Moscow vs. St. Petersburg: School, Myth, or Artistic Identity?
Reflections on Kokoreva, Smirnova, Koshkaryova, Krysanova, and Tereshkina
For more than a century, ballet criticism in Russia has revolved around one enduring artistic duality: Moscow versus St. Petersburg. The debate extends far beyond geography. It concerns aesthetics, theatrical philosophy, pedagogy, musicality, and even the psychological nature of performance itself. To many ballet lovers, the contrast appears immediately recognizable. The Bolshoi tradition is often associated with expansiveness, theatrical fire, attack, emotional projection, and physical amplitude. St. Petersburg, particularly through the Vaganova Academy and the Mariinsky Theatre, has historically been associated with refinement, purity of line, aristocratic restraint, lyrical continuity, and architectural precision.
But how real are these distinctions today? Are they still visible on stage? Or have they become romantic myths repeated by critics and audiences nostalgic for older eras of ballet history?
The recent Bolshoi performances of Don Quixote offered a fascinating opportunity to revisit these questions through three young ballerinas: Elizaveta Kokoreva, Anastasia Smirnova, and Maria Koshkaryova. Watching them dance the same role over consecutive evenings revealed something extraordinary: not merely three different interpretations of Kitri, but three distinct relationships to ballet tradition itself.
The Historical Origins of the Divide
The roots of the Moscow–St. Petersburg distinction are deeply historical.
St. Petersburg, as the imperial capital of the Romanov dynasty, cultivated ballet as a court art. The Mariinsky tradition inherited the values of imperial classicism: harmony, elegance, noble restraint, and technical purity. Even today, dancers formed through the Vaganova Academy often display extraordinary clarity of épaulement, seamless transitions, elongated academic lines, and a profound sensitivity to musical phrasing.
Moscow developed differently. The Bolshoi Theatre evolved not as an imperial salon, but as a grand public theatre designed for emotional impact and dramatic scale. The Moscow school consequently emphasized projection, amplitude, attack, physical power, and theatrical immediacy. Bolshoi dancers historically danced “outward,” filling vast theatrical spaces with energy and personality.
This distinction became especially visible in Soviet ballet criticism throughout the twentieth century. Critics frequently contrasted the “apollonian” refinement of Leningrad (St. Petersburg) with the “dionysian” passion of Moscow.
Of course, such categories can become oversimplifications. Yet traces of these traditions undeniably survive.
Why Kitri Reveals Everything
There is perhaps no better role than Kitri to expose these stylistic nuances.
Technically, the choreography remains largely identical. The steps themselves do not fundamentally change between the Bolshoi and the Mariinsky. Fouettés remain fouettés; grand jetés remain grand jetés. But ballet style is never merely about steps. It lies in attack, timing, accentuation, épaulement, musical elasticity, theatrical projection, and emotional temperature.
A Mariinsky Kitri often emphasizes crystalline precision, buoyancy, musical sophistication, and aristocratic control beneath the Spanish character. The role can appear lighter, more refined, almost jewel-like.
At the Bolshoi, Kitri frequently becomes larger than life — more impulsive, more dangerous, more explosive. The phrasing attacks the music differently. The use of the upper body becomes broader. The dancer often projects outward with an immediacy that feels almost volcanic.
This does not mean one interpretation is superior to the other. They simply emerge from different theatrical philosophies.
Elizaveta Kokoreva: Pure Moscow
Among the younger generation, Elizaveta Kokoreva may currently represent one of the clearest continuations of the Bolshoi aesthetic tradition.
Her dancing possesses extraordinary amplitude and attack. She does not merely execute choreography; she projects it outward with almost overwhelming theatrical force. Her Kitri burns with impulsive vitality. Even her preparation for turns carries dramatic intention. Her jumps travel expansively across space, and her phrasing often pushes slightly ahead of the music in a way that creates thrilling momentum.
Most importantly, Kokoreva dances with emotional generosity. This quality has always been central to the Bolshoi identity. The audience feels included in the performance. Nothing is withheld.
In this sense, Kokoreva recalls the great Moscow lineage associated with dancers such as Ekaterina Krysanova — another ballerina whose dancing radiates brilliance, theatrical instinct, speed, attack, and fearless stage projection.
Krysanova herself became one of the defining symbols of modern Bolshoi style precisely because she fused supreme academic technique with irrepressible theatrical energy. Watching Kokoreva today, one senses that same inheritance continuing into a younger generation.
Viktoria Tereshkina: The Mariinsky Ideal
If Krysanova represents the blazing extroversion of Moscow, Viktoria Tereshkina represents the enduring majesty of the St. Petersburg ideal.
Tereshkina’s greatness lies not in overt theatricality, but in absolute control. Her dancing possesses extraordinary structural perfection. Every line appears inevitable. Every movement unfolds with sculptural inevitability and musical intelligence. Even in technically difficult passages, nothing appears forced or aggressive.
