Jump to content

Sergei Polunin - news and discussions


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 383
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If the quality of an artist's performance is undiminished I don't care if they are going to class every day or once in a blue moon. Whatever Polunin is doing or not doing it doesn't ever seem to have affected his ability to dance.  Why should the audience care about the preparations? It is the quality of the performance that counts.

 

I worry that many people now treat the RB and other companies as a kind of soap opera, and the rise of social media, streaming of insights and so on, and all these "behind the scenes peeks" mean that audiences focus on (their perceptions of) the personalities of the dancers, at the expense of the art.  The intense fan focus on casting and promotions and stupid minutiae such as endless videos of dancers preparing their pointe shoes is I think symptomatic of this dumbing down.

 

Polunin has said lots of stupid things, (as 20 somethings egged on by journalists tend to do), and I wouldn't pay to see a play he had written or buy his latest novel, - I don't even read interviews with him as I know they will be predictable, cliched and dull - but I will pay to watch him DANCE because he is a once-in-a-generation kind of talent.    

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the quality of an artist's performance is undiminished I don't care if they are going to class every day or once in a blue moon. Whatever Polunin is doing or not doing it doesn't ever seem to have affected his ability to dance.  Why should the audience care about the preparations? It is the quality of the performance that counts.

 

Actually, his performance was being affected and it was very noticeable at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, please no.  I couldn't bear to see all his second-rate "Nureyev-centred" productions.

 

His RB productions of Nutcracker and third acts of Bayaderka and Raymonda were second rate?

 

I beg to differ.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worry that many people now treat the RB and other companies as a kind of soap opera, and the rise of social media, streaming of insights and so on, and all these "behind the scenes peeks" mean that audiences focus on (their perceptions of) the personalities of the dancers, at the expense of the art.  The intense fan focus on casting and promotions and stupid minutiae such as endless videos of dancers preparing their pointe shoes is I think symptomatic of this dumbing down.

 

 

I suspect that there has always been an interest in such things; social media is just a new channel for satisfying it, though I agree some of the publicity is very lightweight. And if streaming insights means that many more people can see them that's fine with me. But although I found the video about dancers preparing their pointe shoes fascinating I also thought that publicising to the cinema audiences the fact that the RB spends £250K a year on pointe shoes was positively embarrassing. It made even me, a hardened ballet fan, think - WHAT??? (It was interesting to hear Beryl Grey at the live screening interview say how long they had to make their shoes last in her day even when they were doing a lot of performances. Are shoes today less durable? In which case why do they cost so much? Sorry, complete tangent!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see any evidence of 'unreliability' or 'not turning up'.

 

 

Didn't he let down the La Scala audience pretty last minute because Natalia couldn't dance and he refused to dance with anyone else?  Or was it the other way round?  He couldn't dance so she wouldn't dance with anyone else?  Sorry, senior moment, but there was a time a year or so ago when this happened.  I just don't have time to look it up at the moment! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see any evidence of 'unreliability' or 'not turning up'.

 

 

Unfortunately, Bill, there is quite a lot of 'hearsay evidence', some of it recent. I wish that that wasn't the case. I want Sergei to be dancing for us all. But that may not be the way he feels he wants it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, Bill, there is quite a lot of 'hearsay evidence', some of it recent. I wish that that wasn't the case. I want Sergei to be dancing for us all. But that may not be the way he feels he wants it.

 

I agree, capybara.  I'd really like to see Polunin dancing again in London with major companies but companies really need to be comfortable that they will not have their fingers burned.  Imagine the cries for refunds if Polunin didn't dance as advertised.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think that going freelance is a huge risk for a dancer. Most dancers sustain one or more injuries during their career and as a freelancer you don't have the kind of (cost free) access to specialised physiotherapists that company dancers do. Then there is the very significant problem of loss of income whilst you are injured and recovering from injury. It's not uncommon for dancers to be 'out' for a year, and, presumably, company dancers are entitled to sick pay representing the whole or a proportion of their salary for at least part of their sick leave. I expect that it's possible to get insurance but, given the significant risk of injury, I imagine that the premiums would be extremely high, and after a substantial period of injury it might be extremely difficult to find cover at all.

