Natalia Osipova: Pure Dance, London, September 2018

[johnross]

Only a very short extract from Natalia Osipova's programme at Sadlers Wells Pure Dance. Antony Tudor's The Leaves Are Fading. She was partnered by American Ballet Theatre principal David Hallberg.

 

 

David Hallberg and Natalia Osipova

 

 

Natalia Osipova

 

 

David Hallberg

More pictures on www.johnrossballetgallery.co.uk

Edited September 12, 2018 by johnross

[alison]

I was surprised to see that tickets are still available for this - and then I looked at the prices.  Up to £50 in the Second Circle??!!

 

Anyway, has anyone been yet?

[Don Q Fan]

Going tomorrow - with, I might add, VERY low expectations after that awful show she did with Vasiliev at the Coli a few years ago!  Hoping for a marginal improvement but you never know!

[Mummykool]

Well I'll put my head above the parapet and say that we enjoyed it! The evening is quite short and there are fairly long pauses while Osipova changes costume and gets her breath back, but I think it is well worth seeing as there is probably something for everyone in the programme.

Anthony Tudor's The Leaves Are Fading opened the show so it started in a classical vein and was beautifully danced by Osipova and Hallberg. I was not at all sure about the  very modern second piece by Ivan Perez;  I hated the 'music' but the husband quite liked it. A clever solo by Kim Brandstrup for David Hallberg ended the first half.

The second half opened with a modern piece by Roy Assaf in which Osipova danced with Jason Kittelberger. This was followed by  Valse Triste choreographed for Osipova and Hallberg by Ratmansky. It was only six minutes long but very energetic and, in my opinion, worth the admission price alone. They were fabulous together. Judging by the reception it got, I was not alone in my thinking! The final piece was a beautiful solo for Osipova by Yuka Oishi set to Ave Maria. We found it very moving. 

The applause at the final curtain calls was loud and long with several people standing in the stalls.

 

It was entirely a bonus to be sat a couple of rows behind Alessandra  Ferri and Roberto Bolle!

 

 

[Shade]

I agree mummykool. I was surprised (in a good way) and moved by these pieces. Agree about the Ratmansky. Also it was great to see David Hallberg in fine form. The audience tonight wanted a further curtain call but this was denied, sadly

[Quintus]

I went tonight and pretty much agree with Mummykool above. After the opening promise of The Leaves Are Fading, I then thought the Perez piece was over extended and rather pointless, and I loathed the 'numbers' music. The second half of the programme was altogether better and Valse Triste was the highlight of the evening.

[bridiem]

For me the highlights were The Leaves are Fading and Valse Triste. Or rather, they were the only pieces I enjoyed... but I enjoyed them very much (interesting, sophisticated, musical, technical).  I particularly disliked the Roy Assaf piece which contained mainly small, pointless movements (to music including the Moonlight Sonata!! How could such music inspire such - er - uninspired stuff?!). I found Flutter by Ivan Perez extremely repetitive, and the Brandstrup solo for Hallberg a bit tedious. And the final Ave Maria (to Schubert) was beautifully danced by Osipova, but it was the music that moved me, not the choreography.

 

I think I've seen enough now to conclude that much as I love and respect Osipova, her forte is dancing, not producing or commissioning. And it's such a magnificent forte that I hope she will focus all her energies on it in future.

[Shade]

Oh I loved the Assaf piece - and it seemed very popular up in the second balcony. The only piece I didn't like was the Perez piece and I thought the "music" was awful. I just couldn't connect with that at all. 

 

I hope that Osipova continues to develop these new works as I think that they are getting better each time. Some from the past that I liked were Pita's Facada and the Malliphant. 

Whatever our views I expect that Osipova will continue to develop them as long as she can finance them and there is an audience.

[Bruce Wall]

12 hours ago, Mummykool said:

This was followed by  Valse Triste choreographed for Osipova and Hallberg by Ratmansky. It was only six minutes long but very energetic and, in my opinion, worth the admission price alone. They were fabulous together. Judging by the reception it got, I was not alone in my thinking!

