, 1927 (first edition), 1974.
Foster, Susan Leigh. Choreography and Narrative. Ballet’s staging of Story and Desire. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998.
Genette, Gérard. Die Erzählung. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1998.
Gray, Martin. A Dictionary of Literary Terms. Singapore: York Press, Longman, 1999.
10
Guest, Ivor. The Romantic Ballet in Paris. London: The Pitman Press, 1966.
Hawkes, Terence. Structuralism & Semiotics. London: Methuen, 1977.
Horace. Ars Poetica. Translated by Leon Golden. Accessed 22 May 2005; 13:006. http://www.english.emory.edu/DRAMA/ArsPoetica.html
Jahn, Manfred. A Guide to the Theory of Narrative. Accessed July 2002.
www.uni-koeln.de/~ame02/ppp.htm
Lämmert, Eberhard. Bauformen des Erzählens. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1968.
Noverre, Jean-Georges. Lettres sur la Danse et sur les Ballets. Lyon: Aimé Delaroche, 1760.
Pfister, Manfred. Das Drama. Theorie und Analyse. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 2001.
Poesio, Giannandrea. Carabosse Revisited: Enrico Cecchetti and the lost Language of Mime. In Proceedings Society of Dance History Scholars Twenty-First Annual Conference, University of Oregon, 18. – 21. June 1998b, p. 79 – 85.
Prince, Gerald. A Dictionary of Narratology. Lincoln/London: University of Nebraska Press, 1987.
Propp, Vladimir. Morphologie des Märchens. Germany [Frankfurt am Main]: Suhrkamp, 1975.
Stanzel, Franz K. Theorie des Erzählens. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2001.
Zimmermann, Bernhard. Die Griechische Komödie. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. 1998.
Zipes, Jack. Fairy Tales and the Art of Subversion. The Classical Genre for Children and the Process of civilization. London: Heinemann, 1983.