 

As for Polunin, if he and Osipova are no longer together, as a recent interview with him suggested, then I wonder how keen he actually is to return to the RB either permanently or as a guest. I believe that the tbc concerned Osipova's performances in Marguerite and Armand. Concerning his reliability, it's only fair to record that he did turn up and deliver the goods when he was invited back as a guest to dance with Tamara in M&A.

Edited by aileen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got to say, particularly as a younger ballet fan, that the thing I really struggle to forgive Sergei for is not walking out on the Royal Ballet (which does not need to be rehashed in every interview, reporters!) but the way he talks about ballet in general. I appreciate that his notoriety outside of the ballet world has helped draw people in, but it really angers and even hurts me the way he frequently talks about ballet like it's this 'uncool', ancient artform that should have been left behind years ago. The basic assumption seems to be that young people are not interested in ballet, particularly classical ballet, and the only way to get them interested is for him to perform modern works (see the Sadlers Wells escapade) or get involved in things like Diesel commercials and Hollywood movies. And as he is not 'a team player', he assumes other dancers will not be either. and pushes this whole 'reformation of the ballet company' into nearly every interview, even though some dancers actually seem to enjoy being in the company system (I remember reading an interview with Marianela Nunez where she said that she didn't like last minute guesting with other companies because it meant she didn't feel in sync with the rest of the company like she does at the RB). 

 

Anyway rant over. I think Polunin is a fantastic dancer (although I have a theory that his technique is slipping a bit) and I've greatly enjoyed myself when I've been lucky enough to see him live. I just struggle with him on a personal level sometimes, even if I understand some of why he is the way he is.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really struggle to forgive Sergei for... the way he talks about ballet in general. ...it really angers and even hurts me the way he frequently talks about ballet like it's this 'uncool', ancient artform that should have been left behind years ago. 

 

I agree with this completely. If he means everything that he has said about classical ballet and the life of company dancers, why is he still dancing with classical ballet companies?

 

 

I worry that many people now treat the RB and other companies as a kind of soap opera, and the rise of social media, streaming of insights and so on, and all these "behind the scenes peeks" mean that audiences focus on (their perceptions of) the personalities of the dancers, at the expense of the art.  The intense fan focus on casting and promotions and stupid minutiae such as endless videos of dancers preparing their pointe shoes is I think symptomatic of this dumbing down.

 

I don't think this is a fair representation of those who take an interest in the artists who create the art we enjoy. Also, if it is a dumbing down, it is nothing recent. Many of the the Romantic artists and poets in the 18th century traded on their reputation. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, just seen cinema relay of Dancer. Utterly sensational live performance by Sergei of Take Me to Church. Packed cinema here in Nottingham burst into applause after it.

The film was incredible. So moving. Just portrayed Polunin as such a talent. Not a bad boy at all. Just an exceptionally gifted dancer.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not wrong about ballet not being in the mainstream for young people though is he? The same could equally be said for classical music or opera and no one has 'solved' the problem of ageing audiences for either art form.

 

It's undeniable that the average age in the house for a McGregor is younger than it is for almost anything else so,

while I don't think contemporary as a 'gateway drug' for classical ballet is always the answer, Polinin is undeniably going to reach far more people doing something like the Take me to Church video than he ever will doing Mayerling in Russia or Giselle at La Scala.

 

And I can emphasise with a young person wanting to be something more than the paid entertainment for what they perceive as a wealthy older audience (I know all the points about cheap seats and students but it is still undeniably the case that the ROH crowd; myself included, is far more upper middle class and elderly than you would see at your average music gig, film, football match or even west end play).

 

If you are young, naive and idealistic can you be blamed for wanting to be involved in art that reaches beyond that audience?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where should we post about the premiere of Dancer? Got confused by various forums! Just been to the cinema relay and have so much to say!

