Home » Let’s have a Lynn Seymour interlude

Comments

Let’s have a Lynn Seymour interlude — 12 Comments

  1. They seem very good at this. I have no idea what you are talking about, but it’s obviously an art that takes tremendous discipline and dedication.

  2. Very interesting. While an ardent music collector, I admit to knowing little if anything about ballet. I tend to respond to dance on an emotional level rather than in reaction to technique–although, I realize masterful technique can create an emotional response. I agree with your take on these performances. I much prefer Seymour to Ferri, although Ferri’s age and petite body are probably better suited to the role. This makes me think of several things. I’ve always felt that “women’s” gymnastics lacks mature emotion as most of the participants are little more than children. Of course, they are physically limber and adept, but I think I would prefer less physicality, and appreciate more of the grace that comes with age. As I have gotten older(now 53), I find that I discover nuances in musical pieces that I didn’t appreciate when I was younger. I love jazz. I used to be highly enamored of fast young players who filled every second with flurries of notes, exhibiting phenomenal technique. While I still enjoy some of that, I find I have grown to love the quiet between notes, and the nuance of limited notes in the hands of a master. There are definite similarities with the videos you posted. Both show inarguably talented dancers, but the subtleties and depth of expression in Seymour’s performance strike me as superior.

  3. Was this the Frederick Ashton version?

    And are you familiar with Anthony Tudor’s work?

  4. Beverly: Yes, the Ashton version. He choreographed it on Seymour, but then Nureyev and Fonteyn got hot and they were the first cast, and Seymour was an alternate.

    Yes, I’m very familiar with Tudor’s work. Some of my dance teachers were students of his, as well.

    [Correction from neo-neocon: I meant the Macmillan version, as I said in the original post.]

  5. My daughter’s teacher has commented before that Margot Fonteyn’s (arguably the standard for ballerinas) technique was far from perfect but that she had that “it” factor, musicality, magnetism and magic, such that you just couldn’t take your eyes off.

    As with Fonteyn so with Seymour, if you’ve got “it” you’ve got it. Better technique and the perfect ballet body doesn’t always compensate for enate artistic genious.

    Thanks for the interlude.

  6. By the way my daughter also is battling “body stereotyping” as she is pushing 5’8.

    Other than that she has that willowy, ballerina body, but people are telling us she’s too tall

  7. I much prefer Ferri. Seymour is cumbersome, weighty and clumsy. She no more portrays the youthful immaturity and naivety than my granny! I have never liked her as as a dancer since a teenager and I used to not watch a televised ballet rather than endure her. I wanted to see if I still felt like that. I do. I can’t think of any other dancer male or female I have such a strong negative response to. Also I studied English literature and yet prefer the ballet, which is one of my favourites, to the play and it informed my understanding and enhanced my enjoyment of it. It is a wonderful piece of theatrical drama and art and dance.

  8. I have been lucky to see Lynn Seymour dance in 1976-77 in Covent Garden in this other MacMillan ballets. Choreographer for this ballet was Kenneth MacMillan (not Ashton) and he originally created this role for Lynn Seymour. Ms. Seymour is Juliet’s passion made palpable and carnate. She is not Juliet imagined, ethereal and ideal, but Juliet in the flesh, soft, pliable, round and warm. Ms. Seymour as Juliet epitomizes dancing “with abandon”, ballet technique (both triumph and deficiency) becomes superfluous to pure passion and emotion. Ms. Seymour captures the passionate woman awakened in an adolescent Juliet. Just as some prefer the Mona Lisa to the fleshy Renoir beauties, one can prefer Fonteyn’s Juliet (or others) to Seymour’s Juliet, but Seymour’s Juliet is not a failed attempt to portray youthful immaturity or naivete. Ms. Seymour is not focused on either Juliet’s immaturity or naivete, she is focused on the passion. Most ballerinas dance Juliet, and several dance her beautifully, however, Lynn Seymour is Juliet, the woman.

  9. I am pleased Ellen commented on the “reality” of Seymour’s portrayal. It was unfortunate that she and Christopher Gable who worked with McMillan on creating the ballet were usurped by Fonteyn and Nureyev because their names were more universally recognized for the introduction of the ballet to the ballet world. I was fortunate enough to see Seymour and Gable perform Romeo and Juliet in Vancouver when the Royal Ballet was on tour and she was given this spot because Vancouver is where she was brought up before she emigrated to England to join the Sadlers Wells school prior to being accepted into the Royal. Does anyone have an update on Seymour’s involvement with ballet these days? I saw her do a character role for Bourne’s Swan Lake in California and she stole the show with her camp take off on the Queen (EII). It was wonderful and I’ll never be able to go to traditional performance of Swan Lake again after seeing this production. I would love to find recent information on Seymour. I’m still a fan.

  10. I’m an old friend and colleague of Lynn’s but have lost track of her and where she is today.

    If anyone knows, please feel free to let me know; I’d so love to find her and reconnect.

    Mark Baird
    Former Joffrey Ballet dancer, Ballet Master with Northern Ballet Theatre

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>