 

Could not agree more .... This MADE Thursday evening for me.   Such a shame that the UK has never really (short of the Concerto DSCH brought by the Mariinsky Ballet) seen Ratmansky's core 21st Century masterworks.  On Wednesday evening I attended the European Premiere of Ratmansky's treatment of Bernstein's Serenade on Plato's Symposium - originally created for ABT where he is Choreographer in Residence - courtesy of the Dutch National Ballet's New Classics programme in Amsterdam.  It was revelatory in a way Wheeldon's use of the same score for the RB's Bernstein programme could never hope to approach.  It was filled with rich balletic narrative masterstrokes yet never in an attention seeking fashion that cloyed against the fabric of the whole.  On a programme with Robbin's ever resplendent DAAG and McGregor's august Chroma that evening celebrated the unique gifts that dance can bring in depicting effective community - the first two through a  distinct balletic prism.  It was a joy throughout.  I so hope the new BRB Director (whoever it may be) brings some of the major 21st Century balletic masterworks created outside our boarders into the UK's fold so that these too can help inform and delight our national audiences, dancers and dance makers alike.  That would I'm certain ensure it a unique future niche in terms of meaningful British public service.  

 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Bruce Wall

[Don Q Fan]

Great to hear New Classics was good. I swear I saw Mr Ratmansky on Saturday night at the gala it probably was him as his piece was premiering in the week. The gala was pretty good too. I look forward to Osipova tonight then especially Valse Triste! 

[Bruce Wall]

1 hour ago, Don Q Fan said:

Great to hear New Classics was good. I swear I saw Mr Ratmansky on Saturday night at the gala it probably was him as his piece was premiering in the week. The gala was pretty good too. I look forward to Osipova tonight then especially Valse Triste! 

 

Hi Helen - I'm sure you did see Mr. Ratmansky on Saturday ... as he was there for the Bernstein programme on Wednesday where he was escorted on by Igone de Jongh, ... and the audience greeted him rapturously.  He was also in the line up with all the other dance makers and designers at Osipova's Pure Dance programme on Thursday during their final call.  

Edited September 14, 2018 by Bruce Wall

[Amelia]

7 hours ago, Bruce Wall said:

 Such a shame that the UK has never really (short of the Concerto DSCH brought by the Mariinsky Ballet) seen Ratmansky's core 21st Century masterworks. 

 

I remember that a number of Alexei Ratmansky’s works were brought to London: "The Bright Stream", "Anna Karenina", "Jeu de cartes" as well as his re-stagings of "The Flames of Paris" and "Le Corsaire" (with Yuri Burlaka). I think "The Russian Seasons" were also shown in London. I loved them all.

[Bruce Wall]

52 minutes ago, Amelia said:

 

I remember that a number of Alexei Ratmansky’s works were brought to London: "The Bright Stream", "Anna Karenina", "Jeu de cartes" as well as his re-stagings of "The Flames of Paris" and "Le Corsaire" (with Yuri Burlaka). I think "The Russian Seasons" were also shown in London. I loved them all.

 

Yes, Amelia, they certainly were ... and the NBoC brought the R&J he created for them and the Australian Ballet the update on Cinderella etched for them given that Ratmansky, himself, said he was never particularly happy with his original take for the Mariinsky - which itself has been seen here a couple of times.  All those you mention were either danced in London by the Bolshoi or the Mariinsky (the Mariinsky also did Concerto DSCH in Cardiff I recall) - and many of the former were at the end of Ratmansky's own - not particularly happy by many of his accounts - time as the Bolshoi AD.)  Indeed both the Bolshoi and NYCB (2008) - for whom it was created - danced Russian Seasons here.  The latter is special to me as it was one of the last times I had to see Albert Evans who sadly left our world's midst FAR too soon. 

 

That being said - STILL so many of the works that are uniquely his - and are now in the reps of a goodly number of major ballet companies - e.g., any one of the stunning ballets making up the Shostakovitch Trilogy, the incisive Pictures at an Exhibition, Namouna - indeed ANY of the many things now created for ABT - including the Serenade on Plato's Symposium - have yet to reach our shores.  There are, of course, also the reconstructions (Paquita, Sleeping Beauty, Swan Lake, The Golden Cockrell, his Harlequinade, etc.,) but it was more the unique works to which I was referring.  They are core I think to his current and IMO deserved reputation as a major BALLET maker for our age.  

