In the first article, “100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ Incited a Riot in a Paris Theater”, the author believes that the riot began after the first few notes of the song. It’s stated that a high pitched bassoon caused the audience to start laughing. It’s stated that the tension started increasing and by the time the dancers reached the stage. The dancers started doing violent and bizzare dance moves. The audience started doing catcalls and it became so loud that Vaslav Nijinsky, the choreographer, started yelling commands from backstage. Eventually two factions formed in the audience, which started a fight in the crowd. The orchestra became under siege by the audience. It’s unclear if the police were ever called, but 40 people were ejected from the building. It was described by Henri Quittard as “puerile barbarity”. It is believed that the “near-riot” that took place may have been overly exaggerated, and was really just a disagreement between people who liked the old fashioned way of ballet and those who wanted something new.

The next article, “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring Incite a Riot at its Premiere?”, the author gives us some background into the ballet, stating it as a ritual sacrifice in prehistoric Russia. It was expected to be a major cultural event. It had many big names attached to it, besides Stravinsky, there was also, The Ballet Russes, a famous dance group, and Vaslav Nijinsky, a famous and shocking dance choreographer. The show itself was like nothing the audience had ever seen before. Ugly costumes, dark music, and heavy choreography shocked the audience. The audience booed them, however some in the crowd defended them and hurled insults at the other half of the crowd. It became so loud that no one, including the dancers, could hear the music. The fighting became so bad that the people resorted to physical violence.

The truth however, may not be so exciting. As rumors are, they tend to be overexaggerated with time and this leads to myths to surround them. The truth of the matter may be that it was more of a political argument that spurred between the two groups. Also, the accounts of what happened that night do not account for any physical fights, despite all the verbal insults that were shouted by the aristocrats. It has also been noted that the dancers took 5 curtain calls, and Nijinsky continued with another ballet, which would not have been possible if a riot broke out.

I really liked the music in the ballet. The dancing was good too, and it reminded me of The Exorcist, as well as the costume. If I was in the audience in 1913, I would have really liked it because of how different is was to everything else at the time.

In “100 years Ago Today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris Theater”, our author talks about the infamous riot that took place in 1913 in a theater during a ballet composed by Igor Stvinsky. The author says how researchers are not sure what exactly was behind it, like social warfare or a contemporary movement. Toward the middle of the ballet, the author states how people in the audience were catcalling so loud, that the ballets couldn’t hear the orchestra. Therefore, the composer exchanged words with those who were catcalling from the stage and that sparked an argument. Soon after, about 40 people were escorted out, which caused somewhat of a brutal scene. After all of that, the ballet continued to the end.

However, according to “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?”, there is a ton of doubt and speculation about the riot, especially when they reveal that the riot never happened. The article states how there was never a riot, but just an exchange of words over aristocrats and critics because the critics did not admire how the aristocrats viewed the derogatory performance about racism. As stated, “The disrespectful behavior of the aristocrats appalled the critics, musicians, and music lovers, so they responded by complaining and insulting the aristocrats”. The text explains how the verbal arguments went down, but no fight let alone a riot. The text also states, “Despite these verbal assaults, the earliest accounts of that night do not mention any physical fights, much less a riot. Levitz cites several sources from the immediate aftermath of the premiere that compared the atmosphere to that of a contentious debate in Parliament or a criminal court trial—confrontational and impassioned, but not physically violent”. This goes to show that the feeling of suspense in the theater was compared to those of a courtroom. It was all just a verbal argumentation that went down, also, another play went on to play after that which the author says “ …the evening’s entertainment continued with another ballet, Carl Maria von Weber’s Le Spectre de la rose, also choreographed by Nijinsky. That wouldn’t seem possible if the altercation was as destructive as it’s been construed”. As you can see, the author explains how another ballet would not have happened if 40 people were ejected plus a riot. 

