Royal Ballet Promotion Predictions

[alison]

That's natural, of course, but there are some people who barely seem to be used these days - unless, of course, they are injured and I don't know about it.

[Sunrise]

I don't think that using words like "stalling" or "stagnation" is quite fair. Many/most dancers reach soloist level where they will stay and thrive and do a wonderful job for the company. Hopefully they will get a shot at the odd principal role but without the likelihood of becoming a principal themselves, however much we may disagree. I do agree though that some dancers who seem to be very underused at the moment. 

[Booklover89]

I don't know...I'm looking at the first soloist names and most of them seem pretty 'active' to me, having danced (or down to dance) prominent roles in the most recent triple bill, Onegin, Swan Lake and Fille.  Hikaru Kobayashi has recently had a baby, I believe.  Perhaps there is just more 'buzz' around certain younger dancers who clearly are on the up and that leads to the impression of 'stalling' (which I agree is not a nice word to use in this particular instance).

[FLOSS]

I wonder whether it is kinder to say that a dancer's career has stalled or stagnated or to suggest that they have almost certainly reached their natural level in the company and that in your opinion they are unlikely to progress further. The ardent supporters of the dancer concerned would be sure to come down on the poster concerned like a ton of bricks.

 

I believe that nearly everyone has at least one dancer whom they admire about whom friends and acquaintances maintain a polite if slightly amused silence for fear of causing unnecessary offence although they are thinking ".MISS X OR MR Y AS PRINCIPAL YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS!!". I wonder how many people who have contributed to this debate have put forward names of favourite dancers whose performances they admire who they know are not in the running for promotion and how many believe that the dancers that they have named are really likely to move up the ranks? 

 

Of course none of it matters because it is all harmless speculation.I wonder if anyone has ever sent an irate letter to a director about a favourite dancer's lack of recognition. When people put pen to paper the letter would have been written in green ink. Does anyone have an idea about what the e-mail equivalent might be?

[Sunrise]

I wonder whether it is kinder to say that a dancer's career has stalled or stagnated or to suggest that they have almost certainly reached their natural level in the company and that in your opinion they are unlikely to progress further. The ardent supporters of the dancer concerned would be sure to come down on the poster concerned like a ton of bricks.

 

I believe that nearly everyone has at least one dancer whom they admire about whom friends and acquaintances maintain a polite if slightly amused silence for fear of causing unnecessary offence although they are thinking ".MISS X OR MR Y AS PRINCIPAL YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS!!". I wonder how many people who have contributed to this debate have put forward names of favourite dancers whose performances they admire who they know are not in the running for promotion and how many believe that the dancers that they have named are really likely to move up the ranks? 

 

Of course none of it matters because it is all harmless speculation.I wonder if anyone has ever sent an irate letter to a director about a favourite dancer's lack of recognition. When people put pen to paper the letter would have been written in green ink. Does anyone have an idea about what the e-mail equivalent might be?

 

I think talking about a natural level reached is a very nice and realistic way of putting it actually. I think I've read of at least one non-principal and much admired dancer saying that they are content with their rank and the roles they have been given. I would love to see some soloists in certain roles (in part because I feel I have seen all the principals do everything and would like to see someone new), but I am realistic and I think to be a principal you need something extra beyond being a lovely dancer.

 

As for the e-mail equivalent of an irate letter, if you wrote it all in caps, you might get their attention ;-)

[alison]

I agree, but there is a difference between having reached your natural level and not being used, surely?

[capybara]

I agree, but there is a difference between having reached your natural level and not being used, surely?

 

 Yes, but it is curious that some dancers seem to be promoted and then not fully utilised at their new level.

[aileen]

As in most fields, I'm not convinced that the best dancers get to the top, and I feel that some principals 'grow into' their positions once they are in them. I know that I'm a fan and that he was a principal at ENB but what has been remarkable about Vadim at the RB thus far (and I don't want to jinx things) is that he has stepped into his position and danced all these new roles so well and absolutely at the standard expected of a RB principal having not 'grown up with them' as a young dancer coming up through the ranks.

