Scheherezade

10 minutes ago, Nogoat said:

 

This type of 'corporate non-answer' is all too common nowadays, and it's really exasperating! 

 

In response to a perfectly reasonable request for an existing policy (fees for ticket returns) to change (waive said fees for ticket returns) to address an exceptional circumstance (lack of casting info at the time of ticket purchase), a bland restatement of the existing policy (waiving of fees is standard only for Patrons) is issued; there is no attempt to engage with the question itself and so provide an explanation as to why such a change cannot be accommodated. Grrr!

 

It's especially frustrating given the recent celebration of the Friends' 60th anniversary, with its copious praise of the importance of such Friends to the RB.

The disconnect between the supposed importance of Friends and the continued failure to provide casting information at the time of Friends' booking or mitigate its effect either means the RB really hasn't a clue about the motivation behind why people becoming Friends, or that they prioritise income over customer relations, in which case that very public, celebratory praise of Friends starts to sound a bit hollow. Either possibility is worrying.

 

In case anyone from the RB management or customer relations team reads this forum (and I'd like to think they do!), here's my view of why people become Friends, and why casting information *at the time of booking* is so vital.

 

There may well be folk who become Friends simply for the magazine, or access to a handful of rehearsals, or a 10% shop discount, or as a way to donate, or for the kudos - but I've yet to meet any.

The overwhelming majority become Friends because it allows them to reduce uncertainty around (and thereby increase control over) the purchase of preferred seats or seats in preferred areas (in terms of view and/or price), and the higher up the Friends ladder you are, the greater the advantage conferred (and upfront cost, of course).

 

Unfortunately, on the basis of their approach to the summer booking period, the RB management seems to be of the opinion that priority access to seat booking is sufficient, along with the pre-existing information about programmes and dates, to make successful bookings. 

I would argue that those three aspects might be necessary, but they aren't sufficient for a large number of Friends (to the extent that the opinions expressed on the BCF reflect Friends in general). 

In exchange for handing over a large wodge of cash each year I would expect, when priority booking opens, to be able to make informed decisions about ticket purchases - for that, I need to know the programme, date, and ticket availability but, importantly, I also need to know the cast. Three out of four is not sufficient.

 

The RB management seems unable or unwilling to acknowledge the importance of casts to, I would argue, the majority of Friends (at least, those on BCF - a cursory glance at the forum shows how members, including myself, tend to favour seeing particular dancers). 

Because of that, the upcoming booking (on the 28th for me) will be essentially a lottery, and one that will cost £4 for each failed gamble on trying to see the cast(s) I'm interested in. 

That might be good for the RB's cashflow (the cynic in me is mentally calculating the effective price-hike of returning half the tickets for repurchase on other dates, and - if in desperation I buy many more tickets than I need - the short-term effect on their book balances of 'returning' my excess expenditure as vouchers to be spent next year) but it undermines the rationale to becoming a Friend, especially if casting is not made available until after general booking opens.

For those travelling to London by public transport and/or having to book hotels, the additional costs incurred by missing out on early-bird offers may also be significant.

 

The RB needs to recognise that we all have favourite composers, choreographers *and* dancers, and many of us need to know all three to make informed purchases. Otherwise it starts to resemble the ballet equivalent of Henry Ford's 'you can have any colour as long as it's black'.

 

If the RB fail to recognise and address the issue of providing timely information on casting, then there are likely to be subtle and damaging effects on the relationship between Friends and the RB; folk are already starting to question the value of being a Friend, and who knows if those relationship concerns might end up affecting other ways of giving?

 

I appreciate that casting is the most difficult aspect for the RB management to control and schedule (programmes, dates and seating are trivial in comparison, mainly due to long lead-ins for the first two and real-time booking for the last), and maybe casting is becoming more difficult every cycle, but accepting the importance of casting to a potentially large segment of the paying public would be a start - but on its own it is not enough. 

Rather than recognising the problem but dumping the consequences onto that Friends and the paying public, the RB management should ensure that scheduling is not being slowed down by insufficient resources or inappropriate internal processes (eg if marketing/accounting considerations take precedence over casting activities/customer relations in the setting of booking dates).

If resources are sufficient, then at a minimum, RB management should put in place measures to mitigate adverse effects (ie waive the admin fee for returned tickets).

 

The ideal solution, of course, would be to withhold ticket sales until casting is known (not necessarily full casting across the run; even partial casting or a staged release as performances are cast would be better than nothing - though the response to @Linnzi5's question suggests the RB can't even see the merits of something that obvious. Perhaps they think it's difficult to implement? It isn't - just setting values in a database.); only releasing performances to book once casting is known would be a marvellous way to focus their minds! 

It's not that there isn't 'slack' in the system - the lead-in from first booking to performance for the summer season is around 3.5 months! I'm not privy to the internal workings of the RB, or how efficient they are, but that does seem very generous. Could they not put booking back by a month? Surely casting will be complete within a month from now?!