When I first heard this ballet for myself, I thought it was very harsh to the ear with a very different style of choreography. I also quickly realized why everyone says this piece goes against all elements of music. However, I still believe this could be passed on as music for it has elements of instruments and it can be danced to. Is it the most pleasant form of music however? I don’t think so. Finally, if I was in that audience i would have most likely been slightly irritated by the music, but I would have sat there and kept my mouth shut, waiting for the next performance.

In the article, “100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris theater”; written by Amar Toor, goes on to illustrate how The Rite of Spring would be known as a memorable, crucial but brutal ballet performance. This performance not only opened individuals’ eyes to its modernism but it would shed away from the traditional works of orchestral ballet that others were fond of. Though this would go on to leave an incredible impression on that of “jazz, minimalism, and other contemporary movements”. When trying to clarify what really took place on the date of May 29, 1913  it is still an ongoing debate till today but one thing is for sure when it comes to the Stravinsky opening it did indeed end in madness. An uproar of laughter led from the audience as the ballets would begin to play with the high pitches of the bassoon. As the instrument would gradually get louder so would the tension of other individuals within the Theater. As the dancers came in dressed within their “whimsical costumes” the performers went on to dance odd and harsh movements. Due to the excessive shouts and calls to the stage it led to the commands being too low for the performers to hear their ques as a result it would lead to Nijinsky having to shout them backstage for all. However, within the crowd a disagreement had broken out between two parties within the audience, thus  leading to having vegetables and various things being thrown at the stage. Due to how disturbing the dance has been categorized as many feel as though this was all part of a public stunt. As stated many feel as though these stories containing the “neat riot” have become overly exaggerated to what had really occurred that day. 

In the article, “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?”; written by  Linda Shaver-Gleason, Depicts what really took place of the day of May 29, 1913 at héâtre des Champs-Élysées in Paris.As expected this ballet was suppose to depict the “ ritual sacrifice in prehistoric Russia”. What was supposed to be considered a cultural event due to the talented individuals taking place within this event. Unfortunately, nothing was what the audience expected from this ballet as the “ the costumes were ugly, the choreography heavy, and the music harsh”. When it came to the fact of supporting this ballet there were many who were shocked but for a plausible reason and others who just booed this performance. Although this didn’t stop others from trying to defend their involvement in ballet. This led to many insults being yelled as it soon led to the performers being unable to hear the music. Due to the continuation of this argument it would have led to a fight that broke out. However, in reality the riot never actually happened. The event that occurred during the premiere of The Rite was the harsh sounds from the ballet did take place but Stavinsky Felt as though the location of the audience really affected each of them differently especially when it came to those on the balcony that gave it an over all exaggerated effect. Beside the “verbal assaults” that did take place none happened where it was physical. After the premiere many individuals were intrigued but mainly confused by how unusual the music sounded. As one does they did receive backlash where they had to go respond back in interviews explaining the great amount of hard work that went into this production. The Myth had originated from the 1915 quote, “eyewitness Carl van Vechten, who claimed that a man sitting behind him “beat rhythmically on the top of my head with his fists.” Many believe the myth persists because it no longer gives classical music a perspective that it is boring but people actually started a riot over this type of particular music. 

When it came to watching this ballet for the first time I can say I was greatly intrigued but shocked at the exact time as it was not what I expected to see from the sight of what they were wearing. But nonetheless I found it very interesting on how the performers moved along with the harsh music.  If I was in the audience in 1913, I feel I would be modified in the beginning if it was something I never saw before. I feel as though with both the music and dancing  it would draw my attention to which I would not want to look away. I would mainly try to figure out what is happening.

In the article, “100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris theater,” the author, Amar Toor, writes about the “riot” that happened during the first public performance of “The Rite of Spring” on May 29th, 1913 in Paris. Toor writes of how this incident was mostly eye witness news, and as people debate whether it was the music or the dance, it’s still a mystery of what exactly started the riot. The audience booed at the performance and threw vegetables onto the stage until it gotten to a point where the dancers couldn’t hear the orchestra anymore. Overall, both Stravinsky and Nijinsky, the composer and choreographer, had made a significant impact on the audience on the day of the first performance.

