Review: Dutch National Ballet Monument - evolution of gender identity took me to memory lane
- Ikuko
- Oct 8
- 5 min read
I watched the Monument triple bill by the Dutch National Ballet on 20th September 2025. It was the opening programme for the company's the 2025-2026 season and the first show for me to watch and review this season. The triple bill was the follow up to Pride Amsterdam, which concluded in August. Needless to say, the underlying theme of the programme was the gender identity.
Please allow me to start this review with my personal experience.
I have a small number of good friends. We studied at the same university. We had already known one of us was gay and we did not make a big deal about it. When he came out as homosexual years after our graduation, we were all sightly puzzled why he had to do it after those many years being friends. We concluded the coming out was necessary for him. He never really explained why. But at one point, he casually said to me it was a long, suffocating process for him to accept it.
The triple bill showcased three ballets, all of which were created for the Dutch National Ballet.
The show opened with IN FLUX, a new work by Juanjo Arqués. The stylish contemporary ballet started with whispers. One of the voices said "it's about accepting, you know," which instantly reminded me of the above mentioned friend of mine. All dancers were dressed with white gender-less costumes, no pointe shoes, and danced against the shape-shifting fluid white background (designer was Tatyana van Walsum). It looked smooth and minimalist but this piece of art was actually multi-dimensional and complex. Movements were sometimes heavy, sometimes soft, sometimes emotional, sometimes conforming, sometimes unruly, sometimes in unison, sometimes in fragment, sometimes in duet, sometimes in solo. Gender identities are not straight cut and it's okay. And you are not alone.
Watching this 21st century take on the gender identity, I was thinking of my friend all the time. I was going through memory lane. It was about him accepting himself. It was about his family accepting him. It was about us accepting him.
One thing I relished about IN FLUX was the absence of an antagonist. The music by Thomas van Dun was light, deep and very mature. Somehow, the newly commissioned score reminded me of the soundtrack of Hayao Miyazaki-Studio Ghibli's Spirited Away!, which I had watched recently by accident. There was lots of personalities in the movie, but there was not one specific antagonist, I was vaguely thinking.
In contrast, Monument of a Dead Boy by Rudi van Dantzig, the second piece of the triple bill, was full of antagonists. If IN FLUX was about acceptance, Monument of a Dead Boy was about rejection.
Monument of a Dead Boy was much more black-or-white and psychologically draining than IN FLUX probably because it was created in 1965, around when the contemporary sexual identities were emerging. It must have been a shock to the dance world back then but today it showed its age.
The interesting thing about dance and theatre art is the history can be revived on stage. This ballet was a grotesque piece of history. Especially the Jack Nicholson-esque father, supposedly rich, was the condensation of the norm one was obliged to follow without question (extremely well casted and performed by Conor Walmsley). Neither visual or music was my cup of tea. To be honest, this ballet was abomination... however, I believe this was the whole point.
Unfortunately, Monument of a Dead Boy is not a museum piece yet. It is still relevant today. I am lucky enough to write this review from a cosy apartment in the Netherlands, arguably one of the most socio-culturally tolerant countries in the world. However, non-heterosexuality is still a criminal offence in some countries and it is a target of hate in other countries. For may people, this ballet is their firsthand experience.
Also, this ballet has significance in the history of ballet and that of the Dutch National Ballet. The first two dancers casted for the main role, The Boy, ended up with dropping out. The first dancer did not want such a controversial role and the second one pulled out due to an injury. In the end, the role was given to Toer van Schayk, who had shifted his focus to scalupture from dance and was not a member of the company back then. He also designed the costume and the stage set. Timothy van Poucke was casted for The Boy on the day of the show.
Later on, Rudolf Nureyev put himself forward to take on the role of The Boy. The Dutch National Ballet carries an interview with van Schayk, who carried on dancing the role and later joined the company officially.
“That was the first time I didn’t dance the role myself, so it was quite difficult for me at the time”, admits van Schayk. “I was still in Germany when Nureyev started rehearsing the ballet, and when I returned to Amsterdam he said he wanted to watch me dance the whole ballet. I did a full run-through, after which Nureyev said, ‘I have to start from the beginning again’.”
It is a very interesting interview. Click here for the full text in the digital programme.
The final piece of the triple bill was 7th Symphony (I watched its stage rehearsal in the Open House day).
The ballet was set to Beethoven's well known 7th Symphony. The link to this triple bill was that it was choreographed by the original The Boy, Toer van Schayk, in 1986. It is a technically -focused abstract ballet with full of positive energy from young people having a party.
Ah, I needed this fresh air after the weight of Monument for a Dead Boy!
Van Schayk considered 7th Symphony as his finest work. In the interview, he said;
“Just like Beethoven, I’m probably searching for the light at the end of the tunnel. I was already like that as a child, when at the end of World War II, I firmly believed that now everything would be better and good.”
Overall, the triple bill was very well thought through and a sophisticated presentation without being overly dramatic. It felt as though it was a full-length ballet because it was consistent and made sense: it showed the evolution of gender identities. It was the present, past and future. It was also a great display of the depth of the Dutch National Ballet. It seemed to me that choreographers, dancers, the orchestra and everyone else involved enjoyed being a part of the ongoing history, including the audience.
Was this show ephemeral? Physically yes. But I will remember it and cherish the memory for a long long time.
There are a few things worth mentioning here. The triple bill was the opening of the final season for Artistic Director Ted Brandsen and Associate Artistic Director Rachel Beaujean, who will retire at the end of the season. Beaujean will restage La Bayadere, which will be shown March-April next year. Given her Raymonda was a good interpretation of the classical ballet, I look forward to her La Bayadere. I personally think she should be more talked about.
Another thing is the triple bill on the specific day was the showcase of Sho Yamada. He was almost constantly on stage in all three works. It must have been taxing. A big shout out for him! Below is the full cast sheet.
All images were taken by me using my iPhone.