[Fonty]

As in most fields, I'm not convinced that the best dancers get to the top, and I feel that some principals 'grow into' their positions once they are in them.

 

I agree with that.  I am sure we all have our own ideas about dancers who seem to have reached the top a little too early, and their promotion seems to be done on the basis of promise for the future, rather than current level of expertise. 

 

Oh, and I am a huge fan of Vadim as well.  I loved his partnership with Klimentova at ENB, and I haven't seen him put a foot wrong at the RB so far. 

[Jamesrhblack]

I'm not sure if this should go in casting or promotions, but I wondered if anybody else that thought Salenko's casting in three productions in the first booking period suggests that she wit have a contract of a more permanent nature, essentially as partner to McRae, I'm guessing as a Prinicpal Guest Artist rather than Principal, as the latter would, in theory, imply participation in a wider range of repertoire. Given the repertoire and the casting so far announced I fear that we may be losing Marquez, rarely a favourite but a captivating Lise, who would surely have been obvious casing for Pigeons but is in neither that nor Nutcracker: I'm not sure if the her two R & J's will be valedictory but if she is still here for Giselle I'd predict that those are likely to be so....

[FLOSS]

Salenko is a very nice dancer but I hope that O'Hare does not appoint her as a permanent member of the company or even as a guest principal as that will reduce the number of performances available for the very talented dancers in the lower ranks of the company and effectively block their chances of promotion.

 

Many people have commented on Muntagirov's maturity and the quality of his performances since he joined the company. What we see on stage when he performs is a subtle mixture of ability, training and experience. Experience which he gained because the then director of ENB, Wayne Eagling, gave the young dancer the opportunity to dance in major roles on a regular basis with an experienced partner week in week out rather than waiting for his turn.I some how doubt that O'Hare would dare do that and yet that it is what he needs to do if he is to have locally trained talent leading the company rather than acting as a backdrop to a group of international star dancers .

 

If Kevin O'Hare is serious about developing the talent within the ranks of his company then he will have to ensure that young dancers are given the chance to learn on the job rather than waiting in a queue for their turn while vacancies in the higher ranks of the company are filled from the outside by dancers who have to learn to acquire the company's style and the ability to act.Those with real theatrical talent and technical skill need to be given preference over those who give their best performances in class. He may have to skip a generation of dancers and perhaps deny the rank of Principal to dancers who might expect to be promoted on a "Buggin's turn" basis. Casting Salenko who, as far as I know, is not an Ashton dancer in Two Pigeons next season makes very little sense if he is committed to developing the company's own talent.It is as if O'Hare is saying that there are no suitably talented short girls in the company who could take the role of the Young Girl.

 

There are within the ranks of the company a significant number of dancers under twenty five who show great promise. Hayward,Nagdhi and Ball are getting the chance to dance in Romeo and Juliet next season but there are others such as Reece Clarke and Anne Rose O'Sullivan who should be given an opportunity to gain experience through performance now rather than waiting in a long queue for their turn while their opportunities for advancement are blocked by management buying in dancers.Development opportunities have to be given on a regular and consistent basis rather than treating dancers as flavour of the month.If he believes that the current repertory is unsuited to less experienced dancers he has the power to select works such as Les Patineurs and Les Rendezvous which give opportunities to a lot of dancers he could even ask Wheeldon and Scarlett to create works on the younger dancers starting with Stix Brunell.He is not obliged to churn out 21 Swan Lakes or 21 Sleeping Beauties every season and unless someone signed a contract in their lifeblood he is not obliged to stage MacMillan's Romeo and Juliet every time. There is the Ashton version which was made on young dancers. It needs a home and some performances.

 

I recognise that management can not be completely certain about when a dancer will retire after all a serious injury can cut a career short but it does not seem to me that the company has ever gone in for even the most rudimentary form of succession planning which might help to explain their increasing reliance on the cheque book to fill vacancies rather than internal development which requires long term plannining.

