Scheherezade

I saw the 1st cast on Wednesday and have to say that I didn't find the first two acts quite as dreadful as most of the other posters. Whether this is because, having read so many reviews on this forum and elsewhere, my expectations were lowered, I can't say. I do, however, feel that the third act on its own, whilst clearly a powerful study into mental angst, would have lost all context and meaning without the earlier two acts by way of 'back story'. The difficulty for me was - again as others have pointed out - that the overall impression was one of two entirely different ballets. I do not feel that this, in itself, is necessarily fatal but I do feel that something needs to be done to diminish the initially disconcerting juxtaposition of the two. How best could this be done? If MacMillan were still alive perhaps a more cogent link to 'Anastasia's' madness at the end of act 2 would help set the stage, as it were, for what follows in act 3. Since this clearly cannot be done unless further choreography is superimposed, would the whole ballet hang together in a more satisfying way if restricted to one interval rather than two, with the more traditional Imperial acts pre-interval and the markedly different mad act post-interval? I can't help but think that the fact that the first two acts, with an interval after each, share one distinct musical and choreographical style, leads the audience to expect something similar in the third act and when this does not happen, a period of adjustment is required to overcome the initial impression of a very definite non-sequitur. Could this problem perhaps be avoided with only one interval? In that way, there could one distinct style either side of the interval without the feeling that the last act does not sit happily with what has gone before. What does anyone else think?

I won't be seeing his Albrecht with ENB but looking forward to seeing him when they Mariinsky are over next summer. Long may his success continue!

I do so agree! His Paquita knocked the socks off many of the very fine dancers that I have seen. As a matter of interest, and although wildly off-topic for this thread, I wonder what he would have made of Kschessinska?

A somewhat belated comment, having seen, and been somewhat disappointed by, the opening Sadlers Wells performance of The Tempest which, to me, seemed over-populated, under-developed and woefully sold short by music that did nothing to enhance the plot and characterisation and everything to create an air of tedium. All the more disappointing after the fabulous Shakespeare triple bill in which the dancing, music and costumes in each, very different piece, all came together exquisitely to enhance the overall mood, energy and narrative.

As with other recent posters, there is nothing that I can add about last night's performance that hasn't already been said but I felt that I just had to add my voice to what was a pitch perfect evening. I have topped and tailed this run, beginning with Morera and Muntagirov, both of whom were everything that we have come to expect from them, and ending with Marquez and Campbell, and what a way to end a run! The audience, too, seemed fully engaged from the get-go and rightly so. Alexander Campbell consolidated everything that he brought to his impressive R.B. debut in Two Pigeons and Roberta was just captivating! I do hope that she realises how much her talent, skills and personality, and the charm and intelligence that she invariably brought to everything that she danced, were appreciated by, and will be treasured by, those of us lucky enough to enjoy her wonderful performances over the last decade.

I love the original and authentic and I think that it is invaluable that choreographers like Ratmansky are looking to revive them but for all of that I feel that authenticity doesn't, by itself, make a piece of work good any more than contemporaneity gives a work relevance. Some posters may find this viewpoint blasphemous but I would say that Corsaire is a case in point. I didn't see it this time round because I found it tedious last time. It's a rip roaring tale and I find that the rip-roaring, knowingly ironic ENB production suits the narrative to a tee.

I think it is. The same thing happens at the Wigmore (although I think theirs comes from the ceiling). At the Conway Hall and other places that avoid the use of aircon, I seldom feel the need to cough at all.

I agree. Stream of consciousness ...

I suffer from severe asthma and in addition to inhalers use airways-opening pastilles pretty much non-stop throughout every performance. Even so, coughing is sometimes unavoidable. The onset of the aircon is always a problem, even though I try to cover up the vents beneath my seat with my bag, and since I invariably notice other sufferers coughing at precisely the same time this is clearly a major culprit. Similarly, some of the special effects used during performances. Like other sufferers, I will do anything in my efforts to suppress my cough but I would take issue with anyone who suggests that coughing can always be suppressed. Sometimes it just can't.

I didn’t see ‘Flames’ this run. I saw it last time and wasn’t wowed, even with Vasipova burning up the stage – too similar, in some ways, to their double act in Laurencia with the Mikhailovsky at the Coliseum round about the same time. I would have loved, though, to have seen more of Lantratov. I liked him last time round and he was even better this time in Taming of the Shrew (ditto Tikhomirova who also brought the disappointing opening night of Don Q alive for me). I have a feeling that the controversy surrounding the recent posts by godots_arrived is shortly going to be put to sleep by the moderators so wanted to add my two penn’orth while I can. So firstly to ‘contrary opinions’. Of course these should be encouraged on the forum but not where the content implicitly suggests that those who disagree with the poster have a diminished level of appreciation of the art form or, to put it another way, ‘must be a bit thick’. This is sheer provocation, it does not encourage healthy debate and has no discernable merit. Next, the question of whether an emotional response is more honest than an intellectual response. In my view, this is a no-brainer. An emotional response is instinctive, an intellectual response depends upon received learning. The intellectual response will be better informed but the emotional response is unquestionably more honest. Great art has to engage the emotions as well as meeting the technical requirements and where performance art is concerned, this is dependent upon the individual performances on the night (and these are also informed by the chemistry between the performers) as much as the music and choreography. However subliminally, there is a suggestion in some of the posts that those whose chief response to an art form is emotional, or those who enjoy ‘inferior’ types of entertainment, may lack the capacity to fully appreciate ‘high art’. I have enjoyed ‘high art’ for decades yet I will happily watch Made in Chelsea with my children or read the Daily Mail for light relief. As a young teenager, I cried just as much watching Barbra Streisand’s Fanny Brice on screen as Rita Hunter’s Leonora on the stage. It is the honesty in the performance that reaches out and touches us and transforms a work of art from something that has objective and intellectual merit into something that we can recognise as great art. So what if Lantratov and Alexandrova mugged for the crowd by ducking under the curtain? You could say the same about the Lantratov/Krysanova ‘rose’ routine at the curtain call for ‘Shrew’. It engages with the audience. It injects life and vitality and humanity. It is what performing is about. People respond. And on that point, Nureyev, whom godots_arrived clearly does appreciate, was a shameless mugger and none the worse for it. Finally, godots_arrived does seem to have apologised repeatedly on this thread. I have no problem with stirring controversy as long as this does not descend into personal attack, and some of the posts were getting close, but hopefully everyone can now move on.

