tabitha

How about reading posts properly? I don't know why on earth you make the assumption I haven't seen it, but my comment was in reply to another poster and was a generic comment about Scarlett's lack of competence taking all his work into account, including this latest one.

Agreed. Scarlett has nowhere near proved himself enough to be given Swan Lake. "Cronyism" is one way of describing it.....I've heard others.

Although we each share our birth date with a mere 19 million people around the world.......

There's something a bit 'emperors new clothes' about WM (and in the spirit of WM, you can take that to mean the costumes or the choreography, or both - and pronounce it however you want!)

He is a living legend! Recognition is well overdue!

Sorry MAB, I hate to disagree but In my experience it has a reputation for being one of the most competitive companies going, more so since Tamara took over. Seriously, what type of company has an internal dancing competition? Choreography yes, but dancing....

Or maybe they attend because they don't want to look like sour grapes? In my view there is already a lot of pressure and competition between dancers in a ballet company, constantly having to try and prove yourself for the next role, so why a formal competition that exacerbates all of that? The ones who are constantly overlooked get very good at smiling and cheering for others. I wonder how some of the dancers who have been artists for the last 10+ yrs really feel about it? Probably their confidence died when they realised they weren't ever going to be classed as 'emerging'!

I'm not a fan of ballet competitions generally and am even less of a fan of this 'in-house' competition. I can't see the point of staging something so divisive within a company. Shame that it seems to be growing in popularity.

Interestingly BRB performed Les Rendezvous last year as part of a triple bill with Facade and Kin. The 2nd years at the Royal Ballet School performed Les Rendezvous at the Main Stage performance last year and I think they will be doing Les Patineurs at this summer's performance. Seems like the school is doing its bit to keep the Ashton heritage alive.

Contextual and widening participation are the same and are aimed at 'disadvantaged' students. However you are right that offers for 'mature' students (over 24ish) can be much lower as 'life experience' is taken into account. However, many mature students without any qualifications are encouraged to do an "Access Course" to demonstrate aptitude, but these can be hugely variable and not all unis accept them for all courses.

It is very difficult to take A levels once you are over 18. Further education colleges offer them but if you have already done some level 3 qualifications e.g. A level or BTEC, then you usually have to pay, or if over 24, you can access a learning loan. This is usually a 2 year course. There are a number of private / independent schools which take over 18s for A level in a fast track one year course, but they tend to be in London or the South and typically cost around £16-18k for tuition fees and then accommodation is a further £10k. Then there are the distance / online learning options which offer some online tutor help but require a high level of self-reliance. With regard to university access, the entrance requirements are marked clearly on their website for each course and you generally need good A levels. Foundation courses are only for overseas students who haven't done A levels apart from in exceptional cases. Widening participation means that you have to satisfy at least two of the criteria below and entry requirements are typically dropped by one grade e.g. instead of AAB, it might be BBC, but it does not mean that students with poor grades can get in without meeting the following circumstances: Being from a less advantaged family environment in terms of income, education and experience. We normally use a postcode tool to assess this, but some courses may consider whether: your parents have not been to university you or your family are on a low income or receive a means-tested benefit or tax credit Being from a school or college where high academic achievement is not the norm Being in local authority care (‘looked after’), or having been in care, for at least three months Being responsible for the long-term care of a sick or disabled family member Having childcare responsibilities Being from a travelling background or having had a disrupted education Having refugee status. Also worth noting that some universities do not accept re-takes of A levels.

Worth pointing out that percentages can be very misleading when dealing with small numbers of students e.g. In a class of 10, one student equals 10%

I remember my DD's friends at 'normal' school finished classes at the beginning of May and then had weeks of study leave before sitting the actual GCSE exams. My DD however, was knee-deep in ballet classes and summer performance rehearsals, with ballet teachers who tutted in exasperation when she dared to mention that she had to leave to go and sit an exam and she barely made it in time on a couple of occasions!