 

New thread in the Performances section as usual, I should think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You raise a good point, Lindsay, although on a trivial note, the average age for a Sleeping Beauty and Nutcracker audience is liable to be much younger because of all the young children who would drag the average down. Averages aren't very useful because of stuff like that. Anyway, you're right that ballet isn't in the mainstream for young people. But I think that raises the wider question: why does it have to be? I mean, that's clearly what Sergei is worried about, and I understand that for the art to survive, at least some of this generation needs to be interested in it, but I think enough are (particularly thanks to modern things like YouTube and dancers' Instagram accounts) to keep it going for a bit longer. Has ballet ever been 'in the mainstream'? There have certainly been individual personalities who have brought it more into the public eye on occasion, but I'm not sure I'd say that for it to be great or to even just to continue we need it to be popular with the hoi polloi. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You raise a good point, Lindsay, although on a trivial note, the average age for a Sleeping Beauty and Nutcracker audience is liable to be much younger because of all the young children who would drag the average down. Averages aren't very useful because of stuff like that. Anyway, you're right that ballet isn't in the mainstream for young people. But I think that raises the wider question: why does it have to be? I mean, that's clearly what Sergei is worried about, and I understand that for the art to survive, at least some of this generation needs to be interested in it, but I think enough are (particularly thanks to modern things like YouTube and dancers' Instagram accounts) to keep it going for a bit longer. Has ballet ever been 'in the mainstream'? There have certainly been individual personalities who have brought it more into the public eye on occasion, but I'm not sure I'd say that for it to be great or to even just to continue we need it to be popular with the hoi polloi. 

 

I hope that by 'hoi polloi' you simply mean 'the many'. In which case, yes - I think ballet is unlikely ever to be a fully mainstream art (though I'm not sure I understand why). But for all sorts of reasons I think it's really important to at least try to widen its appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You raise a good point, Lindsay, although on a trivial note, the average age for a Sleeping Beauty and Nutcracker audience is liable to be much younger because of all the young children who would drag the average down. Averages aren't very useful because of stuff like that. Anyway, you're right that ballet isn't in the mainstream for young people. But I think that raises the wider question: why does it have to be? I mean, that's clearly what Sergei is worried about, and I understand that for the art to survive, at least some of this generation needs to be interested in it, but I think enough are (particularly thanks to modern things like YouTube and dancers' Instagram accounts) to keep it going for a bit longer. Has ballet ever been 'in the mainstream'? There have certainly been individual personalities who have brought it more into the public eye on occasion, but I'm not sure I'd say that for it to be great or to even just to continue we need it to be popular with the hoi polloi. 

 

 

 

A friend of mine made a very good point a while ago in context of a Friends' organisation who valued their older members more than some others seem to.  The point was that they had realised the value of the grey pound!

 

I discovered dance by accident in my early twenties but it was a good 8 years later before I discovered that ballet wasn't boring!

 

Young people may get married, have intense careers, have children but it is as they get older and their lifestyle is more relaxed that they can investigate art forms they may not previously have been interested in.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose it helps to have no idea of history or no interest in it but Polunin's ideal of dancers being freelances sounds horribly like the state of affairs in this country before the Vic Wells Company was established as its first full time professional ballet company.Of course there were jobs in West End shows and the possibility of work on the music hall circuits before that but the opportunities for professional dancers were very limited.

 

I think that we all wonder from time to time why it is that ballet seemed to be popular across a wide age range in the 1960's and 1970's  and why it now seems to be the preserve of the older audience and perceived to be old fashioned and insufficiently exciting to interest anyone except those old enough to remember the dance boom of the 60's and 70's and very young middle class child on their annual trip to the ballet. Even allowing for the fact that the audience probably was not quite so broad based and diverse as we now remember it to have been, the audience was younger and more diverse by age and social class than now.

 

First there was Diaghilev in the early years of the century. He revived  interest in ballet and made it fashionable among the cultural and social elite in Western Europe before World War I. He was probably the greatest enabler of the creation of new ballets,musical works and exciting theatre designs by the latest artists. When he died in 1929 many of those who had worked with him continued to apply his methods to the creation of new ballets.

