Suzanne Farrell, the esteemed former principal dancer of New York City Ballet, has undertaken the reconstruction of George Balanchine’s seldom-performed ballet “Pithoprakta,” reviving the work for the company’s 2024 season. Created in 1968 and set to the avant-garde score by composer Iannis Xenakis, “Pithoprakta” — meaning “action by probabilities” — is noted for its unconventional, modernist style, distinct from Balanchine’s more traditional repertoire.
The ballet, originally choreographed for 14 dancers including Farrell herself and Arthur Mitchell as the lead couple, combines an eerie, tense atmosphere with movements that evoke both a sense of gravity and volatility. Farrell described “Pithoprakta” as a unique piece that diverged sharply from Balanchine’s preceding works, such as the 1967 classic “Jewels.” The ballet’s choreography features unusual physicalities; dancers often roll or lie on the floor, and the lead couple maintain a deliberate distance, their interactions marked by a tension that leaves space between their hands.
Xenakis’s complex musical composition, consisting of 46 parts and featuring strings, trombones, xylophone, and wood block, contributes to the ballet’s otherworldly aura. Balanchine first encountered Xenakis’s innovative sound and visual installation at Expo 67 in Montreal, which influenced the development of “Pithoprakta.” Farrell noted that the era’s fascination with space exploration and the unknown may have shaped the ballet’s themes.
The ballet has not been performed by New York City Ballet since 1969 and was largely forgotten until Farrell restaged it in 2007 with her own company as part of the Balanchine Preservation Initiative at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Farrell relied heavily on archival film, photographs, and her recollections to reconstruct the choreography, particularly because the original male lead’s movements were undocumented. This necessitated creating new choreography for the male principal while maintaining some original patterns where possible.
Farrell emphasizes that “Pithoprakta” demands a grounded, urgent approach to movement that differs from classical ballet conventions. She instructed current dancers, including principal Mira Nadon and soloist Unity Phelan, to embody the ballet’s distinctive physicality without imposing additional emotional layers, framing the work as almost a scientific phenomenon—motion akin to molecules in space. Both dancers described the ballet as evoking an alien, extraterrestrial quality, representing a blend of constraint and freedom, with undertones of anxiety and the human condition.
The ballet’s conclusion is marked by the female lead executing small, sharp pointe steps as she reels and eventually collapses in a gesture open to interpretation. Farrell refrained from ascribing explicit meaning to the ending, noting that the essence of the ballet lies in its choreography, which Balanchine viewed as the primary medium of expression.
Although Farrell can no longer perform the demanding choreography herself, her deep connection to the work continues through her coaching. She stresses the importance of the ballet’s sense of danger and energy, reflecting the inherent risks that inspired the original choreography in an era captivated by space exploration.
“Pithoprakta” stands out in Balanchine’s oeuvre for its experimental nature and its stark departure from traditional ballet vocabulary, offering contemporary audiences a glimpse into the choreographer’s exploration of movement, music, and space more than five decades ago.