Many people perceive the academics at vocational schools to be comparable with good independent schools but in my experience it can be de-prioritised, with academics taking a back seat to ballet, and end up being fairly mediocre. Also as students are selected on ballet/dance aptitude, the range of academic ability can be huge and with very small overall numbers, streaming is not cost effective, so teachers have to cater for a very wide range of ability within the same class, which can be difficult. I have known quite a few students leave vocational school and re-enter 'normal' school, and they have all thrived. Also, the ones who started at vocational school tend to have a good grounding in ballet so as long as they have 2 to 3 good quality ballet lessons in the week, plus an associate class at the week-end, they are usually in a good position to reapply at 16 if they want to go down that route still.

I wasn't comparing only the two performances you suggest, I was talking generally. I have seen Nagdhi in a number of full length performances inc. R&J and she is a beautiful dancer but I was just expressing my bemusement that she attracts so much hyperbole (even for a 5 min turn on stage) on here when there are other soloists who are just as good, perhaps better, who barely attract a whisper.

It also seems that some of the Romanian dancers who joined in the protest, were some that JKhas really helped and supported; one girl in particular has made public social media statements about what great opportunities JK has made happen for her, and JK and Alina even brought her to London for treatment for her injury. This all seems to have echoes of the Bolshoi again for me. These ex-communist countries with opera/ballet companies essentially controlled by the government just seem stuck in the Cold War era.

I thought Ball and Naghdi were really lovely last night but am bemused by some of the extremes of enthusiasm for Naghdi, although she is a beautiful dancer. I saw Delia Matthews as Juliet at BRB recently and would put her interpretation and presentation above Naghdi.

It's madness. I understood from the culture minister's announcement that Soare was asked to leave and that a new 'managing director' would be sought who embraced the direction of travel that JK was developing. So how come he is still apparently in post and able to lead a revolt?

Loved Dane Hurst, he was mesmerising.

I have to be honest and say I don't understand the locked threads or what I'm allowed to post where, but here is a link to the NY Times which seems to confirm that JK is back at ONB http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/arts/dance/2-stars-rejoinbucharest-operas-ballet-company-after-clash.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1

Is that in the UK? I understand why she may want to take it if there are no other options but I do think unpaid apprentices are exploitative and shouldn't be tolerated.

I'm sure I saw something (before the current debacle) about ONB working more closely with the National Ballet of Canada and that Dawid was a guest artist for NBC. Maybe something more permanent will come up for him there?

Floss, as usual I can't disagree with anything you say really and your posts are very informative to read. My only issue with the approach you suggest is from an audience perspective. I had a series of really disappointing visits to ROH last year where it seemed that very few of the dancers cast in solo / principal roles were up to the job. I seemed to fall unlucky and always catch the casts where they appeared to be trying people out in roles or letting more junior dancers have a go, and not the ones with obvious potential who are often mentioned on here. I don't get to the Opera House very often and when I do, I book good seats, for which I pay a lot of money, and I want to see a world class performance from one of the top ballet companies in the world. I am not one of the people who can go and see several different casts of the same run and therefore may be more forgiving of a poor performance.

I wasn't just talking about soloists, I was responding to the point about talent "at all levels". The point about guest principles was more about filling a short term gap at the required standard - they don't have to be world famous, although that does appear to draw an audience e.g Osipova. However, I don't see 'buying in' as a long term strategy, and would still like to see the internal promise developed, but need to make sure they are truly world class, so that the company continues to be respected on the international stage.

I think you are being very generous. There are a handful of very promising dancers in the company, who should be given opportunities, yes, but there are also a lot more very average dancers whose names are never mentioned on these pages. I agree that there should be no promotions to principal this year as despite some highly promising soloists, I am not sure they would compare as principals on a world class stage. I would actually like to see a few more world class guest principals brought in on short contracts e.g. just on loan for a specific run, whilst giving the promising talent more time to develop.