I'm getting very twitchy about Wednesday (over and above the usual, unavoidable nervousness that comes with competitively spending large sums of money in a short space of time!) and that is not helped by the RB 'apologising' to @Linnzi5 for casting issues and then ploughing on as normal.

How do we ensure this behaviour doesn't become the 'new normal'?
 

 

Nogoat, I do hope that you send your post to the ROH. Each and every one of the points that you make should be addressed - and satisfactorily addressed- by way of a reasoned and informative response, not dismissive corporate-speak which, lets face it, is either patronising, insulting or both. And if you wish others to add their names before approaching the ROH, I will be more than happy to provide mine.

13 minutes ago, MildConcern said:

 I cannot agree more. I was so thrilled by Vadim when he first joined the RB - the beauty of his first Des Grieux was a real shock to the system. Over the years, I found myself taking the stunning classicism of his lines for granted and wishing that he would emote more even beyond the natural beauty of his dancing. I also (she says quietly) never found his partnership with Nunez emotionally demanding and so inevitably saw him less the more they danced together. 

 

Mayerling was a real turning point for my connection to him - I could not believe that this agonisingly tortured and consumed portrayal came from him. And he has gone from strength to strength since. HIs Des Grieux now glows, and when he looked at Kaneko's Manon last night, the love was from inside, not just his wonderful dancing. I am still agape - and counting the hours to Tuesday's performance. 

Totally!

21 minutes ago, Linnzi5 said:

I would agree with this, as I have watched his Manon with Sarah Lamb quite a few times and I feel his acting and ability to emote has improved dramatically since then. 

Yes, over the last couple of seasons he has evolved into the ‘complete’ performer. The sheer beauty informing his flawless technique has always been on another level but after his Rudolf in the last Mayerling run and now this DG, Vadim is delivering masterclasses in dramatic interpretation too. For which I think we should add a massive bravo to the coaches, too. 
 

Back home from Manon and what can I say that hasn’t already been said so eloquently by everyone who has already posted. Although the fact that I am still sitting here, four hours later, should in itself say plenty.

Fumi’s debut was just extraordinary and she carried us with her with every sublime, nuanced step - from the excitement of her reunion with Lescaut in the courtyard to the horror of her death in the swamp. There was never any doubt that this Manon loved Des Grieux and that in itself made us love her more. 

I was in the camp that couldn’t quite make my mind up about Vadim’s Des Grieux in Act 1. I wouldn’t say it was lack of engagement; more like diffidence. But, my goodness, he had me by Act 2 - the adoration, the passion, the lack of comprehension, the hurt. And by the end, I had my heart ripped into little pieces. It was unbelievable, utterly wonderful and totally unforgettable.

17 minutes ago, Linnzi5 said:

Just a little bit! 🤣🤣🤣

Ooh, ah, a little bit more! Can’t wait! 

29 minutes ago, jmhopton said:

Irreplaceable.

Absolutely. It was that all too rare humanity that shone through everything he did. 

If no takers by 2.00 pm for Manon this evening, will return this SCS £14 ticket to the box office.

Have there ever been so many tributes, so wide ranging or so richly deserved? He will be so, so deeply missed. The space that he leaves on the ROH stage is not one that will easily be filled.

Four very different pieces and I enjoyed them all. Two of them I would be happy to see again. They were the two pieces in the second half.

Of the first half, Boundless, for me, had more promise than delivery. It's sharp, spiky attack sat well on the music but was insufficiently varied; some of the movements felt a little awkward; and it seemed to me that Gemma Bond was less comfortable working with the slower parts of the score. Naghdi and Hirano were outstanding - something of a given - and brought integrity and chemistry to the stage, and the rest of the cast impressed throughout. I would like to see what some pruning and revisions could achieve as the parts that did work, worked really well.

Although, unlike Joshua Junker, the music used in Never Known was not something that I would listen to by choice, I felt that it was an excellent choice for what he was looking to achieve, and whilst the overall effect might be said to be somewhat derivative - well what isn't? - I enjoyed the rolling, somnolent nature of the movement far more than I thought I would. That said, this is not the type of choreography that, for me, bears repeated viewing as I find it hard to imagine that it would reveal anything new to me.

I came to For What it's Worth somewhat biased since I have enjoyed pretty much everything of Mthuthuzeli November's work that I have previously seen. I find him an intelligent choreographer and a consummate storyteller and this piece was no exception. I loved the music, the colour, the performances - Mayara Magri was compelling and it was good to see Leo Dixon, whose stage presence always draws the eye, take a more central role. Africa is a continent that I love and I certainly felt Africa in this piece. Yes, I would be happy to see it again and couldn't we commission more work from the never less than enjoyable Mr November?

I would also happily see Twinkle again and cannot understand the bitchy disapproval shown by some of the critics. It was charming, witty, visually and aurally pleasing. It played to the strengths of the wonderful RB dancers (Bracewell's lyricism and that captivating quality that Kaneko brings to everything she does), and it was gloriously and undeniably ballet. More of the same, please. What's not to love?

I have SCS D2 for sale £14 for tomorrow (Friday) evening's much awaited Kaneko/Muntagirov pairing. Please DM if interested.

