Tchaikovsky didn’t like Swan Lake
There’s this persistent myth that Tchaikovsky didn’t like Swan Lake. That he was embarrassed by it. That he thought it was a failure.
I don’t buy it.
I think the problem wasn’t that he disliked Swan Lake.
I think the problem was that he was a perfectionist… and he died before he could finish perfecting it.
We have to remember something about Tchaikovsky: he wasn’t just a composer. He was an obsessive reviser. He rewrote, reshaped, rearranged, and polished works over years. He didn’t treat a premiere as the final version — he treated it as a draft that the public happened to hear.
Swan Lake premiered in 1877. It was not a huge success. The choreography was weak. The production was uneven. The orchestra struggled. But the score itself? It was already full of the emotional DNA that made Tchaikovsky Tchaikovsky — longing, fragility, sweeping romantic tragedy.
He revised parts of it. He kept adjusting things. But he never got the chance to do what he later did with The Nutcracker.
Look at The Nutcracker Suite. The ballet premiered in 1892. It also wasn’t an immediate smash hit as a full ballet. But Tchaikovsky pulled out sections, reshaped them into a concert suite, refined the orchestration, tightened the structure, and turned it into something that could stand on its own outside the stage.
That’s the key difference.
The Nutcracker got the Tchaikovsky “second life treatment.”
Swan Lake didn’t.
He died in 1893.
After his death, other composers and choreographers reworked Swan Lake. The version we know today is partly his, partly posthumous editing. That’s why people get confused and assume he must have disliked it. They see later revisions and think, “Oh, he wasn’t satisfied.”
Of course he wasn’t satisfied. He was never satisfied. That was his whole deal.
Not liking a piece and not being finished with a piece are not the same thing.
Perfectionists don’t abandon work because they hate it. They hold onto it because they love it too much to let it go unfinished.
In that sense, Swan Lake is a snapshot of a work mid-process — a genius still wrestling with it, still hearing improvements in his head, still wanting one more pass at the orchestration, one more structural tweak, one more emotional refinement.
He didn’t hate Swan Lake.
He just didn’t get time to finish arguing with it.
And honestly? That’s more relatable than the myth.
Some of us are like Tchaikovsky. We hold onto drafts forever, convinced we haven’t quite gotten it right yet.
Others — and I’m raising my hand here — eventually go, “Good enough. Ship it. The world can argue with it now.”
Tchaikovsky was not built like that. He couldn’t emotionally detach from a piece while he still heard ways to improve it. So Swan Lake stayed in that painful, unfinished, deeply-loved state.
Not a failure.
Not a rejection.
Just a masterpiece that outlived its creator before he could give it one last polish.
It's easy to fall for persistent myths, especially when they involve legendary figures like Tchaikovsky and his iconic ballets. For years, I just accepted the idea that Tchaikovsky somehow disliked his own 'Swan Lake.' Like, how could someone create something so profoundly beautiful and then just... not be into it? But the more I looked into it, the more I realized that this 'dislike' narrative misses the entire point of who Tchaikovsky was as an artist. Think about it: Tchaikovsky wasn't just a composer; he was a relentless reviser, a true perfectionist in every sense of the word. I can almost picture him, much like that old illustration, a pensive Tchaikovsky with his hand on his head, surrounded by stacks of musical scores, a quill and inkwell nearby. He'd be pouring over every note of 'SWAN LAKE,' always hearing improvements, always striving for that elusive perfect version. For him, a premiere wasn't the final word; it was just a public draft. That's a mindset many creators, myself included, can deeply relate to—that constant feeling that your work isn't quite 'done' yet, even when others see it as complete. The initial premiere of 'Swan Lake' in 1877 wasn't a smash hit, and it’s true that both the choreography and production had issues. But the score itself? It was already brimming with his signature emotional depth. The tragedy, the longing, the sweeping romanticism – it was all there, the very 'emotional DNA' that makes Tchaikovsky's music so captivating. He started revising it, adjusting elements, but fate intervened. He died in 1893, leaving 'Swan Lake' in a state of ongoing composition and revision, a testament to his perfectionism, but also his humanity. Contrast this with 'The Nutcracker.' Although its initial ballet premiere wasn't an instant sensation either, Tchaikovsky lived long enough to meticulously rework parts of it into the beloved 'Nutcracker Suite.' He pulled sections, refined the orchestration, tightened the structure, and honed it into a standalone concert piece. 'The Nutcracker' got its 'second life treatment' from the master himself. 'Swan Lake' didn't get that same chance. Other composers and choreographers stepped in after his death, shaping the version we largely know today. It's these posthumous edits that, I believe, fueled the misconception that he must have been dissatisfied with the original. And yes, he was dissatisfied – but not because he hated it, but because he hadn't finished perfecting it. This distinction is crucial. As creators, we often grapple with the idea of 'finished.' Do we abandon work because we dislike it, or do we hold onto it because we love it too much to release it before it meets our impossibly high standards? Tchaikovsky's wrestling with 'Swan Lake' was clearly the latter. It wasn't a rejection; it was an act of profound artistic love. He simply ran out of time to resolve his ongoing 'argument' with his own creation. For me, understanding this makes 'Swan Lake' even more poignant – it's a masterpiece that captures a genius mid-flow, a rare glimpse into the beautiful, painful process of creation itself, before he could give it that one last, definitive polish.