Edited May 17, 2015 by FLOSS

[aileen]

Yes, why is Salenko being brought in three years running? I'm afraid that there is a group of senior dancers who will probably be leapfrogged by some of the more junior dancers who have been identified as future principals but I suppose that that has always happened.

[Tony Newcombe]

If anybody wants to see younger dances being given the chance to develop their talents, could I suggest that visiting Birmingham Royal Ballet might be the answer. The last time they danced Lac we saw Mathews, Hirata and Gittens all make their debuts as O/O within the space of a few days.

[capybara]

If anybody wants to see younger dances being given the chance to develop their talents, could I suggest that visiting Birmingham Royal Ballet might be the answer. The last time they danced Lac we saw Mathews, Hirata and Gittens all make their debuts as O/O within the space of a few days.

 

But haven't all these lovely ballerinas actually been around for some time, Tony? Longer than (say) Francesca Hayward and Yasmine Nagdhi have been at the RB?

[Jan McNulty]

But haven't all these lovely ballerinas actually been around for some time, Tony? Longer than (say) Francesca Hayward and Yasmine Nagdhi have been at the RB?

 

Bearing in mind that it's probably 3 years since we saw Swan Lake probably not at the time!

 

Let us also not forget that the likes of Alexander Campbell (now with RB), Miki Mizutani, Yaoqin Shang to name but 3 were getting major roles within their first year in the company.

[Tony Newcombe]

Absolutely right Janet.  It was the first week of October 2012 and Mathews was  a First Artist at the time. 

[capybara]

Absolutely right Janet.  It was the first week of October 2012 and Mathews was  a First Artist at the time. 

 

In her fifth year in the Company then.  Your point is well made!

[FLOSS]

Going to see BRB dance Swan Lake is not the solution to the inevitable consequences of hiving off the Covent Garden company's training section. BRB is the current incarnation of SWTB/SWRB which was specifically created to provide the opportunities which it was recognised that the move to Covent Garden would deny young and inexperienced dancers and choreographers. The difficulties in developing dancers and choreographers in house at Covent Garden that de Valois identified in the late 1940's did not disappear when SWRB moved to Birmingham and became BRB. They were simply ignored.The ballet was of little interest to Jeremy Isaacs. In fact it seems to me that most, if not all, of the changes to the Royal Ballet companies over the years have been driven by the Board's concerns over the opera company's finances.

 

The loss of the touring company was not the only self inflicted wound that made the Covent Garden company an organisation seemingly without the ability to regenerate itself.The sudden loss of dancers who might have been expected to have left over a lengthy period of time and to have provided an element of continuity as exemplars of performance style also played a significant part.

 

Michael Kaiser made his contribution to the current state of affairs by suggesting to Anthony Dowell that he should reduce the company's costs by getting rid of some of the older, more expensive dancers.Fiona Chadwick and Ravenna Tucker suddenly disappeared without any announcement being made about their retirement. A little later uncertainty about the continued existence of the company while the house was closed led Kumakawa and four other men including Gary Avis to leave the Royal Ballet and go to Japan where Kumakawa set up K company. Michael Kaiser's advice to Dowell had been that he should close the company down during the closure of the theatre and then when the redevelopment was completed go out and hire a whole new group of dancers who would not be employed for the full year much like the employment pattern of dancers at ABT. As we know that did not happen but the uncertainty led to the loss of dancers who would, like the women who were retired, have provided continuity and acted as exemplars to members of the company.Ross Stretton's short directorship also led to the departure of key dancers. The loss of dancers led to Dowell, and then Mason buying in dancers to fill gaps. But it seem to me that what began from necessity became something of a habit. It became too easy to recruit from the outside by video rather than developing dancers from within the company's ranks.

 

It seems to me that it is the cumulative effect of these events that has done the damage as far as the company's ability to regenerate by developing talent is concerned.It has simply got out of the habit.That is why the decision to employ Salenko and cast her in the sort of ballet that was previously the preserve of a dancer like Hatley is of so much interest as it suggests that O'Hare may be about to follow the same route as his predecessors.Is the decision to cast well known dancers in the initial run of Two Pigeons intended to get people to buy tickets or is it evidence of O'Hare taking the easy route? Booking for the second run of Pigeons is not going to be influenced by the first run of performances as booking will open for the second run before the first run has been danced.It would be unfortunate if the performance to be streamed into cinemas were to be danced by someone outside the company but who is prepared to put money on it not being McRae and Salenko who dance in that performance?