One thing I do find strange ... KO'H - who has done such a wonderful job building the current RB ensemble from the bottom up - at his last insightful BA interview ... said he felt all new works 'deserved a second outing'.  (Not sure I would ALWAYS agree with than.  I'll be happy not to see Acosta's Carmen again.)  Sadly the one piece Ratmansky did for the RB - '24 Preludes' - which I remember having some lovely passages although over-long - has - and please correct me if I'm wrong - never been seen again.  I'd love for him to have a second take on it, maybe lessening the number in the title.  I know many hereabouts did not like it - much as the NBoC R&J got a chilly reception from many of the London critics.  Perhaps fate in Ratmansky's instance had simply put paid in terms of the UK ... and thus the service Osipova is currently actioning in having the premiere of this glorious Ratmansky PDD in London is especially estimable.  I'm certain it will be cheered alike when it is shown in New York's City Center next year during their 75th Anniversary celebrations.  I, myself, would love to see it become staple gala fare here on in.  

 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Bruce Wall

[alison]

I too was aware that 24 Preludes hadn't been repeated.  It has of course now lost quite a few of its original cast.  I wonder if Ratmansky wanted to revise it, or supervise its revival?  He's a very busy man.  I know that, prior to becoming Director, KO'H was surprised, on his trip to NY, that Ratmansky had an empty spot in his schedule, and grabbed him immediately.

[Shade]

It is a loss to the art form that we don't have a regularly performed full length Ratmansky here in the uk.

i would also be very delighted to see the full length Tudor - The Leaves are Fading.

[Don Q Fan]

Apart from Valse Triste, the Ave Maria piece and Leaves are Fading, "Pure Dance" was a waste of talent. There wasn't much ballet content. I knew I should not have gone to this after the last O/V effort. Lesson learned. 

 

[Bruce Wall]

Can I just say - after having read the one review by a noted UK reviewer who is almost always accurate - that the extracted sections danced from Tudor's Leaves are Fading are in fact TWO DIFFERENT segments from the ballet - one fairly early; one definitely late and not - as he specified - one PDD.  The break in the centre where Osipova walks around Hallberg marks this.  In fact - were Tudor's ballet to have been presented in full - (which would have been a major undertaking as it incorporates a substantive company) - the principals would have been in different costumes for the second half. 

 

In this way I thought the pairing of the Tudor passages with Assaf's Six Years Later as different Pure Dance act openers was apt in that there were - in this instance - two distinctive sections involved in each. 

 

The critical error is, of course, understandable - as the reviewer himself notes - given that Tudor's ballet - even in parts as seen here - as indeed with his entire canon - is simply not seen in the UK - certainly with any regularity.  I think many hereabouts will recall that the British born Tudor's centenary went completely unmarked on these shores; a fact surprisingly notable given that the dance maker himself created several notable works whist a member of the Sadler's Well's Ballet. 

 

Surely a note of some thanks is due Osipova for helping - in this small way - to restore a rightful slice of balance.  

 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Bruce Wall

[Ian Macmillan]

Folks - go to today's  Links - you now have 10 reviews of this show.  (I'd been wondering when they would appear.)

[FLOSS]

I thought that the programme was very much better than the earlier efforts in which Osipova has been involved. It was an eclectic mixture but there was something for a wide range of dance tastes and interests and we did see Hallberg dance. I found the excerpts from The Leaves are Fading and the new Ratmansky the most pleasing but nothing in the programme was down right objectionable and the music was kept to a reasonable volume. While I know this may sound like damning with faint praise the whole programme felt as if there was one person in charge of it whose tastes were reflected in the choice of works and the range of styles performed. If Osipova is feeling her way I am fine with that because she now seems to be going somewhere with what she is doing with these programmes. I had wondered whether I should buy a ticket as the previous offerings had been so variable. I am glad I did and on the basis of this programme I look forward to her next one.  

 

Re neglect of Tudor repertory.

Bruce,

While it is true that the Royal did not mark Tudor's centenary Rambert did. If I recall correctly Rambert danced The Judgement of Paris and Dark Elegies. Unfortunately I found both ballets disappointing for much the same reason. The dancers portraying the goddesses in Judgement were far,far too lean, fit and healthy looking and far too alert to be convincing as the tired, bored, aging prostitutes who go through their seductive routines as they try to gain the attention of their potential client " Paris" the drunk sitting at the bar. The dancers were unable to give the impression of weight, age and boredom, which are needed to give the ballet its impact. This was also a problem in the performance of Dark Elegies where the dancers looked like the lean, lithe, young dancers they are rather than the members of a peasant community weighed down by grief and loss who they were supposed to be portraying. It was all rather disappointing but at least they attempted to dance a couple of his ballets rather than serving up a modern version of an old work which is what the company did with A Tragedy of Fashion when it came to commemorating the Ashton centenary. The strange thing is that while that work is the earliest of Ashton's creations the company danced a range of his other early works which are capable of revival such as Capriol Suite and Façade until it switched from being a small scale classical company to the company it is today. 

