Wulff

I think it is true to say that several theatres have been built or rebuilt on the site, and the "old" theatre was far from being "antique". So at what point in time would a new short name be appropriate seeing that the full name has not changed over the centuries? Now, if a theatre on the site was no longer called Sadler's Wells then that would be the time to dump tradition.

I have noticed that several members posting on this site refer to Sadler's Wells theatre in its shortened form as" Sadler's". This is a recent departure from the long established tradition of "The Wells". When Michael Sadler built his theatre on this site at the end of the 17th Century it was found to contain a number of wells constructed by the monks of nearby Clerkenwell Abbey. The water from these wells was thought to have therapeutic properties, and so Mr Sadler decided to add to the attraction of his venture by not only offering his patrons theatrical entertainment but possible cures for their ailments by "taking the waters". Sadler has long gone and his theatre has had several subsequent owners , but the wells remain. even though their waters are no longer considered therapeutic. There is one in the basement of the present theatre under a plate glass cover, and I understand that there are several more under the former Metropolitan Water Board building opposite the theatre, When Pinero wrote his play "Trelawny of the Wells" the "Wells" theatre of the title although not specifically "Sadler's Wells" was a thinly disguised version which contemporary audiences would have recognised. When Lilian Baylis, already owner of the Old Vic, acquired Sadler's Wells the companies that performed in the two theatres adopted the title of "Vic Wells" and not "Vic Sadler's", and the support association was, and still is the Vic Wells Association. I would therefore respectfully suggest that we continue to maintain the long established usage of "The Wells" when referring to Mr Sadler's theatre.

I saw Lachlan Monaghan dance the Clog Dance from Hobson's Choice at a solos evening at the RBS when he was still a student, and.It struck me then that he was born to dance the role of Will Mossop, and it is great to see that that early promise has been fulfilled

Wonderful debut from O'Sulivan and Sambe. In addition to the standing ovation they took a curtain call with the house lights on. A rare tribute these days and well deserved.

Regarding McRae's jumps.He concluded his variation in the first act with a manege of Barrel Turns (tours de reins). In the white act he threw in a couple of 540s (Revoltade 540: so called because the body turns through 360 degrees and then another 180 - you can look this up on youtube). At the conclusion he did not perform the usual manege of double assembles but instead one of double sauts de basque.

The Golden (? Bronze) Idol is a Soviet era addition, and definitely not by Petipa. Talking of additions, that dreadful jester in Swan lake is the work of Alexander Gorsky who interpolated it into a revival of the ballet in the early 1900s. On the subject of the Berlin production of La Bayadere, is this billed as a reconstruction or simply "after" Petipa. I note that the German text says "nach Petipa" which leads me to believe that the latter is the case.

Definitely Bugaku. Long time since the RB did it. I remember seeing Bryony Brind in the female role.

Further to my previous post, I have just checked out the music and it is part of No19 in the full score Act III pas de six (andante con moto). This item is for the 6 potential brides, each one having her own variation.

To the best of my recollection this music has been used in a previous RB production. It is in fact the variation for the Hungarian princess in the original score.

Many people seem to hate the Bintley waltz and love theAshton version act IV. My thoughts on these items are that as regards the waltz Bintley has followed quite closely Petipa's libretto (in this connexion check out Roland John Wilely's book on the Tchaikovsky Ballets.) The Ashton version of ActIV in my opinion involved far too much running around by the corps in order to form beautiful floor patterns at the expense of drama, and it is interesting to note that Ratmansky"s reconstruction is very similar to the current RB version.

I agree whole heartedly with Floss's comments. It seems that my worst fears are about to be realised and that we are going to get a trendy "concept" version of SL, which while paying lip service to respecting the Petipa/Ivanov text - and for that matter the libretto too - ditches much of the choreography in favour of Scarlett's innovations. Much as I respect Scarletts own original creations I find it hard to believe that he will reveal himself as a better choreographer than Petipa or Ivanov. I think that the RB can no longer claim to be a guardian of the 19th century classics, especially since they seem to have made no effort to research the notations that are available in the Harvard collection. In future, in order to see productions closer to the original texts we shall have to look elsewhere.

I think that those of us who saw Fonteyn in roles originally created for her will inevitably see "echos" of her when those roles are performed by other dancers., so I don't think that such an experience is peculiar to Sylvia although this was a role created specifically to show off Fonteyn's talents. The big difference between Fonteyn's performance and those of the current run of Sylvias is that today's dancers have a more athletic attack and bigger jump than Fonteyn.

What Nunez was doing was authentic Ashton, and she was doing what Fonteyn did in the role. The only difference was that she has a naturally bigger jump than Fonteyn. The steps in act1 portray the dancers as huntresses and and are not influenced either by Balanchine or Darcey Bussell. Incidentally, regarding the music.When Tchaikowsky heard it, he admired it so much that he said that he would not have dared to compose Swan Lake if he had heard it earlier. Also the score of Sylvia was quite revolutionary in its time. Delibes was an admirer of Wagner and the score incorporates a number of Leitmotivs, which was unusual for ballet music of that period.. It also strikes me that the entree and pas des chasseresses, is a sort of gallic Ride of the Valkyries.