 

There is no possibility of establishing another training company. The solution to developing dancers in house has to be found at Covent Garden.Perhaps the refurbished Linbury should be used to enable the younger dancers to perform some of the old repertory that is suitable for a small stage.Ballets like La Fete Etrange, Capriole Suite,La Boutique Fantasque,Les Rendezvous and Facade spring to mind.In fact anything created for, or performed on the old Sadler's Wells stage would be fine in the Linbury.Perhaps a mixture of old and new works, two older works and a new one is the answer.The fact that new works would have to stand comparison with works of proven quality might improve the quality of the new ones. It must be possible at certain times of the year to divide the company so that it can perform two separate programmes simultaneously.An in house equivalent to the split tours that BRB undertake.That is a possible solution as there are quite a few ballet evenings when the corps is not used. But perhaps the best solution is for the Royal Ballet to perform in the Linbury on opera evenings.

 

I think that regular performances of this type would assist in developing the dancer's stamina,technique,and theatrical artistry as well as a real understanding of the inherent differences in choreographic styles of the works that they dance.It is unlikely to happen but it does no harm to wish.

Edited May 17, 2015 by FLOSS

[Jan McNulty]

Ravenna Tucker did not retire from RB - she moved to BRB and I enjoyed many of her performances there!  She did retire from BRB.

 

A late friend of mine firmly believed that if the move to Birmingham had not taken place, with its subsequent unravelling from RB, then SWRB would have been closed down during one set of cuts or another.  She was a very astute observer of politics in respect of Arts Council funding and I am sure her assumption would have proved correct.  Thank goodness, says I, that BRB unravelled from RB!

[aileen]

Using the Linbury for smaller 'chamber' works performed by less experienced RB dancers could work well. There is less pressure than performing on the main opera house stage. The RB could even stage taster evenings for newcomers consisting of short excerpts and pdds from a variety of ballets from different eras.  

[Sunrise]

Isn't rehearsal time one of the limiting factors though? Some principal dancers are underused, but the dancers in the corps and the soloists are always saying they are working flat out, and that may be case with the repetiteurs and rehearsal rooms too. To put on more programs in the Linbury may mean sacrificing a production on stage, and it would cost a fair amount of money for relatively little financial return.

[MAB]

I've read Jeremy Isaacs's account of his time at Covent Garden and as far as I remember he left all the decisions concerning the ballet company to Anthony Dowell on the assumption that Dowell knew more about running a ballet company than he did.  I don't remember any of Isaacs's predecessors concerning themselves with ballet casting either: it isn't their job.  The board's concerns about finance covers more than just the opera, as they are responsible for running a huge organization of which the dancers and singers are just a part of a very large whole.  To refer again to Jeremy Isaacs's memoires his biggest headache was retaining as many jobs across the board as possible during the rebuilding closure. ROH is dependant on money from ACE. i.e. the government. and from whatever donations they are able to squeeze from wealthy organizations and individuals.  As far as I'm aware no monies are given on the basis of who dances what within the Royal Ballet.

 

Interesting that you mention Ross Stretton as he was a director who seemed to have some views similar to your own.  He started casting according to what he considered merit rather than seniority and faced a revolt as a consequence.  He promoted Nunez and Putrov to principal before they had slogged their way through the hierarchical categories and there was some lively discussion about it right here on ballet.co from those outraged that these upstarts had leapfrogged over their personal favourites.

 

I'm disappointed about casting of Two Pigeons too as I wanted to see Nunez with Acosta and Osipova with Bonelli and can I say that wanting that work to be purely the preserve of the younger dancers is taking a risk.  The ballet has been out of the repertoire for so long it needs tip top experienced dancers in the roles to re-establish the work's popularity with an audience unlikely to have seen it before.   I doubt very much that Ashton regarded the work as only suitable the young to dance, when I saw the ballet for the first time the role of the young man was danced by Alexander Grant who was forty at the time.  I presume as Ashton was director then he had full control over who was cast in his ballets.