 

Then there was the diaspora from his company who became the pioneers of ballet in countries which had little or no recent tradition of ballet as a serious art while others revived interest in it in countries which had a long history of dance institutions.Then there was lots of touring across the US by companies claiming connection with the Ballets Russes.In this country there were the classics staged by Nicolai Sergeyev for what was essentially a small London based organisation.Arguably it was the war which transformed the place of ballet in this country as new companies sprang up and they and the Vic-Wells company toured providing entertainment for factory workers, the military and the general audience.  By the end of the War the  Sadler's Wells company had a national profile and  Pamela May and the Sleeping Beauty seem to have been sufficiently well known for National Savings to produce a poster with a picture of May as Aurora with a caption exhorting the viewer to "Keep a Good Balance". Clearly the poster's designer assumed that  the general public had more than a passing acquaintance with the ballet and the dancer. I don't think that anyone would dare to issue such an elitist advertisement today.

 

In this country and elsewhere television companies needed product and ballet companies wanted the publicity which televised  performances could provide.In addition in this country there were just enough advocates for the arts to ensure that important programmes were made and broadcast.Although after Margaret Dale it would seem that a great deal of what we have come to see as the BBC's appreciation of ballet as a serious art form is attributable to the enthusiasm of one man John Drummond. From the end of the war until the early eighties there seems to have been a general view that high art and culture were good things and therefore the public service broadcaster's duty to educate and entertain extended to making elite culture and high art available to the viewer. Cultural  relativism or the equivalent of utilitarian assertions that "if it gives as much pleasure pushpin is as good as poetry" were not part of the public discourse about the arts or television output until the rise and encouragement of a more commercial approach to broadcasting.

 

A lot of unhelpful things happened at about the same time, The pioneers who had established the major companies and had been forces to be reckoned with well into the seventies began to die off. The choreographers who had provided the bulk of the major works of the twentieth century which for decades had made ballet a lively,vibrant and exciting artform were winding down their activities and dying without being replaced by choreographers  of equal ability or invention.The quality of the dancers at the RB was not comparable with that of the past. Its senior dancers showed signs of being technically challenged by choreography which had been designed to display skills of an earlier generation of senior dancers in the company now challenged a cohort of dancers who longer seemed to possess those skills. This was particularly true of the company's Swan Lake production which in act 1 apart from the prince and the pas de trois required twelve good classical dancers for the  waltz. Suddenly the company no longer had good classical dancers in sufficient quantity to enable it to stage some of its old productions and no one seemed capable of dealing with the problem.The RB was beginning its long decline and there were problems at the RBS which the appointment of Merle Park as it director did not succeed in stemming. In this country at least the RB was rapidly becoming a museum company without enough interesting or exciting dancers to sustain interest in the artform except among those who had caught the bug  during the days of the dance boom and were optimistic enough to believe that things would improve..

 

 Just as the RB was going into decline it became fashionable to question the value of the arts and elite art forms in particular. What was so important or special about elite art forms which only appealed to a small proportion of the population? At about the same time popularism and high viewer numbers became the order of the day for television companies leading to less interest being shown in broadcasting ballet and opera on television.The assumption that great art was great art and that it mattered no longer went unchallenged.When the general media showed any interest in ballet or opera they were only really concerned with celebrity and the showbiz elements of the story which invariably began with information about the top ticket prices as if they were the prices which everyone paid to attend a performance. Such costly elite art forms could be of no interest to any ordinary person.

 

Really with all the negativity about elite art forms which have been the norm for more than thirty years it seems nothing short of miraculous that anyone under the age of thirty, apart from children being taken to the ballet for a Christmas  treat, ever attend the ballet. I can understand that an art form which is not immediately accessible does not appeal to the young even if they have the money to attend. I think that ticket prices are an issue but that other factors are far more significant.

 

Bringing students into the building to attend performances of the classics for example will not achieve that much if the performances are not at the highest level but there is still the problem of the art form's conventions. Why are there all those "extras" on stage who insist on breaking into a tenuous storyline at regular intervals ?. If you have not learnt how to watch a live theatre performance and many haven't; if you don't understand the corps de ballet's function you will not appreciate their unwarranted intrusions into the activity of the main dancers who you believe you have come to see; you may find the slow passage of twenty four girls down a series of ramps boring and make a mental note not to repeat the experience again. Then  there is the problem of multiple casting you need to understand that if you are not seeing Nunez or Bonelli in a performance that the dancers you are seeing are not understudies and that the best known dancers are not necessarily the best who can be seen in that particular ballet.