The article, “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?” talks about what actually happened at the premiere. Tamara Levitz, a musicological researcher, pointed out that many firsthand accounts were from people in the balcony, and so the music was “… exceptionally resonant due to aspects of its architecture… the environment likely exaggerated the effect in the balcony, rendering the sound overwhelming.” Levitz concludes that this may have caused an “an unsettling sonic chain reaction.” The dance was based off of ritual sacrifice in what Stravinsky and his collaborators imagined prehistoric Russia to be, and was also inspired by dances in Siberia. Parts of the dance are seen as very racist today, but back then, the audience, mainly aristocrats, responded by laughing. This behavior from the aristocracts had, as the article states, “appalled the critics, musicians, and music lovers, so they responded by complaining and insulting the aristocrats,” and while most depicitons of this conflict have people shouting across the whole theater, Levitz comments, “In truth, only those sitting close to the people who uttered these insults probably heard them at all.”

When I first watched the video of the ballet, I felt disturbed looking at the movements while listening to the accompanied music from the orchestra. I also felt fear at some parts where the jerking and stomping set me off guard, and I could see how this was meant to be a “sacrificial” dance. If I was in the audience in 1913, I think I’ll be shocked and overwhelmed, because the performance was something I’ve never seen before, and the music would also probably be very loud and dramatic since it was performed in a large theater.

1.) The author believes that during the ballet premiere a riot broke out. He says that the reason behind the brawl was unclear. He has many theories of what could’ve started the brawl, one being that the audience did not like nor appreciate the modern twist to this ballet premiere and wanted the traditional one to remain the same. He also believes that the brawl could have started because of the audience. Some people in the audiences could have been liking the new ballet performance twist while some wanted the original.

2.)This author feels that during the ballet premiere the aristocrats were being extremely disrespectful which caused a chain reaction in the audience. He also feels that the music was too loud and full of rage and the premiere was more politics based. Some evidence he claimed of having was personal journals and records from people who attended the premiere.

3.)After watching this ballet piece, I feel that it is really packed with emotion and intense. I think it pushes the boundaries of ballet and is more of an intense version of it. If I was a part of the audience, I would be shocked at the intensity level, but I don’t think id react in a negative manner about the piece or overthink the meaning of it.

In ”100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris theater” by Amar Toor, he seems to agree and believe that a riot did indeed occur 100 years ago when the Rite of Spring premiered. He talks about how many of the Parisians in the crowd that watched the play started to throw vegetables on the stage and the crowd got so loud that even the dancers couldn’t hear the music. He does say that perhaps the story was exaggerated over time, but a riot did indeed occur after the release of the ballet. Toor talks about how the riot was between two factions in the crowd, one that liked “The pretty and tamed” and the other that liked “new exciting things”. He goes to explain that this was a riot between traditionalists vs modernity, and people that supported this novel form or ballets and the ones that didn’t.

In “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?” the author explains that the riot is must another classical music myth that far too many believe in. He sources Tamara Levitz, “Racism at The Rite” in The Rite of Spring at 100 (Indiana University Press, 2013), 146-78 and Ian Hewett, “The riot at the Rite: the premiere of The Rite of Spring” for the British Library. The author explains that much of the ”riot” are sourced from people that had a limited understanding of the ballet and from people that wanted to lash out because they didn’t support the new type of ballet. Furthermore that day there was another play at the theater that happened right after the release of ” The Rite Of Spring”, which wouldn’t be possible if the crowd had became violet and throw vegetables on to the stage. The author explains that the riot was a narrative that was exaggerated and carried on from article to article about the ballet. it was simply a over the top story about a play that many were confused about. In addition the story became popular because it was essentially a huge game of telephone. People that heard the story wanted to believe it because it was exciting, a ballet that caused a riot in one of the largest booming metropolises during this time period.