 

I think it unlikely that the Royal Ballet will ever consider giving any of Tudor's ballets a good home and performance time given how ambivalent the company is to much of the repertory created for it by its founder choreographer. But if it were to undergo an artistic transformation and start to look seriously at what remains of the repertory created in the 1930's and 1940's by Ashton and Tudor then there are some pretty impressive Tudor works which it should consider "homing" on the basis that Rambert does not seem that concerned with making them available to the public on anything like a regular basis. If the Royal were to think about staging them then it needs to take greater care over casting them properly than it did last time it performed Lilac Garden which requires dance actors rather than star dancers and box office certainties.My selection for homing  would include LIlac Garden, a ballet which both Ashton and Balanchine admired and, it is said, wished they had created ; Dark Elegies an incredibly moving work which would benefit by being danced by a cast which included the character principals as well as the company's mature dance actors; Gala Performance fun if it is danced well, not if it danced too broadly; The Judgement of Paris, similar comment here about broad performance style and the benefit of dancers who are mature artists ; Soiree Musicale; Pillar of Fire, for Morera, perhaps, and Echo of Trumpets, which was in LFB repertory eons ago. I would push for these to enter the repertory before other later works for a number of reasons. London audiences and the company's dancers should be as familiar with his works as they are with the works of Ashton and Balanchine. He is, after all, one of the greatest choreographer of the twentieth century, and Lilac Garden and Dark Elegies are extraordinarily innovative and choreographically and psychologically sophisticated works. Perhaps the problem is that if we were to see more of  Tudor's psychological ballets we would be aware just how much of a debt MacMillan's dram-ballets owe him. Tudor is far more succinct and generally far more effective in portraying what he wants the audience to see and understand and accomplishes it all in twenty to thirty minutes where MacMillan will take three hours with intervals.

 

Here we come to a problem with both the Ashton and Tudor repertory of the thirties. Many of these works were originally created for much smaller spaces than the main stage at Covent Garden, If it is decided that they should be performed in the new Linbury will they attract audiences or will ticket prices deter people from attending ? Much of this repertory is unknown to regular ballet goers. Will people be prepared to take a punt on a pricey mixed bill made up of works which have not been performed in years when everyone knows that long term neglect is the result a work's weaknesses and has nothing to do with the tastes and concerns of individual artistic directors?

[Vanartus]

Blitzschnell comments en route back to Berlin ...loved it. Acknowledge some of the comments particularly Luke Jennings, but I felt privileged to see Hallberg, loved the Tudor and Ratmansky, like the modern pieces and Ave Maria better than I'd thought. Good on Osipova- she's a trooper and treating London to some good stuff. Careful people- too snippy and carping, and if I were her I'd decamp to NY or Munich! Appreciate what you've got...

[Lizbie1]

On 13/09/2018 at 22:58, bridiem said:

I particularly disliked the Roy Assaf piece which contained mainly small, pointless movements (to music including the Moonlight Sonata!! How could such music inspire such - er - uninspired stuff?!). 

 

I thought the Assaf piece was, frankly, poor (uninspired doesn't cover it IMO) and was baffled by the enthusiastic applause it received. But I see it has several fans here! Maybe if I watched more contemporary dance I'd think more highly of it?

 

 

[bridiem]

24 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

 

I thought the Assaf piece was, frankly, poor (uninspired doesn't cover it IMO) and was baffled by the enthusiastic applause it received. But I see it has several fans here! Maybe if I watched more contemporary dance I'd think more highly of it?

 

 

I was struggling to find a word that didn't sound too dismissive given that some other people had enjoyed it; which I realise is a bit wet of me... I was actually quite enraged on behalf of Beethoven. (And of me, since I had to watch it.)

 

I suppose if you watch a lot of contemporary dance (which I have in the past) your expectations might be lower; that's the only way in which I could rate this piece more highly. (I have seen, and still occasionally see, some contemporary dance that I like very much; but too often it seems to me to be meandering into a (dimly-lit) cul de sac whilst gazing into its own navel.)

