LONDON â€" Alexei Ratmansky and Christopher Wheeldon are, with reason, frequently referred to as the most important ballet choreographers working today. A new ballet by either is reason for excitement, so it was quite a coup for the Royal Ballet â€" and a shot in the arm for the company’s new director, Kevin O’Hare â€" when the company announced last year that two commissions were in the bag, on a single program.
Expectations were at positively dizzy heights by the time the program opened at the Royal Opera House last week (the program is being performed three more times, including tonight). The Russian-born Mr. Ratmansky, who is artist in residence at American Ballet Theater, has choreographed for most of the world’s major ballet troupes, and his work has been extensively seen in London â€" but he had never before created a piece for the Royal Ballet.
The British Mr. Wheeldon, who danced briefly with the oyal Ballet before moving to the New York City Ballet, has made several pieces for his former company, but this one is the first since Mr. O’Hare invited him to take the position of artistic associate.
As if this didn’t make the stakes high enough, the two new works â€" Mr. Ratmansky’s “24 Preludes,†and Mr. Wheeldon’s “Aeternum†(why the current fashion for Latin names in ballet) â€" were preceded by Balanchine’s 1928 “Apollo,†still a benchmark for what it might mean to break new ground in classical dance.
After the fever-pitch buildup, it’s not really surprising that the excitement that preceded the premieres was matched by disappointment after them. The droves of critics who attended seemed, mostly, to let out a collective exhale of discontent.
“Both have produced work of expected skill, which feel as if they’re fulfilling the commissioning company’s expectations rather than either of them insisting on saying something keenly personal,†wrote Is! mene Brown on The Artsdesk.
“The cast dance through Ratmansky’s fluent and ingenious encounters, evoking sudden joys and mysterious despairs, and continue until there dawns the heretical thought that Chopin/Françaix is a damned bore, and that one more embrace, yet another fall to the ground with attendant moping, and enough is more than enough. Sixteen preludes: Da! Twenty-four preludes: Nyet! And to Siberia with the orchestration,†wrote Clement Crisp in “The Financial Times.â€
Benjamin Britten’s 1941 “Sinfonia da Requiem,†to which Mr. Wheeldon’s ballet was set, is “gloomy and strenuous. Mr. Wheeldon’s ballet is gloomier, and more strenuous,†wrote Alastair Macaulay in The New York Times.
Some critics were happier. “â€Aeternum seizes the attention ferociously,†write Mark Monahan in The Telegraph. “It is also immensely original and constantly surprising.â€
Zoe Anderson in The Independent thought that Mr. Ratmansky’s work, at least was worthy of the hype: “Ratmansky’s magnificent new work for the Royal Ballet glows at the heart of an awkward triple bill,†she wrote.
But it’s Ms. Brown who summed up the problem: “The curse of ‘Apollo’ strikes,’ she wrote. Masterpieces are in short supply.