Personally I think i would have enjoyed it quite a lot. I loge horror modern horror and thriller movies, snd “The Rite of Spring” was essentially the horror film of ballets during this time. The acting and dancing of the dancers would have probably mesmerized me. The music also fit perfect with the dancing, and fit the scenario perfectly. So yes i probably would have loved the ballet.

In the article ”100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris theater” the author is stating that the riot did happened and that it was seen as one of the most important and violent riots of the time. “Stravinsky’s grand debut ended in mayhem and chaos.” the author explains that mostly all of this performance was disastrous and everyone was being violent. The author is also explaining how the audience didn’t like the performance at all “with a performance at the same theater where it debuted to boos and violence. ” meaning that the performance was full of hate and violence and that’s why the riot started.

In the article “Not Another Music History Cliché” the author is talking about how “the author stated that “the riot never happened ” meaning that the author thinks that this was mostly a myth and a racist act that was happening while the opera was being played for example the author states, ”as the title of Levitz’s essay indicates, these practices were very racist. Thus some in the audience—notably the aristocrats—responded in the way they thought they were supposed to: by laughing.” this show us how it was mostly about an argument of people being racist and fighting each other. It was also perceived as a myth in the text states, “Yet the myth doesn’t just claim that a riot occurred—it asserts that Stravinsky’s music caused the riot.” this evidence show us that the author interprets this problem as a myth and that Stravinsky helped with this riot in order to happen.  

If I were the audience in 1913 I think I would have been surprised and kinda confused. Because it’s a performance that it supposed to give a scary feeling, and I think I would have been confused because I Wouldn’t have thought that something like that could have been portrayed in a dance.

In the article “100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring incited a riot in a Paris theater” by Amar Toor, Toor believes that the ballet’s performance was meant to cause chaos. The way he describes it is that Stravinsky knew what he was doing putting in pitches that would sound violent and frenetic. The type of opera that was going to be performed on the night of May 29th, 1913 was not what anyone expected. This was something completely new compared to Stravinsky’s old work. But this opera itself turned into a nightmare when the ballerinas didn’t know what they were doing. The high-pitched bassoons and the pounding percussion caused even more issues. With the loud pitches, the ballerinas weren’t able to hear and follow the orchestra, leading the choreographer Vaslav Nijinsky to shout commands from backstage. This caused anger and the crowd didn’t know who to blame. Was Stravinsky to blame because of the musical choice? or was Nijinsky to blame for creating a violent choreography? No one knew how to feel, but at the time the anger was so strong they chose to go on a riot to express how unhappy they were for an opera show to be like this.

In the article “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?” by Linda Shaver-Gleason, the author argues that the famous riot never happened. According to Linda the only evidence that we have from the “riot” came from the people who attended the opera and specifically sat on the balcony. Their seating arrangements, Linda brings up to question if their seating arrangements had anything to do with how intense the music sounded, maybe people sitting on the bottom floor didn’t experience the music at the same intensity as the balcony. It’s a good question that we will never know but should keep in mind. But the term of the riot itself came to light two years after the opera occurred, “The first mention of physical altercations at the premiere came from eyewitness Carl van Vechten, who claimed that a man sitting behind him ‘beat rhythmically on the top of my head with his fists.’ This evocative quote comes from 1915—two years later, as even firsthand accounts were embellished in the retelling.” When Linda mentions this quote it brings out the truth of how much we really know about what happened that night. What happened at the opera then become a game of telephone. Everyone knows the game of telephone and they know how easy it is to mess up a message. But so far this game of “telephone” that’s connected to that night is all we have. But Linda goes on to inform us, “As Levitz puts it, the myth establishes a “false causality…between artistic revolution and bodily revolt.” It tells a version of music history that people want to be true, of Great Art having the power to make people do things. The extreme reaction of the audience reinforces the reputation of The Rite as one of the greatest works of art of the twentieth century. ” If the riot never really happened then why do we talk about it and why is it talked about as the biggest riot in classical music? The only thing we know about the “riot” itself is possibly broken news or opinions coming from people who didn’t like the idea of change in opera coming from Stravinsky whos originally famous for “The Nutcracker”.