Her Kitri differs profoundly from a Bolshoi interpretation. Rather than explosive theatrical attack, Tereshkina often emphasizes clarity, brilliance, serenity within virtuosity, and supreme academic polish. The result feels imperial rather than volcanic.
This distinction illustrates something fundamental: style in ballet is not only technical training. It is also a philosophy of presence.
Anastasia Smirnova: Between Traditions
Anastasia Smirnova presents a particularly fascinating case because her artistic identity seems suspended between traditions.
Her academic formation clearly reveals the influence of St. Petersburg aesthetics. One notices it immediately in the purity of her lines, the refinement of her upper body, the cleanliness of transitions, and the elegance of her placement. There is a softness and continuity to her phrasing deeply associated with Vaganova training.
Yet now, dancing within the Bolshoi environment, another transformation seems to be occurring.
Gradually, Smirnova appears to be acquiring greater theatrical breadth and projection. The Bolshoi stage itself demands this evolution. Dancers entering the company often absorb elements of Moscow style over time — broader phrasing, stronger projection, more expansive dramatic attack.
Importantly, however, Smirnova does not lose her northern refinement. Instead, she creates a synthesis. Her Kitri retains aristocratic polish while developing greater warmth and theatrical immediacy.
This evolution demonstrates that ballet schools are not prisons. Artistic identities remain fluid.
Maria Koshkaryova: The Most Interesting Paradox
Maria Koshkaryova may represent the most intellectually fascinating example of all.
Technically and educationally, she belongs to the Vaganova tradition. Yet emotionally and theatrically, she often feels astonishingly close to Moscow aesthetics.
Her dancing combines elongated St. Petersburg line with remarkable Bolshoi-style expansiveness. Unlike the cooler reserve often associated with Mariinsky classicism, Koshkaryova projects outward with warmth, openness, and emotional immediacy.
This creates a remarkable hybrid quality. Watching her, one realizes how artificial rigid stylistic categories can become.
Perhaps Koshkaryova represents the future of Russian ballet itself: dancers formed through multiple influences rather than singular traditions.
Are Schools Destiny?
This ultimately leads to the central question: are ballet schools lifelong artistic identities, or merely technical foundations?
Historically, the answer may once have leaned toward permanence. Soviet ballet systems were highly centralized, and dancers often remained within one institutional culture for life.
Today, however, globalization, guest coaching, international competitions, social media exposure, and stylistic exchange have transformed ballet culture entirely.
Young dancers absorb influences constantly. A Vaganova graduate dancing at the Bolshoi may gradually acquire Moscow attack. A Bolshoi dancer coached by former Mariinsky artists may refine musical phrasing and line. Artistic personalities evolve continuously.
And yet, traces of early formation almost always remain visible. The body remembers its first language.
One sees this clearly in the contrast between Kokoreva and Smirnova. Even while both evolve within the same company, their instincts remain fundamentally different. Kokoreva attacks movement from the center outward; Smirnova shapes movement through line and musical continuity.
Neither approach is more authentic. Both reveal different truths about ballet.
Beyond Geography
Perhaps the greatest mistake is to reduce dancers entirely to schools.
At the highest level, truly exceptional ballerinas transcend institutional categories. Tereshkina is not merely “Mariinsky.” Krysanova is not merely “Bolshoi.” Their greatness lies precisely in how they transformed inherited traditions into profoundly personal artistic languages.
The same may eventually become true for Kokoreva, Smirnova, and Koshkaryova.
What audiences witnessed during those extraordinary performances of Don Quixote was not simply the continuation of two rival schools. It was the living evolution of ballet itself — tradition being preserved, questioned, blended, and reinvented in real time.
And perhaps that is the real beauty of ballet: the choreography may remain unchanged for generations, yet every great artist reveals a completely different soul hidden within the same steps.
Are Schools Destiny? The Case of Raymonda
Historically, the answer may once have been absolute: design dictated destiny. A dancer’s stylistic allegiance was permanently forged by the architecture of their training. Today, however, while modern globalization has softened the rigid borders of classicism, certain canonical ballets remain structural fortresses of regional identity. There is perhaps no greater test of this cultural topography than Marius Petipa’s Raymonda.
To witness Raymonda at the Mariinsky is an exercise in contemplating a living museum of imperial classicism. Conversely, experiencing it at the Bolshoi is to submerge oneself in a symphonic drama of heightened theatricality. This divergence is crystallized with absolute clarity when contrasting two contemporary icons: the Mariinsky’s Oxana Skorik and the Bolshoi’s Anna Nikulina.