[MAX]

could you be more explicit please ? why did you think Six years later was poor and uninspired lizbie ?

[Lizbie1]

One of the main things that struck me was that it seemed to have more in common with mime than dance. I gather that it portrays a relationship over some time; there was a long passage in the middle where Osipova repeatedly "hit" her partner with her shoulders (I found that, together with the "slap", very problematic, tediousness aside), then presumably they patched up their differences and there was some standard issue contemporary pdd stuff. Honestly though, I'm hard pressed to remember much about it, apart from a general feeling from the off that it wasn't really of performable standard.

 

Harsh words, I know 😕

Edited September 16, 2018 by Lizbie1
clarifying the "hitting"

[Fiz]

Goodness! I mean the dance, not your opinion, Lizbie.

[capybara]

Pure Dance? Pull the other one! That 'hitting sequence' in Six Years Later referred to above went on for 2 minutes. And Flutter wasn't much better.

 

I liked The Leaves are Fading and Valse Triste but, overall, felt that I paid far, far too much for 60 minutes of' 'performance'.

 

One of the reasons I gave this a 'go' was the appearance of David Hallberg. After all the hype about him being Osipova's ideal partner and the special relationship they have (which has been going on all year as it preceded his appearance at the ROH as well), they might have been dancing in separate worlds as far as I was concerned. Neither Hallberg's bland expression nor his body showed any feeling, except for a slight smile of pleasure when he took his bow. And his quality of movement didn't seem anything special either. I really would be grateful if someone could explain to me why he has the stellar reputation he seems to enjoy.

 

[Don Q Fan]

A few curtain call photos from Friday's show.

 

 

 

[bridiem]

3 hours ago, Lizbie1 said:

One of the main things that struck me was that it seemed to have more in common with mime than dance. I gather that it portrays a relationship over some time; there was a long passage in the middle where Osipova repeatedly "hit" her partner with her shoulders (I found that, together with the "slap", very problematic, tediousness aside), then presumably they patched up their differences and there was some standard issue contemporary pdd stuff. Honestly though, I'm hard pressed to remember much about it, apart from a general feeling from the off that it wasn't really of performable standard.

 

Yes - and I kept thinking 'movement to music does not in itself constitute dance'.

 

[Don Q Fan]

1 hour ago, capybara said:

Pure Dance? Pull the other one! That 'hitting sequence' in Six Years Later referred to above went on for 2 minutes. And Flutter wasn't much better.

 

I liked The Leaves are Fading and Valse Triste but, overall, felt that I paid far, far too much for 60 minutes of' 'performance'.

 

One of the reasons I gave this a 'go' was the appearance of David Hallberg. After all the hype about him being Osipova's ideal partner and the special relationship they have (which has been going on all year as it preceded his appearance at the ROH as well), they might have been dancing in separate worlds as far as I was concerned. Neither Hallberg's bland expression nor his body showed any feeling, except for a slight smile of pleasure when he took his bow. And his quality of movement didn't seem anything special either. I really would be grateful if someone could explain to me why he has the stellar reputation he seems to enjoy.

 

100% concur with you.  I gave it the lowest marks on the Sadlers Wells survey and said I want a refund.  

Is it just me or is there an element of self indulgence here, not to mention Emperor's New Clothes about this show and others of its ilk?

[Bruce Wall]

2 hours ago, capybara said:

One of the reasons I gave this a 'go' was the appearance of David Hallberg. After all the hype about him being Osipova's ideal partner and the special relationship they have (which has been going on all year as it preceded his appearance at the ROH as well), they might have been dancing in separate worlds as far as I was concerned. Neither Hallberg's bland expression nor his body showed any feeling, except for a slight smile of pleasure when he took his bow. And his quality of movement didn't seem anything special either. I really would be grateful if someone could explain to me why he has the stellar reputation he seems to enjoy.

