Artistry and learning from examples of greatness

[PyeongChang2018]

I'm italicizing what I posted in the Ladies and the Quad thread. I feel it's an appropriate way to introduce this thread and its significance.

Is there a thread on this forum for people who wish to discuss artistry in figure skating and, as they perceive it, the current decline of the sport? I personally feel like the sport has moved in a really uninspired direction and that some of the top figure skaters right now are offering very little. I'm not asking for a thread to bash figure skaters by any means, but I do think it would be nice to have a place to discuss the magic of the work of Kim, Witt, and Miyahara and objectively talk about what sort of changes and growth we can hope to see from today's top-ranked skaters. For example, I think Kim had a really good understanding of what her body moving in space looked like to an external eye. Look at her arms raised in a circle above her head during her layback spin here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgXKJvTVW9g at 3:40. The beauty of that shape is reflective of Kim's great understanding of what she looks like from an outside eye. I think that a skater like Sotnikova, who I have tremendous respect for, could've become even greater by working to enhance her understanding of this idea, because at times her arm movement seemed like "flailing" and lacking purpose.

Basically I'm asking if there's a thread to very intelligently and respectfully discuss artistry in the sport: the current state and also past and present examples of greatness and what we can learn from them.

 

[gkelly]

I think it would be helpful to talk about how we define "artistry."

Does everything currently listed under the Performance, Composition, and Interpretation components count, or only some of those official criteria?

Should other factors be considered even if not mentioned at all in the judging criteria?

Can we agree on which criteria are most important, or is it expected and acceptable that we each have different opinions about what are the most important aspects of artistry?

Do we have different opinions about what we call "Artistic" and what we think should earn higher PCS?

 

[hanyuufan5]

Look, I've been watching figure skating for over 30 years. Things have changed, yes, but there's still plenty of artistry. Some of it is a different kind of artistry than past eras. And not all skaters from past eras had strong artistry. Watch some past skaters below the top 10 and you might be surprised.

I don't think the problem is that there's a decline in artistry but that it isn't being scored fairly. PCS is tied too heavily to the technical score. I wish it were possible for a skater to, say, earn 10's in performance with mostly or all double jumps if they really did perform that well.

Now, strong Lutz edges are another story...

 

[DSQ]

I think it would be helpful to talk about how we define "artistry."

Does everything currently listed under the Performance, Composition, and Interpretation components count, or only some of those official criteria?

Should other factors be considered even if not mentioned at all in the judging criteria?

Can we agree on which criteria are most important, or is it expected and acceptable that we each have different opinions about what are the most important aspects of artistry?

Do we have different opinions about what we call "Artistic" and what we think should earn higher PCS?

Agreed, different strokes and all that. Never have I been more conscious of this fact than when I was at a Samuel Beckett play. I thought it was awful but many many would disagree.

A more relevant example would be Alexander Samarin’s FS. I really like what what he tried to do despite, admittedly, giving up a lot to get those jumps. To me it’s moody but vulnerable and he captures the build and release of the music perfectly.

I have been made aware I might be in the minority in my opinion. xD

 

[luckyu2]

Artistry is subjective and tied to personnel feelings. I enjoyed all the skates from top ladies at 4CC this morning and did not feel anyone lacked artistry. The only thing that jeopardizes my viewing experience is too many falls. I am not opposed to giving more harsh deduction on failed jumps so skaters only include jumps that they can land consistently in their programs.

 

[Edwin]

Since 3A and 4FLST jumps are the exclusive domain of only a handful of skaters, there should be more than enough artistry left in those thousands of other skaters to please you and others?

If the skater and her federation aren't even thinking of ultra-si, they should concentrate on artistry?

Being artistic does require some innate quality, some dancers, gymnasts, skaters are just graceful, and perhaps even artistic, by nature?

Does it require in-house choreographers, or does rent-by-the-hour choreography services suffice?

Only those programs with unlimited ice time and resources can invest both in skills and artistry. I didn't find any of the 12-15 year olds that just competed in Russian Junior Nationals unartistic.
But I suppose this discussion is more about previous older vs today's younger skaters. Which of course begs the question of how to evaluate and qualify the artistry of Valiyeva, Usachova?

 

[ladyjane]

When I see Jason Brown skating to Schindler's List, I don't think there is a decline in artistry. Just that artistry should be rewarded more highly. And, of course, but that's just my personal view on what should be called artistic...longer Ina Bauers, spirals and such. Although a skater like Torgashev manages really well in being very artistic, even with falls (yes, I'm thinking of his FS at US Nationals which also was something else).

 

[Mathman]

I think Kim had a really good understanding of what her body moving in space looked like to an external eye. Look at her arms raised in a circle above her head during her layback spin here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgXKJvTVW9g at 3:40.[/I]

This is an interesting example of how a truly artistic skater can leave a legacy. This position became the classical iconic layback position because of Peggy Fleming in 1968.

https://images.fineartamerica.com/i...inter-olympics-grenoble-fr-thomas-pollart.jpg

They even made a Christmas tree ornament out of it,

https://www.hookedonhallmark.com/th...ts/keepsakes/2001/qxi6845.jpg&maxx=300&maxy=0

Janet Lynn was another from that era who employed the classic circular arms position to great effect. (I think it is called the high fifth arm position in ballet.)