I thought that the revival of Sylvia went very well, and overall was better danced and with stronger technique at all levels than on some occasions in the past. In particular the women's jumps are far stronger than they used to be. I saw the original production of Sylvia with Fonteyn a number of times in the past and I consider that Christopher Newton's "realisation" is pretty faithful as far as the choreography goes, However he has made changes to the drama in the second act. Originally there was no wine in Orion"s grotto, but Sylvia took some grapes and squeezed them, and made 'instant" wine - "silly" I know , but I think it was in the original libretto, and sometimes you have to suspend disbelief. Of course Orion and his minions being unacquainted with alcohol quickly got drunk and collapsed. Sylvia then tried to get out of the grotto but couldn't find a way, she then prayed to Eros, the roof of the grotto flew off and Eros was revealed standing on a sort of plinth. He beckoned to Sylvia to go free and she jetteed off into the wild woods . This ending leaves us with the question of how did she find her way onto Eros's boat, so the new ending makes more dramatic sense. Some years ago at an insight evening I mentioned the "instant wine" to Christopher Newton and was told that I was talking nonsense. However, some time later I met Valerie Taylor who was one of Orion's concubines in the original production, and she confirmed that my memory was correct. Toda's Sylvias are more athletic in act 1 than Fonteyn was, and jump higher and further. The one thing that Fonteyn lacked was a good jump, but she made you think that she had one. That solo in act 1 has a number of difficulties, steps that look easy but are not, and the only time I ever saw Fonteyn fall on stage was in that solo. Certain numbers in act 3 have been cut in this production for the simple reason that their music is not in the original score and Ashton borrowed a couple of items from "La Source". In particular I remember that there was a pas de dix for Apollo and the nine muses. I thought that Vadim Muntagirov was excellent as Aminta and made much of what is quite a slender part. To those who feel that he should have more to do I say, "Where do you find the music, and how would you fit the extra action into the drama?" His solo in act 1 was outstandigly well danced with beautiful line, fluid and assured execution and sensitive use of the upper body which I am sure would have pleased Ashton.

I ought to have added that shoes are usually removed before carrying out this manoeuvre. Whether it makes it more or less displeasing I leave you to guess.

Despite the undoubted quality of the dancing, I felt that the Holland Park show was marred by the very poor quality of the sound amplification. This was especially noticeable in Les Sylphides which was danced to a solo piano which was made to sound more like a bar room honky-tonk than a concert grand. It says much for the professionalism of the students that they were able to to turn in a good performance to such a sorry accompaniment - no fault of the pianist. Neither did the recorded items fare too well, being subject to much distortion and a generally unpleasing sound quality. Let's hope that if there is a Holland Park event next year somebody ensures that a decent sound system is installed. In contrast it was a great relief to hear the ROH show accompanied by a live orchestra, with the exception of that rather curious Israeli mass striptease number for which the recorded music sounded a good deal better over the ROH sound system.

Very glad to see that Ben Ella has made it to soloist. He was in the same year in the RBS as Vadim and showed great promise as a student, but his subsequent career has been held back by a series of injuries, so it's great to see that he has at last won through.

I have noticed a recent feature of audience behaviour in the amphi at the ROH. If there is an empty seat, then quite often the occupant of the seat in the row behind will put his/ her (usually her) feet on the back of the seat in front.

I was at Saturday night's performance of Mayerling in which Johannes was dancing the role of Bay Middleton. At the general curtain call I noticed that he was waving his hat as if to say"goodbye". He later took an individual call and repeated the same gesture with his hat. My guess at the time was that this was his last performance with the company, and I think I must have been correct.

Sightlines in the amphi are generally very good as long as people sit back in their seats and don't lean forward. Unfortunately I often find myself in a situation where I am sitting behind the only person in the whole row in front of me who decides to lean forward. I have no qualms whatsoever in asking them to sit back and very seldom have a problem. I think that most people have no idea that in leaning forward they obstruct the view of those sitting behind them. There used to be a reminder to this effect in very small print in the programme, but I think that this has now disappeared. I reckon it should be brought back in larger print

I wonder who it was who originated the idea that Act 1 of SB was the celebration of Princess Aurora's 16th birthday. In fact Petipa's original libretto states that it is her 20th. When you think about it, that makes more sense. Aurora is no teenage bride about to be married off "out of the schoolroom`' but a princess of marriageable age endowed with all the talents bestowed on her by the fairies and just approaching what used to be considered the age of majority. Of course the matter of a woman's age is often liable to be subject to economies of truth, so perhaps Aurora is starting early in this respect.

Tim Scholl's book is extremely interesting, but unfortunately seems to be out of print. A search on the web offered a new copy for £50 and used copies for around £30, which seems an awful lot for what is quite a slim volume. An hour long lecture by Tim Scholl about certain aspects of the reconstructed Sleeping Beauty can be found on Youtube. Another good source for the history of the 1890 production is Roland John Wiley's book on the Tchaikovsky ballets

. I wonder if anyone knows who the actor is who wanders around for most of the first act, mostly in front of the tree, appearing very busy but not actually doing much at all. He carries the chandelier at the end of act one as everyone goes to bed. I have seen him doing this for a good few years now, he never gets in the way of the dancers but manages to keep out of the way. I would love to know who he is, does anyone know? I think it's Oliver Symons.

I entirely agree with all that Floss has said about Pierrot Lunaire, especially the music which seems to upset many ballet goers. I hate to say this, and no doubt will be roundly abused for saying it, but I have the impression that the average ballet fan is not particularly musically literate and finds it difficult to accept a score that does not have "easy tunes". Things have improved a bit, but I recall a time when the opening bars of the "daybreak" music in Daphnis and Chloe used to be drowned in chatter because they were - and still are- played with the drop curtain down, and so qualified as "only music".