 

The fact is that contemporary dance is immediately accessible and no previous knowledge is required on the viewer's part. I suspect that one of  the reasons that dance works by McGregor and others appeal to young audiences is because they see the movement as intriguing and unusual while ballet movements, which no doubt take far longer to master, seem dull and uninteresting because they are uniform and elegant. Extreme movement and poses are something which anyone whether or not they are experienced in watching dance will be able to see if not appreciate.  As I said at the outset I think that Polunin's ideas represent little more than a return to the work practices of the past. They might benefit the occasional outstanding dancer but I don't believe that they will guarantee such a dancer fortune and fame. The dance projects in which Polunin has been involved so far have had a predictable sameness about them. It would appear that Polunin has far less idea about his art form and what constitutes an effective dance work than Nureyev ever had.

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. Polunin has said in several interviews that he felt he was underpaid at RB, -unable to afford a flat in London ( we can all sympathise there)-and that as ' the best dancer in the world' ( no false modesty-fair enough)  he wanted fame, he wanted to explore ' commercials and modelling'- as well as film acting.

That is entirely his right to do so- dancers are not well paid for all the work and pain they put in.  Good for him. But that is not the same as stating some high artistic vocation.

 

As for audiences- we have discussed all this before.

In the amphi I see a lot of younger people, and don't agree it is entirely old and middle class- not where I sit.

But if  over 40s like ballet, - why should that be seen as a problem? We live in such a youth-orientated culture, that nothing is seen as worthwhile unless it appeals to young people. That is rather absurd because we all get older.  I think it is marvellous that so many old people, many of whom have trouble getting up and down the amphi steps, DO struggle with the London streets  and transport and go to ROH: 3 cheers for them I say.

 

As Janet says, the grey pound is important. We are an ageing population, and if theatres rely only on the young they will not survive.

 

I have always maintained people  do change  tastes through their life and grow into classical music and ballet.

 

It takes people a while to shake off all the silly conditioning about 'elitism' that the media and sadly the education system bombard us all with. 

 

I have taken many people to their first ballet at ROH, and about half of them have got completely hooked-  the only thing that ever baffled one of them was a McGregor.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. Polunin has said in several interviews that he felt he was underpaid at RB, -unable to afford a flat in London ( we can all sympathise there)

 

 

We will never know exactly how much the RB's Principal Dancers earn (and salaries are said to range widely) but the minimum rate that Polunin would have been on is only low when compared with (say) footballers, bankers etc. A flat in Central London may well be out of reach (certainly now) but many dancers seem to have managed to purchase a little further out.  Some have even 'gone public' over their purchases and not all have been jointly obtained with a partner, friend or relative.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a very interesting article in the Dancing Times by Julie Kavanagh about how she and her husband (Ross McGibbon) were making a very different kind of film with and about Sergei Polunin - same back story but more focus on celebrating his amazing talent. But, well into production, they lost out to Stephen Cantor who was originally backing them financially but wanted more influence over the storyline.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea what RB Principals earn, or whether he was under paid or not- just pointing out that he says he felt he was;  most young people in the South East can't afford to buy a flat; but, if you sense you have the opportunity to make a lot of money, especially if you are from a relatively badly off background, you might want to do so.  Fair enough.

 

I wouldn't criticise Polunin at all  for wanting to make hay while the sun shines- it's his talent, his life and his choice.

 

But I would criticise the stance of the great artistic rebel who was being oppressed, especially when it involves so much criticism of the RB and its many  creative and talented professionals, and the rest of the ballet world, because it doesn't quite ring true, and we really don't know the full facts. Judith Mackrell, taking the film as absolute truth rather than one partial take on someone's life story, is now demanding in The Guardian that companies must think about what they can do better etc- as if they never consider the welfare of their dancers. Are not most of the young people at the RB school and company far from home, under pressure etc-? How many of them run away and turn to drugs?

i think the RB are doing a pretty good job of looking after them actually. 