The first time I watched the performance of “The Rite of Spring” I was in shock. Personally, I am not a big opera listener but from what we’ve heard in class I’ve developed an understanding of what that type of music is and how it sounds. The second I heard the first few beats of “The Rite of Spring” I knew it was something completely different and it sounded like the type of music you hear in a horror film or in a bad nightmare. I understand why the people in the crowd could’ve acted that way, when you get used to how something is you develop an expectation. If I were a person in the audience in 1913 I would’ve been left shocked and confused because comparing it to “The Nutcracker” this show could be understood as a scene of chaos. I honestly think I would’ve reacted the same as others because back then the way we saw music wasn’t as broad as we see it today. Back then you didn’t have much to compare it to and it’s clear that people weren’t very open-minded. So it’s understandable for the crowd to react in such a way because many can say this opera performance was ahead of its time. Today if this was performed people would’ve simply labeled it as different and edgy and put it in a different category.

In the article,  “100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris theater”, the author talks about how The Rite of Spring ballet performance by Igor Stravinsky, caused mayhem and chaos. Through the bizzare and violent moves the ballet artists were doing many people were confused and even horrified at seeing such an odd form of ballet. 2 factions soon broke out leading to a major arguement in the theather and leading to police involvement. The story has been extremely overexaggerated as some people say that violence incited and many people were injured. But the author says that no such violence occured but arguments insued.

In the article, Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?, the author argues that what actually happened is that aristocrats were not used to what the performance portrayed so they procceeded to bash it instead of having an open mind, saying ” these practices were very racist” and the aristocrats were laughing at these racist jokes. Those who actually cared about the Rite of Spring and wanted to critique it got mad at the aristocrats for being loud and laughing. The author says “Levitz speculates, “In truth, only those sitting close to the people who uttered these insults probably heard them at all.” meaning that the people who even heard the insults blew it way out of proportion leading to a major argument and insults being thrown around. Since the recordings of the experience of what happened was through the lens of somebody in the balcony, most of the things we know now could be seen as over exxagerated. The author states “The first mention of physical altercations at the premiere came from eyewitness Carl van Vechten, who claimed that a man sitting behind him “beat rhythmically on the top of my head with his fists.” Meaning that the man that claimed this might’ve lied and blew it out of proportion when in reality it was not a riot but rather a smaller altercation.

I thought this ballet was very interesting but I did not like the racist jokes that were used for humor. However, that is only through the context of nowadays. If I was apart of the audience back when this was released for the first time and I was a white male, due to the social context I would probably laugh at it as well. But as a critic I would be mad at the aristocrats laughing during the performance. Overall, my feelings are mixed.

In “100 years ago today, ‘The Rite of Spring’ incited a riot in a Paris theater” article, the author believes that it is unclear that if the audience was disturbed by the ballet dances or it could have been a publicity stunt. In  “Did Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring incite a riot at its premiere?” article the author says because of how the harsh music is, the choreography, and the ugly costumes are, it made the audience mad and they were booing. This led to people acting violent. He was able to find sources through Dr. Levitz essay, which has first hand accounts from the theater. “The disrespectful behavior of the aristocrats appalled the critics, musicians, and music lovers, so they responded by complaining and insulting the aristocrats……. Levitz speculates, “In truth, only those sitting close to the people who uttered these insults probably heard them at all.” If I would’ve heard it for the first time during 1913 I would’ve been shocked and interested. The Usually style of ballet is totally different from Rite Spring Ballet. The Violins gives a horror feeling and the costumes and dances moves look different from the norm.