Oxana Skorik: The Aristocratic IdealIn the hallowed spaces of St. Petersburg, Oxana Skorik embodies the Apollonian ethos of the Vaganova tradition. Her Raymonda is defined by a crystalline, almost melancholy restraint. Skorik does not merely execute lines; she stretches them into infinity, exhibiting a profound geometric purity where every épaulement feels predestined.In the iconic Hungarian Variation of Act III—where the claps of the hands introduce a stylized, courtly exoticism—Skorik eschews overt passion in favor of architectural precision and musical sophistication. Her performance feels jewel-like, etheal, and unreachable. She plays a medieval countess untouched by the mundane world, a vision of porcelain perfection that addresses the audience through the lens of supreme aristocratic control.
Anna Nikulina: The Volcanic MajestyStep onto the vast stage of Moscow’s Bolshoi Theatre, and Anna Nikulina offers an interpretation that belongs to an entirely different emotional ecosystem. Under the lingering dramatic lineage of Yuri Grigorovich, Nikulina’s Raymonda is not an unreachable portrait, but a woman of flesh, blood, and profound internal conflict.Nikulina commands the space with the characteristic Bolshoi amplitude. Her movement is grounded, expansive, and texturized by an irrepressible dramatic weight. When she approaches the same third-act variation, the syncopated claps are delivered with a rhythmic attack and an unapologetic pride that cuts through the auditorium. Where Skorik offers symmetry, Nikulina offers presence; where St. Petersburg whispers of historical lineage, Moscow roars with immediate, theatrical vulnerability.
The Fluidity of Modern Classical IdentityUltimately, the juxtaposition between Skorik and Nikulina proves that while technique has become universal, regional philosophy remains sovereign. Schools are not prisons, but they are undeniably the languages through which artists speak. Through these two distinct ballerinas, Raymonda ceases to be a static late-nineteenth-century relic. Instead, it becomes a dynamic dialogue between the sacred architectural stillness of the North and the volcanic, expressive fire of the South.
he Architecture of the Sacred: La Bayadère at the Bolshoi and the Mariinsky
If Raymonda serves as a test of courtly aristocracy, Marius Petipa’s La Bayadère represents something more metaphysical: it is the supreme barometer of a company’s collective soul and ritualistic precision. The ballet exists in a delicate balance between the melodramatic passion of the exoticized East and the abstract, sacred geometry of the Kingdom of the Shades. When this monumental work is staged, the structural and philosophical chasm between Moscow and St. Petersburg reveals itself not just in the solos, but in the very breath of the corps de ballet.
The Mariinsky: The Hypnotic Symphony of the NorthAt the Mariinsky Theatre, La Bayadère—and specifically the Kingdom of the Shades—is approached as a sacred architectural ritual. The descent of the thirty-two shades down the ramp is executed with an almost terrifying uniformity of line, where individual identity is willingly surrendered to the collective whole. The St. Petersburg aesthetic treats this act as a living canvas of symphonic minimalism. The port de bras is soft, fluid, and suspended, mimicking the ethereal quality of opium-induced spirits.
This ideal of pure, unblemished classicism is perfectly captured by the Mariinsky’s Eleonora Sevenard. Her Nikiya does not fight her tragic destiny; she transcends it. Sevenard’s dancing possesses that trademark Vaganova fluidity, where the transition between steps feels completely seamless. In her famous scarf duet or her mournful monologue in Act II, her grief is internalized, poetic, and pristine. It is a masterclass in tragic restraint—a performance that draws its power from the strict adherence to academic symmetry and architectural stillness.
The Bolshoi: The Volcanic Drama of the SouthCross over to the Bolshoi Theatre, and La Bayadère transforms from an opium dream into an immediate, high-stakes human tragedy. The Moscow tradition refuses to let the choreography remain entirely abstract; instead, it injects the choreography with visceral weight and theatrical heat. The Bolshoi’s Shades descend with a heightened sense of dramatic breath, prioritizing physical amplitude and a commanding stage presence that fills the vast auditorium with palpable energy.
This mammalian, expressive force is epitomized by the Bolshoi's Alena Kovaleva. Standing as a statuesque and commanding presence, Kovaleva’s Nikiya is a creature of fierce devotion and shattering betrayal. Her movements are characterized by an explosive expansiveness. When she dances in the temple, her back bends with an elastic, dramatic desperation that commands the audience's absolute attention. Where the Mariinsky whispers of cosmic order, Kovaleva and the Bolshoi tradition roar with earthly passion, turning the choreography into an emotionally charged narrative of love, jealousy, and divine retribution.Conclusion: The Sacred and the ProfaneUltimately, La Bayadère exposes the eternal duality of Russian ballet at its most profound level.
The Mariinsky Theatre looks inward, seeking the eternal, geometric perfection of a spiritual realm. The Bolshoi Theatre projects outward, capturing the fiery, immediate truths of human emotion. Through these differing lenses, Petipa's masterpiece remains a breathtaking double portrait: the North offering the serene architecture of the spirit, and the South offering the magnificent, volcanic theater of the human heart.