[FLOSS]

Janet.I have every reason to believe that you are right about SWRB being in danger of being sacrificed at some point if it had not moved to Birmingham and become BRB. When MacMillan took over the directorship of the Royal Ballet one of the things that he did was to close down the old Touring Company as a cost cutting measure.If it could happen once it could clearly happen again.

 

The thing that I don't understand is that knowing that a significant number of its outstanding dancers had come through the touring company the Royal Ballet management team at the time of the establishment of BRB failed to recognise the need to put in place and maintain a system to develop its own young dancers. Succession planning is a fundamental need in all organisations but not apparently in arts organisations.

 

But then perhaps I should not be surprised, Despite making money on its tours which for years helped keep the Royal Opera House afloat financially the ballet company accepted that it needed to make cuts when the Board told them that that they were necessary. The odd thing is that, at least according to Anthony Russell Roberts, the ballet company had, unknowingly, been subsidising the opera company for years because of the way the costs of the two companies were handled.Instead of each paying their own costs their costs were combined and then allocated between the two companies according to the number of performances that they had given.An organisation that can be duped like that is probably not going to worry about regenerating itself.

Edited May 17, 2015 by FLOSS

[Melody]

From things I've read about the running of the Royal Opera House, it sounds as though the most powerful and influential people tended to be focused on the opera rather than the ballet, and the stories about how the board didn't want MacMillan creating ballets to certain important symphonic or religious music suggest that they viewed ballet as rather trivial. If these people were so focused on opera, it might not have seemed unreasonable to them to structure the ballet company along the lines of the opera company and, rather than developing the top talent from within, to just provide an in-house chorus and buy in stars as needed from the international market.

 

One thing I don't particularly understand, though, is why, when Monica Mason took over after Ross Stretton's scorched-earth tenure and the associated resignations from the company, she didn't try to get Sarah Wildor back. If they were serious about preserving Ashton's repertoire, I'd have thought that bringing back one of the best Ashton dancers of the time would have made sense.

Edited May 18, 2015 by Melody

[capybara]

 

Interesting that you mention Ross Stretton as he was a director who seemed to have some views similar to your own.  He started casting according to what he considered merit rather than seniority and faced a revolt as a consequence.  He promoted Nunez and Putrov to principal before they had slogged their way through the hierarchical categories and there was some lively discussion about it right here on ballet.co from those outraged that these upstarts had leapfrogged over their personal favourites.

 

 

Unfortunately, however, once Ross Stretton had departed, it did not seem that these two wonderfully talented young people were given the kind of consistent support and opportunity which enables dancers to develop as artistes. Nunez had to wait an unduly long time to dance as Odette/Odile and 10/11 years before she was cast as Juliet. Putrov was arguably overlooked for many years for both Romeo and Des Grieux. 

[MAB]

From things I've read about the running of the Royal Opera House, it sounds as though the most powerful and influential people tended to be focused on the opera rather than the ballet, and the stories about how the board didn't want MacMillan creating ballets to certain important symphonic or religious music suggest that they viewed ballet as rather trivial. If these people were so focused on opera, it might not have seemed unreasonable to them to structure the ballet company along the lines of the opera company and, rather than developing the top talent from within, to just provide an in-house chorus and buy in stars as needed from the international market.

 

 

I think we've moved a long way from the arch conservatism of the 1960's and I doubt that fifty years on any objections would be made as to a choreographer's choice of music.

 

Historically the Royal Ballet hasn't been reliant on guest dancers and during the directorship of Norman Morris he stopped the practice of bringing in guests altogether to encourage talent within the company.  This policy had mixed results, though at the time there were also fewer dancers on the international freelance circuit.

 

As the Royal Ballet now has no discernible overall style and the English/Ashton tradition has disappeared, on reflection the idea of bringing in dancers to perform certain roles doesn't seem such a bad one. 

