We look forward to reading it! What kind of feedback are you seeking?
Christopher,
It was very interesting for me to read about Helikon’s opera bashing through pop culture! It sounds very similar to what Bulgarian director Lilia Abadjieva has done to Shakespeare. I wonder though how Bertman has adjusted (or not) the composition of the operas and the musical execution to the visual MTV-like provocation? Has music/singing also been turned into a reductionist and self-reflective counterpoint on stage? (I can see how if music is rendered in its classical form, the aesthetic intention and adequate perception could be lost even for open-minded fans of experimental hybrids.) In Abadjieva’s compressed tragedy-“mixes,” the fast-shifting images and stylistic blends build over the foundation of one clear motif—sometimes not of primary value for the play. I wonder if Bertman has similar under-conceptualizing approach to the text/conflict and the music. Your paper gives such a clear idea of Bertman’s mise-en-scene and the possibilities of its different reading as kitsch and as art in the West and in the East (i.e., the cultural economy in a new postcolonial context in Europe). The cultural deconstruction and political connotations must be so much stronger in Russia! Really looking forward to the discussion…
This is an interesting look at a company I knew nothing about before reading this. I especially appreciate that you are grappling with how this company is finding its aesthetic language(s) in a post-Soviet world.
I’m guessing that you, too, are fairly early in the research and writing process for this project. It seems to me that sources are your greatest challenge at present. You have a few reviews, but they are from different stages in Helikon’s existence, which makes it potentially problematic to compare them (Maybe Vlasov was correct that the company was “amateurish” in their first couple of seasons, for example…). It also seems like you have descriptions of a few vivid production moments- the guillotine bowling alley, for example- but that you are still looking for more production specifics. And specifics will strengthen your next draft.
Your other challenge is how to define things like kitsch (and “second-degree kitsch”), cliché, convention, and tradition while helping your reader to follow your overall argument. I sense that your discussion of kitsch and convention is right on. I’m not sure I fully understand it yet, though. How do you define kitsch? Can you give a few examples of kitsch as used by Helikon in setting up this definition? How do you define “traditional” in the context of the Bolshoi, etc.? Certainly a hundred years ago, Chaliapin (who was, incidentally, admired by both Stanislavsky and Meyerhold) made it possible for the Imperial Theatres to showcase a performer who was not only a singer or only an actor, but both. What has changed?
You are on firmer ground when you give us a historical overview of the company. I wonder how you can add more depth to your discussion of Bertman’s influences? I also wonder if Helikon’s aesthetic is based not so much on the “interplay” of high and low, but on deliberately incongruous clashes, even more so than Meyerhold? Or are the “shocks” (p. 9) more akin to Artaud? What is their purpose? I don’t follow your B-movie mummy argument. Are there specific Russian or foreign films that support your evaluation? Your links between debased power figures on the Helikon stage and the Soviet political past, on the other hand, are very clear. I wonder if more political specifics will also help ground your discussion?
Thanks for sharing your work. I look forward to hearing more about where you are in your process.
I found your paper quite interesting as I knew nothing about this company, and very little about the distinctive characteristics of post-Soviet Russian opera. Given my lack of expertise in your area, I will share a few of the thoughts I had while reading your paper.
First, I am curious how the Helikon fits into the broader international opera scene. Opera has always struck me as particularly international art form in the way that its performers and directors seem to participate in a global market. (This was no doubt enabled by the move in the twentieth century to present operas in their original language rather than a local language.) Does the Helikon participate in this international opera community? I so, how? If not, why not? Similarly, the emphasis on acting ability over singing may be unique to Helikon, but it seems akin to contemporary movements in many countries to pay more attention to aspects such as appearance when casting opera performers. Is the Helikon part of a broader movement here? Was it an early mover?
Second, your use of the term kitsch brought to mind two references that you may find useful. One is the introduction to Svetlana Boym's book Common Places. You may find other parts of the book useful as well, but in the introduction you provides a sophisticated analysis of the history of the word "kitsch" and similar words such as "banality," "cliche," and "camp."
Finally, while this may be related to sources available to you, I find it very interesting to consider how the funding change to a state theater affected the company. I would love to learn more about that.
Thanks for opening me up to a new Russian theater, I'm looking forward to learning more about it.
Forgot to include my second reference suggestion "Communism as Kitsch: Soviet Symbols in Post-Soviet Society" by Theresa Sabonis-Chafee in Consuming Russia edited by Adele Marie Barker.
Thanks for sharing your work Christopher! I am not an expert on contemporary Russian opera by any means, but it seems to me that your research is very important as theatres like the Helikon and directors like Bertman continue to play an important role in current Russian theatrical culture. My only big suggestion at this point, is to reconsider how you discuss Bertman's influences, particularly Meyerhold. It's nice when a artist cites his/her influences, but unless they provide some explanation, it can be difficult to interpret exactly how the influence is represented in their works. And even then, artist can not always be trusted in this regard. For the Meyerhold/Bertman connection, maybe there is more than the voice/body interpretation you mention on page 2. I wonder if Bertman's connection to Meyerhold has more to do with his unconventional treatment of classical/canonical texts (i.e. Bertman as auteur). Maybe viewing Bertman as an auteur will be helpful as you continue to research influences.