The interesting thing about Yuna Kim was that her most artistic and soul-satisfying moves were her jumps. Technique to die for -- just beautiful. In contrast, the moves that are more generally considered "artistic" (laybacks and spirals) were not Kim's strongest elements.

 

[Mawwerg]

To be frank for me laybacks and spirals are as artistic as Lutzes and sit spins and other technical elements. Although I believe every technical element can be mastered to such level when it is considered as art.

 

[Mathman]

Since 3A and 4FLST jumps are the exclusive domain of only a handful of skaters, there should be more than enough artistry left ...

Nothing is more artistic than a well-executed triple Axel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDJcZrKiCk0

Or a quad Lutz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGPhymzFSfo

Or for that matter, a double Axel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q&t=1m48s

Or a bunch of double and triple jumps that nake the program pop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djadlQLK_ow

 

[Silvia451]

This is so subjective, but for me the emotion is very important, if the skater puts a lot of passion in the performance, I find it artistically even if positions and things like this are not perfect.
So much passion here, not flawless moves.
It matters to me to see that the skater enjoys the program, the music (I have to mention Yuzuru singing POTO and Scott singing to Tessa during the Olympic Moulin rouge).
It doesn't matter if it's a delicate swan-like program, a powerful warrior-like program, a rock one, a jazzy one, as long as the skater makes it his/her own thing. The facial expressions help a lot. Seriously, look at that smile...

I think some skaters are more talented at transmitting emotion than others, but in time "artistry" can improve for everyone, with suitable music and choreography.


edit: I don't think there is less artistry now than in the past. Artistry is safe, we have Kostornaia

 

[Pantsu]

I think we have more of everything now, both artistry and tech
And personally i see no reason to discuss artistry since it is extremely subjective
Just looking at people who see Kostornaya as a divine creature, and on the other hand they see Trusova as a broken wooden doll who should get at best 5s in PCS

 

[Mathman]

So much passion here, not flawless moves.

But he had to go all in with the over-the-top passion to keep up with the overwhelming music. :yes:

 

[el henry]

Artistic then: Toller Cranston.
(I’ll give a shoutout to John Curry)

Artistic now: Jason Brown. And my boy Andrew T.

That’s it, that’s the post

Seriously, we’ve always had artistry and we’ve always had “tech”. Where is the line drawn in a program, I do not know. I do know that the skaters I remember are not the ones who first landed a mega gazillion revolutions jump, but the ones who landed jumps (or maybe didn’t even land them) and touched hearts. All in one program

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

As far as Mens


Past: Toller, Robin Cousins, Kurt Browing, Paul Wylie, Curry.

More recent past: Jeremy Abbott, Patrick Chan, Jeffrey Buttle, Stephane Lambiel, Alexander Johnson, Joshua Farris

Now: Jason Brown, Nathan Chen (in his own way), Kevin Aymoz, Daisuke Takahashi, Jordan Moeller, Torgashev, Sadovsky, Nguyen, Toman (getting there: Dinh Tran, Rabbitt, Markell).

 

[skylark]

For me, it's all about emotion and if the skater communicates that emotion to audience members, for their enjoyment and to lift the everyday into something extraordinary.

There can be as much emotion in a quad toe-triple toe combination as in what a skater does "on the ice." Nathan Chen communicates such joy, passion for skating, and freedom, the feeling of flight. Ashley Wagner didn't have perfect technique, but every cell of her body could ooze drama, passion, (Moulin Rouge), or sass (Hip Hip Chin Chin). Michelle Kwan could share the feeling of flight with a perfectly placed falling leaf jump or with her fingertips, during a pause in the music. Mariah Bell somehow gives a feeling of yearning and fulfillment with her skating and her smile. Ashley Cain-Gribble and Timothy LeDuc show artistry with their unison and their mutual commitment to every detail and nuance of choreography. Madison Hubbell and Zachary Donohue thrill with their power and speed, and with their ice presence that fills an arena.

I could go on and on, but it's subjective with every audience member and every fan. Whoever gives you those feelings of being on the ice and experiencing an emotion with them, that's an artistic skater to you. It's not about spins and steps, edges or jumps. It's more like: Do those spins, steps, edges and jumps serve the real purpose of a performance: bringing an experience of emotion, beauty, musical nuance, to the audience?

 

[PyeongChang2018]

Wow! Okay, I think this thread is really bringing up some interesting ideas and whatnot.

I think we have more of everything now, both artistry and tech
And personally i see no reason to discuss artistry since it is extremely subjective
Just looking at people who see Kostornaya as a divine creature, and on the other hand they see Trusova as a broken wooden doll who should get at best 5s in PCS

It is so subjective, and yet wouldn't you agree that the majority of people find Kim Yuna's Send in the Clowns extremely beautiful? In fact, I dare say there might be no one on earth who does not find it beautiful, if they look deep in their hearts and really examine the artistry. Thus, I do think there's something to learn from artists like Kim. We can look at the things she does to inform us about what exactly draws people in, thus making beauty a little more objective so to speak.

