Let’s call the whole thing off
Life contains few universals, but in my view the big three are love, Starbucks and ballet. What I love about Starbucks is that you can go into any store anywhere and a latté is made exactly the same way. Similarly, I can walk into any ballet class in the world and the “recipe” is essentially the same. The barre comes before the centre, which comes before across the floor, and a plié, is a plié, is a plié.
…most of the time.
While the five major methods of ballet* share many commonalities, there are certain particular aspects of each technique that distinguish them from one another.
When you closely compare the methods, you see the difference between the subtle, clean lines of the Cecchetti Method and the exaggerated lines of Vaganova. You see the balon of the Bournonville dancer and the épaulement of the French School. Then there are all those dance studios out there around the country and the world who teach some amalgamation of methods based on what the teachers were taught, what they believe, and trial and error.
I, myself, am one of those dancers who received a mixed bag of training pieced together with some of the Cecchetti Method, some Bournonville, and my own teachers’ ideas. I am not saying that this is necessarily bad… I believe that I received excellent training and don’t have any regrets. However, as a teacher I’m seeking my own ideas and it’s hard to look at each of the methods and know which one is “right”. Yes a plié is a plié, but how steps are executed may differ among methods. Names and positions can also vary slightly between methods.
Take for example the position of the foot in cou de pied.
Dissection of the neck of the foot
I’ve dabbled in nearly all of the major ballet techniques, and cou de pied is the position that causes me the most confusion by far. Here’s what I can deduce based on personal experience, independent research, and my dear friend Gail Grant, who literally “wrote the book”
The Vaganova Method: Often referred to as sur le cou de pied, this position is really divided into three: sur le cou de pied devant (with the heel at the ankle bone and the toes wrapped around the ankle), sur le cou de pied derriere (with the heel at the base of the calf and toes pointed away) and the “conditional” position in which the toe is pointed in front of the leg and the toes touch the ankle bone.
The Cecchetti Method: cou de pied is a relaxed position of the foot in which the heel is placed just below the ankle bone so that the toes may gently rest on the ground. The heel may either be at the front or back of the ankle (devant and derriere, respectively). There is no wrapped position in this method, and the relaxed foot is employed in frappe and petit battement. The toe is fully pointed when performing steps such as coupe devant or derriere, jete temps leve, etc., essentially the same position as “conditional” in the Vaganova Method.
Everyone else: Cou de pied appears to be one of those steps that doesn’t line up with the whole “universal language of dance” idea. There are even variations between individual methods: the Cecchetti Council’s printed syllabus calls this position “devant on the ankle” (1), but Ms. Gail Grant, the quintessential goddess of dance terminology (and every Cecchetti teacher I’ve ever come across) call it cou de pied (2). But wait, there’s more! Many, many schools and teachers refer to it simply as “coupé” and do not differentiate between coupé the step and coupé the position… and the best part of this entire confusing dribble is that THEY ARE ALL COU DE PIED!
What’s in a name?
What you call a step may be of little importance in the grand scheme of things, but it just goes to show that someone somewhere thought that it would help the dancer’s training to teach it “like this”. I could sift through all of my files of peer-reviewed articles and try and rationalize one cou de pied over another cou de pied for some biomechanical or pedagogical reason, but quite honestly, I’m not sure it’s worth the effort. Regardless of what it’s called, where the foot is placed on the ankle, or whether the toe is pointed, if you, as a teacher, can justify why you are doing it that way, then do it.
Consider the focus of your lesson plan, and which method is going to best suit that need.
Enrico Cecchetti might tell you that the relaxed foot relates to the landing of a jump, and Agrippina Vaganova might tell you that the wrapped foot engages the turnout, and they are both probably right. In the end, whichever of the cou de pieds you decide to teach is up to you. Dancers around the world learned and are learning ballet following the same “recipe” with a dash of cou de pied that is different from school to school. Like Almond Joy and Mounds, they are different, yet equally delicious.
A refreshing contradiction
Now, this may be a contradiction from my usual banter about using evidence to support your teaching methods, and I tend to come from the school of thought that consistency and accuracy is important across classes, schools, and ballet in general. I believe strongly in choosing analogies and images, and technicalities carefully to maximize the potential for learning, and sticking with them. But in the case of cou de pied, I might just disagree with myself.