Sorry Janet, I didn't realise how ambiguous my post was until I read it through. It's the first of two casts currently performing at the ROH. With a little overlap (Haroutounian and Kunde are singing again), there are two further casts later in the year with Hvorostovsky and Kelsey as di Luna in place of Lucic and Maltman, Alagna and Kunde sharing Manrico, Haroutounian and Agresta as Leonora and Rachvelishvili as Azucena throughout the second run.

A totally convincing, all-round performance from Semenchuk, who effortlessly stole the show on the opening night. The rest of the cast were more park and bark but delivered the goods vocally, with a wonderful warmth and colour to Meli's Manrico, suitable menace from Lucic and great support from Haroutounian and Muraro. Once again, a less than inspiring production, with too many simplistic and overly-signposted projections and a bizarre carnival air to the gypsy camp that was totally at odds with the war-zone brutality of almost everything else but at least the interpretation made some sort of sense, which is more than can be said for many of the latest RO offerings. How nice it would be to have a production that acknowledged the intelligence of its audience! Nevertheless, an enjoyable and rewarding evening.

'The evening of the 30th was both a début for Stella Abrera, a company stalwart elevated to principal last year, and an anniversary party marking Abrera’s twentieth season with the company. (She is also the company’s first Filipino-American principal.) Abrera’s assumption of her new rank has been both natural and, in a way, astonishing. After spending almost fourteen years in the trenches as a soloist, she has stepped into one leading role after another with little fanfare, as if she had been born dancing them.' - a quote from Dance Tabs/Marina Harss' review of the Ratmansky Sleeping Beauty. There is hope for Yuhui Choe yet!

I agree. I am seeing Morera/Muntagirov, Marquez/Campbell but I saw Osipova last time and despite the 'non-Ashtonian' criticisms enjoyed her portrayal immensely.

An interesting take on the performances, Coated, which I enjoyed reading although I won't be going to see this programme since if I want scorching theatre I'd rather see Helen McCrory at the National. I did see Osipova's last contemporary run which didn't inspire me to go again. Pita's Facada was the highlight but a case of 'that box ticked now move on' for me.

There have, however, been extraordinarily perverse decisions been made, both in terms of those promoted and those overlooked, the latter of which have included a number of the finest Ashtonian dancers in the latter part of the twentieth century.

Congratulations indeed, and well deserved!

The NT also had appalling problems during Advance booking. They happily exchanged the Circle tickets for which I was forced to settle for the Travelex front of stalls ones that I originally wanted free of any administration fee when these reappeared on the site the following day. As usual, the NT box office couldn't have been more helpful.

Glorious, yes!

I have to say that I have found much of the music recently commissioned by the R.B. to be considerably worse. As a matter of interest, which current composers do posters feel could engage with narrative ballet? Do we need a Klaus Badelt or Hans Zimmer, who can tell a story rather than someone intellectually considered a composer of note?

Does anyone else remember the 'morning of the performance' queueing outside the greasy spoon cafe in Floral Street from 6.00 am in the morning? Not to mention the fascinating conversations with the lorry drivers stopping off for breakfast after making their deliveries to the old Covent Garden Market. Or that eventual, never-ending hike up the 'servants' entrance' stairs at the side of the building to the amphitheatre for the actual performances? No way I could do that climb now. Or not without a number of stops on the way.

Which presupposes, somewhat, that the director's judgement is always sound.

How fabulous would it be if she were to bring her Juliet to the ROH. Overall I think that I would rather see her Juliet than her Marguerite.

Well, no Casta Diva, and no encores either, so a bit of an anti-climax on the 14th but what did Ruth E and you, Geoff, if you were there think of the rest of the performance? I felt that she was stronger after the interval - at certain points in the first half she was almost inaudible, but understandably as she was ill, and overall pretty damned fine. I would have loved to have heard her Norma. As has been previously pointed out, what a missed opportunity for the RO.

I hope that Yuhui has read all the positive comments on this forum, the ROH website and elsewhere and that this in some way helps dissipate what must be a tremendous disappointment for her. This in no way detracts from congratulations to those who have been promoted. As to what Kevin O'Hare saw in the the two female soloists who have been promoted to principal, it seems quite clear in the case of Francesca Hayward - true and immediate star quality - and I have no doubt that Yasmine Naghdi will follow down the same path before too long. Yuhui Choe, however, lights up the stage. If she chooses to leave, it will be a sad loss for the R.B.