Let's take Arakawa's Ina Bauer here at 3:20. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=jJ9EaMEk74g. I get a sense that Arakawa has an image in her mind. I think she truly sees something on the ceiling of the rink. Maybe she's imagining the sun? Before beginning the Ina Bauer, she has a moment of looking upwards as if to prep the image in her mind maybe? This is a technique--imaging--that ballerinas use and actors use, and I think it is a key thing that a true artist does.

My all-time favorite free skate/long program is Witt's Carmen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7Ago3RRV6I. Throughout the skate, Witt actively seduces the audience, she tempts the audience, et cetera... she's not playing at the idea of a character. She simply is the character. A little acting lesson...acting isn't about emotion; it's about doing actions. As an actor, you can play the action of comforting a loved one. You cannot play "sadness," because sadness is not a thing you do. It's a thing you experience, one that often gets in the way of your objective. Witt's Carmen, a prostitute, seems intent on seducing the audience because that's how she gets paid and thus survives. There's a real need behind her performance.

It's hard to articulate what I want this thread to be, but I honestly feel like our conversation about artistry can be taken to another level of intellect. If we really put aside personal biases and whatnot, we can somewhat objectively examine what exactly the skaters are doing that evokes a response from the audience. I truly believe Arakawa's Ina Bauer is in part as beautiful as it is--in addition to her insane flexibility--because the thing she's doing is imaging a need or reason to tip back like that...maybe basking in the sunlight is the idea; it's some sort of glorious reverie that I think she's experiencing in that moment as an artist.

 

[gkelly]

It is so subjective, and yet wouldn't you agree that the majority of people find Kim Yuna's Send in the Clowns extremely beautiful? In fact, I dare say there might be no one on earth who does not find it beautiful, if they look deep in their hearts and really examine the artistry.

This really offends me!

I think we can point to examples of performances that we find artistic and discuss what we find artistic about them. Beauty often being a primary consideration.

I think we can compare notes and see whether there are certain performances that every participant in the discussion, or everyone we have discussed it with in other contexts, agrees is beautiful and artistic.

(And other times we will find that other people are left cold by the performances we love most, and that's OK too.)

But I think it is presumptuous for one person to say "Everyone I know thinks this performance is beautiful. In fact, every human being in the world will find this performance beautiful if they only look in their heart."

There may be various reasons why some viewers are less impressed by a given performance than you and your friends are. They might be cultural reasons, they might be personal reasons, they might be different aesthetic standards. To imply that their opinion is wrong or based on insufficient consultation with their inner heart is pretty obnoxious.

Tell us what you like and why. Tell us what people you know who don't post here may have said to us. But please don't tell the rest of us what we're supposed to think or feel.

 

[PyeongChang2018]

This really offends me!

I think we can point to examples of performances that we find artistic and discuss what we find artistic about them. Beauty often being a primary consideration.

I think we can compare notes and see whether there are certain performances that every participant in the discussion, or everyone we have discussed it with in other contexts, agrees is beautiful and artistic.

(And other times we will find that other people are left cold by the performances we love most, and that's OK too.)

But I think it is presumptuous for one person to say "Everyone I know thinks this performance is beautiful. In fact, every human being in the world will find this performance beautiful if they only look in their heart."

There may be various reasons why some viewers are less impressed by a given performance than you and your friends are. They might be cultural reasons, they might be personal reasons, they might be different aesthetic standards. To imply that their opinion is wrong or based on insufficient consultation with their inner heart is pretty obnoxious.

Tell us what you like and why. Tell us what people you know who don't post here may have said to us. But please don't tell the rest of us what we're supposed to think or feel.

Whoa you completely misread my post. I'm not saying "everyone would find this beautiful." You made that up. I simply said everyone "might." The key word was "might." Really take in my words for a moment. If someone genuinely does not find Kim's performance beautiful, then I totally respect that! My point, though, is that everyone might genuinely believe her performance is beautiful. Every single person! I really believe this could be a possibility! And what a magical idea that is!

This is meant to be a conversation to see what things we find beautiful. To see what are the cultural, personal, and any other conditioned preferences that determine what we as individuals find beautiful. That is the entire point of this thread, really! To put really intelligent effort into making this thing called artistry a little less subjective and to try to really break it down as best as we can.

I hope you reread my post and see that I never once told anyone what they're supposed to feel.

 

[gkelly]

Let's avoid speculating about what everybody might believe and stick to sharing what we each believe, and maybe noting points of agreement if we get enough input to make the comparisons.

We can post examples of programs that we find most beautiful, or most artistic, or most emotionally moving, or most deserving of top PCS. Those are not necessarily all the same thing.

I do think it's useful for someone to post a performance they especially admire and point out all the things that admire about it. Then others may join in with other favorite details. And someone else might nitpick the things they don't like about that performance and that detract from its effect, for them.

And we each bring our own beliefs and preferences and predispositions to the experience of watching skating. We're not all going to agree on "That was OK" or "That was nice" vs. "That was really special." And that's OK.

When a lot of people agree that a given performance was special, that tells us something positive about the quality of the performance. But the agreement is never going to be unanimous.