For younger dancers, it may be important to pick one version and stick to it, since too many exceptions to “the rule” can become confusing. As the dancer’s training progresses, however, you can utilize variations in positions across different methods to emphasize the points of your lesson plan.
Until someone actually researches how each variation of cou de pied impacts a dancer’s training, all I can say is:
- use your best judgment
- educate yourself on the variations of certain steps and reasons for using them
- be consistent with young dancers, and as they progress in their training make them aware of different methods to serve the goals of your lesson plans
—
*Cecchetti, Vaganova, RAD, the French School and Bournonville. Some might disagree with these designations or include others such as Balanchine. Others only talk of “the big three”: Italian, French, and Russian. Ultimately, the point is that these schools of thought have slightly different technique, vocabulary, and training regimens. They are essentially different dialects of the same language.
References:
1. Cecchetti Council of America (1991). Graded lessons in classical ballet technique: grade one, 3.
2. Grant, G. (1982). Technical Manual and Dictionary of Classical Ballet
Lauren Warnecke is a freelance writer and editor, focused on dance and cultural criticism in Chicago and across the Midwest. Lauren is the dance critic for the Chicago Tribune, editor of See Chicago Dance, and founder/editor of Art Intercepts, with bylines in Chicago Magazine, Milwaukee Magazine, St. Louis Magazine and Dance Media publications, among others. Holding degrees in dance and kinesiology, Lauren is an instructor of dance and exercise science at Loyola University Chicago. Read Lauren’s posts.
Language….coupe, “to cut” generally under, but always reversible, so therefore, over as well, sur-le-coup-de-pied, “at the neck of the foot” position of the foot,
Sur le cou-de-pied = position, coupé = step.
On the neck of the foot–the position of the foot may be wrapped (devant only), pointed (devant and derriere, although the shape of the foot should be as in the wrapped position), or relaxed, with the ball of the foot on the floor (devant and derriere).
Couper means to cut (coupé is the past participle); usually, but not always, it is executed as a jump.
Coupé the step and cou-de-pied the position are often used interchangeably to describe the position of the foot, but that is not really correct usage.
At least, that’s what I was taught. 🙂
Deb- I was also taught the position/movement (or noun/verb) contradiction, but it was something that was often contradicted by other teachers just calling it all “coupe”. At this point I tend to think (or rather hope) that it’s simply because “cou de pied” is a mouthful… Thanks for reading and for your comment!
Lauren–thanks for the piece, and for the discussion.–Deb
Great post! Love the Starbucks-idea – I’ll steal it when I go home to Norway next week, the guys there use a different language than me 😉
Another step, or phrase, that we can’t seem to agree on is the jump called “pas de chat”. In my world (vaganova), this is a elevated jump where both feet are pulled up to something of a passé-position. But many people call the grand jeté where you developpé your first leg out rather than “grand battement” it (see that?! I just made a verb out of a step), a pas de chat, and “my” pas de chat, they call pas de passé. With this phenomenon, I don’t see a parallel between schools, like with cou de pied, I’ve met other Vaganova-trained dancers that also use different terminology for this jump.
And I’m pretty sure you have yet another term for it 🙂
Thanks, Henrik! What a treat to hear from such a great fellow blogger…
Pas de chat is another great example, and definitely more complex than cou de pied. I did a post several months back about basic biomechanics in the take off of a pas de chat to achieve both feet leaving the ground simultaneously… a couple comments disagreed with me that this is how the step is performed, and it got me thinking about how different techniques dictate different ways of performing steps….. and they are all right!
Yes, there are quite a few steps performed a tad differently in the different syllabuses – but I was thinking more of two schools/syllabuses performing the steps (in this case, a pas de chat) similarly, just calling it by a different name..
By the way, I’m taught that pdChat is a jump from one to one leg, where the second leaves the floor a tad later when jumping, and closing in fifth just straight after landing but I know some dancers perform it “simultaneously”, sort of like a sissonne..
Love this. Thank you.
Thanks for reading, all!
I totally agree Deb! Wish more teachers taught the difference.
