Skip to main content

The word 'choreography' requires a fuller definition. Discuss

In gymnastics, the word 'choreography' is heard frequently in discussions of artistry, normally in respect of floor exercise, sometimes about beam (many teams have specialist beam choreographers, for example the Russian team work with the fearsomely experienced Larissa Ushakova) but rarely about the more athletic pieces, bars and vault.

I was looking at the floor routine Anastasia Grishina performed at the Jesolo Cup the other day.



It's beautiful and powerful and expressive. One of the best floor routines on the competitive circuit at present; in fact I would put it a close second to Afanasyeva's in the world rankings.

But my analysis of the routine is this:

1 The actual dance composition of the routine as a whole is relatively ordinary, although good in parts. There is a predominance during the early part of the routine of straight line work. For the first 40 seconds, Nastia does not veer off the diagonal on which she started. This is because she is busy completing some of the necessary tumbles and spins required by the Code, but I think Afanasyeva's composition manages to get round this a little more creatively.

2 Yet there are some individual fragments of choreography which are superb, for example the leap and turn in handstand at 40-45 seconds is superbly expressive and matches the music absolutely in both feeling and in timing.

3 Nastia's confidence and expression is just right for this music. Her emphatic head and arm movements are never over gestured and she really does feel her movement. Such a pleasure to watch this compared to so many floor routines where the music is no more than a raucous background accompaniment.

4 Finally, Nastia's amplitude and the perfect harmony of her movement shows great attention to body alignment, details such as toe point and so on that are central to good body choreography.

Four different but complementary meanings, and I'm sure a qualified dance instructor could add so much more. So far, we have dance composition, dance elements and sequences, expression, musicality, feeling, amplitude, body alignment, line, harmony, plasticity.

So my question is : does the word choreography, in English at least, require some fuller definition. Its full meaning embraces so much more than the dance composition that so many use as its key reference point. If we in the English language do not appreciate the multiplicity of meaning of this complex word, what chance do we have of appreciating artistry on all four pieces of apparatus?

Discuss.

Comments

  1. Russian definition of the floor (apparatus) means literally 'free exercise', but even that English translation doesn't fully convey the true meaning. It is supposed to express 'freedom' of the gymnast to represent her/his body to the best of its ability which OF COURSE incorporates the flexibility, softness and fluidity of movement, athleticism and self awareness (tested to its limits by the presence of music). The vault (quite similar to Russian definition), is VAULT not a 'jump', therefore (you've got it right QueenElisabeth), it incorporates choreography too. Not only is it about the particular order of the moves and how specific they are (just like a dance), but a huge part of it's definition is the LEAP, which is one of the fundamentals of choreographer's work. Uneven bars, well.. it may not make sense to you, but in Russian you'd get something like 'stripes'.. and there you have it. The apparatus represents a form of marked territory, restricted by two 'bars'. The gymmnast's self-awareness, body control etc. are tested again.. again the basics of choreo. Beam, well there's a slang for it and it is referred to as a English- 'ray'. Beam is not without reason this high and risky. It represents the extraordinary. It is supposed to be an adventure, both challenging and powerful, just as the journey of the Sun's ray. The gymnast is no longer on the competition floor, she is higher than the rest, higher in length and higher in spirit, the magic of choreo here lays in marrying the attack (quickness of the moves) with precision. There's a reason judges look for 'a constant movement of some sort', not because it increases the risk, but because it represents the spirit of the contender on the apparatus. Like a great climber, eyeing the mountain's peak...

    Sandra

    ReplyDelete
  2. Body alignment is more about execution, not just choreography. A gymnast can have both, like Grishina in this routine. Komova has excellent body alignment, while poor choreography (Worlds 2012).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Head MAG Coach Alfosov on Russian gymnastics prospects in 2026

"A Really Good International Level": Alfosov on the Return of Russian Gymnasts, Belyavsky's Videos, and the Games Qualification Alfosov: Belyavsky's presence on the team was a big plus Interview by Elena Vaitsekhovskaya  Google translate Russian gymnasts competing under neutral status will be able to take their first step toward qualifying for the Los Angeles Olympics as early as October, Valery Alfosov, head coach of the Russian men's team, told RT. He believes that qualifying for not only the individual but also the team competition at the World Championships is one of the season's greatest achievements. He also explained the criteria he uses to compare his players with their competitors and described David Belyavsky's decision last year as hard-won. The current season began with good news for the gymnasts: almost all of the leading Russian team members are participating in international competitions. Does this mean the suspension situation is a thing of...

Who really won the WAG All Around?

You will find a link to the FIG's newly published book of results at the Olympic Games here .  This year, they have broken down the judge's execution scores so you can see exactly how each judge evaluated the gymnasts' performances.  It makes for interesting reading - if only I had more time to analyse each judge's marking.  A skim reading already highlights multiple inconsistencies in individual judges' marks and makes you wonder why they bother with the jury at all. I have taken the time to look at the reference judges' scores for the top four in the women's all around.  The FIG explains here what their role is, and how they are selected.  I even used my calculator, which is a risky thing in my hands.  My, how I wish we could have seen a similar document for the Tokyo World Championships. I wonder if anyone can explain how, if the FIG's Code of Points is so objective and fair, it is possible to come up with two different results using two differ...

Artistry versus acrobatics???

Watching videos of this weekend's competitions - the qualification and all around rounds of the Russian championships, medal winners from the American Cup - I am struck, more and more, by the huge difference between the American and Russian schools of gymnastics. It led me to ask the question : do artistry and acrobatics have to be mutually exclusive? (I am afraid that I think naming 'American' gymnastics a 'school' is perhaps lending an undeserved dignity to work which has become excessively obsessed with the difficult and the consistent, but I am using the word here so as not to label unfairly those individual gymnasts who are blameless in the direction of their training.) The FIG's vision for gymnastics is said to embrace more artistry; at least the publicity it has put about on the subject of its new Code makes that fairly plain.  So perhaps the Russians, with their inconsistent brilliance and superior body carriage (Mustafina, Komova, Grishina, Afanasy...

RRG Archive - scroll by date, from 2024 to 2010

Show more