 

Polunin has claimed the RB wouldn't let him work elsewhere but this is odd as we know many RB dancers do make ads, appear in magazines etc, as well as  dance with other companies, routinely, -no doubt to top up the coffers. But to really make money you need to have completely free rein, full-time PR, marketing, non-stop stories in the press, a film, and so on.

 

Big shame about Kavanagh and McGibbon.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has been noted that the RB has been lacking in pastoral care when there have been difficulties in the lives/careers of several dancers in the past.  Polunin isn't the first.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will never know exactly how much the RB's Principal Dancers earn (and salaries are said to range widely) but the minimum rate that Polunin would have been on is only low when compared with (say) footballers, bankers etc. A flat in Central London may well be out of reach (certainly now) but many dancers seem to have managed to purchase a little further out.  Some have even 'gone public' over their purchases and not all have been jointly obtained with a partner, friend or relative.

 

 

I really raised an eyebrow when I read Polunin couldn't even afford to buy a proper dinner on his Principal salary (?). So what was he spending his salary on? (...) There are dancers who are very smart with their money, who have and do manage(d) to buy their own property (not in Central London of course). I greatly admire him as a dancer but I really have enough of reading about all his "difficulties". He's not the only one on this planet having experienced poverty or being far away from home...he was (is) just very unrealistic and immature. We all know of people, artists,...who had to overcome huge difficulties. They managed and succeeded.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that it will be a very long time before we learn what really prompted Polunin's departure from the RB. In the years since he left the company we have been presented with a number of accounts in which he presents the RB's management as the villain of the piece for exploiting him and restricting his artistic freedom. In his latest account we are asked to believe that the company was paying him a pittance for his services. While I am sure that these accounts of his victimhood are an accurate account of his feelings and his current view of what took place, that does not make them factually accurate. However they makes a good juicy story for journalists and filmmakers and as a result we are unlikely to have heard the last of them.

 

While it is true that a few outstanding dancers are able to make good money by making guest and gala appearances my impression is that the majority of the dancers involved have connections with companies with significant international reputations such as the Bolshoi and the Mariinsky and have themselves built up substantial reputations by working with those companies over a period of years in which they have developed their repertory, their artistic reputation and their artistry. It is this which makes Polunin's current position so sad because by leaving the RB he effectively cut himself off from what could have been a very lucrative career option in the future.It is one thing to be, or have the potential to be, the greatest dancer in the world with a wide and bankable repertory quite another to be that dancer without that repertory and only able to offer a limited and not particularly inspired contemporary repertory which you have commissioned but does not bear repeat viewings..

 

Real money can be made in guesting abroad. Whether or not a dancer is able to guest with other companies while the member of a home  company depends on the views of the artistic director as much as it does on the individual dancer's contract of employment. At the end of the day management have to agree to release the dancer or at least agree that the dancer is not needed by the home company during specified dates.Polunin is reported as saying that the RB restricted his artistic freedom and obstructed his career development which I take to be a reference to appearances as a guest artist.Perhaps Polunin found that irksome but given his comparative youth and the breadth of the repertory that he was in the process of learning management's reluctance to release him to make guest appearances  does not seem that unreasonable.

 

I am afraid that I find Polunin's statements about his plans for the future hopelessly nebulous and naive while his statements about the career and artistic limitations of working with the RB sound rather similar to Ivan Putrov's reported views of the company and its artistic ethos. I wish Polunin well but I am afraid that instead of showing us things that are wonderful and new in classical dance and developing it as an artform he will end up wasting his extraordinary talents on a series of artistically limited dance projects which prove to be of no lasting interest or importance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am afraid that I find Polunin's statements about his plans for the future hopelessly nebulous and naive while his statements about the career and artistic limitations of working with the RB sound rather similar to Ivan Putrov's reported views of the company and its artistic ethos. .

 

 

 

 

 

If one dancer had concerns perhaps they can be dismissed, but when two are saying pretty much the same thing it gives pause for thought.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...