I can’t tell you the number of times I’m frustrated with students doing fondu in cou-de-pied, which is NEVER done.
love the post! Smiled the entire time I read it with a cup of coffee in hand!
This article (and its comments) are an excellent example of how passionately teachers feel about their own version of things. Thanks for sharing it Lauren!
I’m glad that Lauren brought up coupé. After some education in terminology and pedagogy myself, I have come to the conclusion that coupé is indeed an action, and sur le cou-de-pied a position. She is absolutely right that MANY teachers do not make this distinction or do not make it clear to their students. We can fault them, but language and terminology are malleable and subject to all kinds of influences. That’s why I think Lauren’s main point: whatever you choose, choose it for a reason, is a good one. Because even the “right” terminology isn’t nearly as effective, if it lacks purpose and intent.
P.S. Speaking of position vs. action… passé and retiré 😉
Great point! Although, I do also get annoyed when teachers/masters mix up the terminology (hey, dude, you’re supposed to know this better than me, right?!)
Ha! Yesterday morning during a beautiful run/sprint with my beloved doggie, during which I try to think profound thoughts, I wondered whether you would dive into retiré versus passé….
Deb- Tiffany from Dancing Branflakes has also been looking for a retire/passe analysis… so it’s definitely on my radar!
Hmmm.. re pas de chat – I have always thought of it as, the back foot starts the jump, and rises quickly to retire. The upward motion helps the elevation of the jump. The front foot leaves the floor a nano second later, because it is pushing to travel sideways, not just upward. In a series, those with more balon may naturally take off from two feet, using more pressure with the front foot to keep moving sideways/diagonally. Those with less elevation and balon will not be able to do it exactly that way. One of my favorite (now deceased) teachers – maestro of Cecchetti, Margaret Saul used to say “don’t think about it, it will look better”.
Coupe is an action, from a jump or a releve position, changing supporting legs. Whereas you can jump from fifth and land in a cou de pied position, and that’s not a coupe, although some teachers call it that. I enjoyed reading all of the above!
One correction here: as stated above “coupé” means “to cut”. In most schools it is a step from one cou de pied position (en avant ou en arriére) to another cou de pied with the other foot. In no school of ballet -ever- does in reference the normal positions of sur le cou de pied in stasis. Therefore the dominant usage of “coupé” as used is -blatantly- incorrect and I appeal to all dancers, teqchers, choreographers, directors, régisseur, and ballet master to correct their usage.
It might do to understand why the terms have become confused. Its simple: to the American ear they sound the same and is very different to rol ” cou de pied” off the tongue? So because 90% of the time, the step of coupé occurs from cou de pied, the terms gradually became confused as more and more non-french speaking ballet progenitors used it, it became codified in speech as normative. This is because ballet and dance is mostly a verbal and demonstratively transmitted skillset.
This is similar to the Americanization of the balletic term “chassé” we have a very tough time attempting to pronounce the verb “Chassé” (to chase), because it is difficult to put an “S” before an “Sh”. So, even though many may know better, the term becomes “shashay”, with the swasive phonics reversed. This goes back so far and is so entrenched in our linguistics that in traditional Appalachian square dance, the term for the same as chassé is referenced as “SAH’ shay”!
When referencing “cou de pied” there is a histo-derivative and etymological reason for its usage. The word for “ankle” in French is Cheville. Why, then, did they did not simply say “Sur le Cheville”? If one considers the somatic moralism of the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, one may note that, particularly for women, the legs and feet were almost completely covered with dresses, bustles and stocking: to expose -or even to mention- the word for “ankle”, was like mentioning words for genetilia is today! Ergo, instead of literally using what was considered to be gauche and course, “cheville”, the neck, ( which, rising out of the Elizabethan and Rennaisance era where the neck was concealed), by the baroque era had become revealed as a portion of feminine beauty), was codified in the Ballet d’ action era (Louis the 15th and 16th), as “”sur le cou de pied” so identifiying this particular “neck” (“cou”), as associated with the the foot (“de pied”).
Hope this helps, Philip.
Hi Philip, I read your article and I found it very interestint. it was just a rigth complement to the principal article. Is good to know that they are people who understand the meanning of the ballet therms, thaks you!