[Bleaden94]

 

As the Royal Ballet now has no discernible overall style and the English/Ashton tradition has disappeared, on reflection the idea of bringing in dancers to perform certain roles doesn't seem such a bad one. 

 

That is a strong statement, you only have to watch a video of Russian ballerina and an English ballerina to notice an obvious difference in style. At Christmas in 2014, my Mum and I went to watch a live relay of the Bolshoi's Nutcracker, and a few months before we had gone to watch the Winters Tale live. My Mum has a limited knowledge of ballet, and even she immediately picked up on the difference of style, noticing that English ballet was more lyrical, with more accurate footwork. 

 

The English style has perhaps evolved over time, as technique has become more refined. It was never going to stay the same forever, as Frederick Ashton is no longer alive to choreograph new ballets! 

[LinMM]

I think the BRB has been a good move as it gives people who don't live in London or the London area more of a chance to see first rate ballet performances.

I love your idea for the Linbury Aileen (post 119) I'd love to go to the Linbury where the view of the dancers on stage is excellent to see some younger dancers from the main company have a special programme there......of course having no business acumen whatsoever I don't know how practical this would be but I'd be for it anyway!!

 

Although I think the style of the Royal has changed a little in recent years and perhaps a tiny bit more "Russian" I still think they are very distinctive from Russian Companies at the moment. Of course it's not realistic to preserve Ashton in aspic so to speak but that speed and precision is important enough as part of ballet for it to be fully incorporated into teaching.

 

Perhaps Ballet will be a bit like Education where in the end everything becomes cyclical and returns with a different name tag ...for those with a long enough memory!.....that's all ...and that is I think because educational ideas have such a broad spectrum and so no one way will serve everybody.....and Ballet too in my view has a broad spectrum ......there's plenty of room for different styles .....one isn't superior/inferior to the others.....just different.....there's joy in all for me.

[LinMM]

Sorry forgot to add .....getting a bit back to the thread.....that I would like to see more exposure of dancers within the Company but of course even a Director who,may favour this will have to occasionally bring in outsiders ......as recently with Salenko because of the injury rate. But anyway it is nice occasionally to see "guest artists" just for the sake of it. Hope a balance can be struck!

[Sunrise]

I wonder if any of the younger dancers within the company have tried to take a hand themselves in developing their own careers and organising and staging performances themselves. A number of principal dancers have done this, Cojocaru, Kobborg, Galeazzi, Watson, and so on, though I guess being principals they are more likely to attract financial backing. I'm not aware of many dancers below principal level doing so (apart from Emma Magure recently), and I know it takes a tremendous amount of organisational effort and it would have to be done outside of company time, i.e. in the summer. But it would be nice if these kind of endeavors had the support of the RB management. Thinking about the direction that Melissa Hamilton is is taking, I hope that she inspires other young dancers who are waiting their turn not to accept the status quo.

Edited May 18, 2015 by Sunrise

[aileen]

I think that it's difficult for a dancer below principal level to attract a large enough audience to his or her own show. Not all principals could manage it either; you need to be very high profile and popular. You are likely to get more support of you are organising the show for charity or if you get your high profile friends to perform with you.

[Lynette H]

Pietra Mello-Pitman of the RB managed it. She's the Executive Producer of Inala (returning to Sadler's Wells in July.  See http://inala.co.uk/cast-creative

 

Sisters Grimm is her production company. (Excellent name..)

[Fonty]

I seem to remember a time, long, long ago, when matinees had new young dancers cast in the lead roles, and the ticket prices were cheaper to reflect that fact that the performance might not be the finished article. Or is my memory playing tricks on me?

 

I also agree with the point that Floss was making in an earlier post - that Muntagirov benefitted from being cast with the experienced Klimentova.  If there is no possibility of introducing newcomers to lead roles away from the glaring spotlight of Covent Garden, then surely this should be considered?  Someone who has performed a leading role many times, and is comfortable with it is bound to be a huge help to a first timer, surely?