 

 

Capybara, the person you are really quoting vis a vis this 'perfect partnership' business - IS Osipova.  (See here.)  I think the clue to your answer - FOR HER - lies in the semantics.  It is the 'partnering' - or that is how I take it.  Hallberg has always been a reserved actor - one might almost say repressed - [and consequently a very strange choice for Fillin to take into the Bolshoi] but he used to have truly stellar feet to go with his John Barrymore profile (think of the cutting glass bow in the entrechats of, say, a Sissens) which injury/surgery seems to some degree to sadly have put paid to - and he always knew how to present a ballerina.  He still does. The partnering in Valse Triste was far from easy and Hallberg made it look a relative walk in the park for both.  Ratmansky knows Osipova well - if anyone does - as he is really responsible for the significant dawning of her career.  She oft refers to him as her balletic father.  He knows how to husband this partnership - and I think you saw effective evidence of that through his piece and the Tudor.  Lest we forget - for both good AND bad - and there was I agree evidence of both [Thank God one had seen the stellar Jonathan Goddard in other work] this was Osipova's choice.   I wonder - what would you like to bet that Hallberg shows up as Osipova's Romeo for a couple of those 26 MacMillan R&J's in the RB 2018/19 Season?  The odds I think are on.   I'd be happy to take a stake that he will.  That, too, would be HER choice.  Were such to come to pass we could call it Hallberg's 'Salenko' period.    What we watched in Valse Triste was him offering HER a safe pair of hands wherein her comfort lay .... and leapt!  

 

 

Edited September 16, 2018 by Bruce Wall

[serenade]

8 hours ago, bridiem said:

 

I was struggling to find a word that didn't sound too dismissive given that some other people had enjoyed it; which I realise is a bit wet of me... I was actually quite enraged on behalf of Beethoven. (And of me, since I had to watch it.)

 

Haha, you're not the only one.  I thought it was pretty dreadful but the music made me more annoyed because it's so beautiful and then there we have 2 people engaging in some shoulder slapping for an extended period of time.  I think it's definitely up there on the list of worst pieces I've seen unfortunately.

 

This piece aside I had a lovely time.  I nearly always love watching Natalia dance and yesterday's matinee was no exception.  I also love Hallberg so it was a real treat for me.  I loved his solo piece, I thought he danced it quite powerfully.  Valse Triste was my highlight...I loved it.  Also thought The Leaves are Fading was brilliant.  I thought Flutter was not too bad, I quite liked the music and I enjoyed the energy of it but not really sure about the choreography- it didn't do much for me.  I thought she was brilliant in Ave Maria.  All in all I thought it was a pretty good programme...

 

[SPD444]

Have to agree with you Serenade, Leaves are Falling/ Valse Trieste we’re excellent showing  great dancing and partnering with Natalia and Hallberg. “Six years later” was embarrassing to watch Natalia playing shoulder bumps for about 10 minutes ( or so it seemed ) total waste and then both dancers trembling in some sort of orgasmic passion was laughable. “Flutter” was ruined by the music, if that’s what it was, Mr. Muhly must have seen the McGregor at the RB ( Multiverse and please god I never have to sit through that again).

 

One lovely incident at the curtain calls, Natalia must have thought they were over as when the lights came on again there she was sitting on the stage. The boys started laughing which she joined in with.

 

well done Natalia.

[BMC]

Well, like so many others, I found this to be a bit of a so-so event. As an Osipova fan, I am always happy to see her dance and it was lovely to see David Hallberg at last, although I wish I had got to see him pre-injury. He does have a very classy stage presence though and they were wonderful together in Valse Triste. I also enjoyed The Leaves are Fading and, I suspect against my better judgement, Ave Maria.

 

It does make you realise, once again, how difficult it is to get these things right. I was thinking back to the equivalents I have seen over the years with, for example, Acosta, Mukhamedov, Sylvie Guillem, Polunin and others, and it seems very rare that these events match their talents and provide something memorable.  If I'm honest, Sylvie was probably my least favourite of these dancers but I can still remember the genuine excitement I felt on first seeing Two and Push, whereas as an adoring fan of Irek, only his Diana and Acteaon pas de deux with Yoshida lives on in my mind (and a bit of a strange Othello). Perhaps it's my conservative taste or subconsciously wanting these superstars to dance show stoppers, or may be it's just a reminder what a tremendous talent it is both to commission and then for the choreographer (and everyone else involved) to create a work that people want to see again. I think the best of these sort of evenings I have seen was Johan Kobborg's at the Queen Elizabeth Hall when he put on a series of Bournonville works which again says it all!  

 

I think managing my expectations is the key in future - enjoying seeing whichever dancer it happens to be in something outside the repertoire we usually get to see them in while having no expectation at all that it will produce one of those 'seared in the memory' occasions.