Thank you.

Patrina

 Can I join the queue please for this performance. Looking for 1 or 2 SCS, balcony D  or cheap amphi tickets for Friday 8 March.

42 minutes ago, PeterS said:

personally, I would rather be water-boarded than to see Creature live again. 

Agreed. And not just because of the sound levels. 

59 minutes ago, Emeralds said:

Campbell was one of the best Oberons (with Morera a brilliant Titania) I've seen. Rewatched their pas de deux on the Royal Ballet Back on Stage lockdown livestream over and over again! Such a pity their 2017 performance wasn't recorded for DVD - a masterclass in allegro technique, acting and Ashton style. 

And a total standout in Two Pigeons. 

2 hours ago, Mary said:

James Hay has danced Rhapsody superbly before. I am so much hoping to see him over the summer in some Ashton.

He and Hayward were sublime all those years back. 

6 hours ago, JNC said:

From memory the Bausch version (as part of a triple) sold well both times ENB did this? I don’t know what ticket sales were like for the Mats Ek version but I thought it was great ENB got him to choreograph something for them.

I really like the Bausch version. Not so much the Mats Ek.

6 hours ago, JNC said:

Creature on the other hand was awful imo and if others were anything like me it sold out on the strength of Giselle, but one viewing was more than enough. It’s about the only ballet I seriously considered leaving at the interval because I hated it so much and the sound was actually deafening so I was rather uncomfortable. 

My daughter wanted to leave 10 minutes in, And having unwisely sat it out to the end, all I can say is that notwithstanding Jeffrey Cirio's utterly stunning performance, I wish we had followed her instinct.

I hear what you say, Vanartus and Roberta, but I find the whole concept of a ‘thought leader’ not only worrying but somewhat sinister. Freedom of thought is something that should be enshrined in the ethos of every organisation, culture and society. Its absence can only have one outcome - bigotry, oppression and persecution. It also leads to an unedifying elitism on the part of those who believe that they know better than anyone who disagrees with them, and the inevitable and unacceptable rise of thought policing. I will say no more as I do not want to politicise this thread. 

2 hours ago, Roberta said:

We also credit Phil Chan, a thought leader in the field and author of Final Bow for Yellowface and Banishing Orientalism.

I find the appellation “a thought leader” very worrying. 

15 hours ago, capybara said:

Patrons were therefore being urged to ‘book blind’ for the Ashton programmes, although they are able to return or swap without financial penalty.

This certainly makes it easier for Patrons, who have the luxury of being able to afford the most expensive seats, to ‘book blind’ since there will invariably be a choice of acceptable seats available if and when they decide to swap. The same is not true for those on a budget restricted to the cheaper seats. 

2 minutes ago, Sim said:

Why does David Jays feel the need to say this in his review?  It's insulting to all the dancers who have worked so hard, and to Mthuthulezi November, who was very happy to create on these dancers without caring what colour they are.  

 

Mthuthuzeli November has made a splash with his work for Ballet Black. Ballet diversity being what it is, a predominantly white cast delivers For What It’s Worth, inspired by singer Miriam Makeba (“Mama Africa”)

Precisely. And what is more inclusive than that?

Nobody calls out pantomimes for their inaccurate historical and fantastical settings. Or for the fact that they may be inappropriate for modern sensibilities. And do the audiences still love them? Oh yes they do!

Lots of positive reactions. I am now rather looking forward to the 21st.

Shocking, disgraceful, unbelievable. And what really saddened me was that I couldn't even feel surprise.

19 hours ago, art_enthusiast said:

 

Being born in 2023/24 - the post Covid/recession/war filled/climate change stricken years - doesn't seem a bundle of laughs though. No offence meant, I just wish I could see more of older people appreciating their long lives and experiences more instead of bemoaning old age (which is a privilege to achieve, particularly in a world like this one. I'll be grateful if I get to see 30, not sad about it).

I think its generally true to say that if you haven't had to battle illness, loss or hard times over the years, you don't begin to feel grateful for attaining a certain age until you hit 60, if not later, That's the time you begin to look back and wish that you had done some things differently, spent more time with those who are no longer there, and that you hadn't taken people, opportunities, youth or good fortune for granted. My grandmother used to say that the only thing worse than getting old is not getting old. This is true, but it also draws the spotlight on the unavoidable fact that as we get older we accumulate regrets as well as blessings.

And as has been said of the RB, what about their wonderful back catalogue of 20th century works? But I had no expectation of seeing any of those since sadly they seem to have been written off across the board.

18 hours ago, alison said:

Well, here's something I can moan about - talk about making the London Underground map more complicated than it already is!  Personally, I'm perfectly happy seeing all the Overground lines in orange, because then I know that they're Overground lines, and (roughly) where they go.  Otherwise, they'll just be individual lines with no obvious connection with each other.

 

"We're naming the London Overground lines to make the network easier to navigate and reflect the Capital's diverse history. We aim to make the changes by the end of 2024. 

Each of the 6 routes that make up the London Overground will be given a new name and its own colour. Giving each of the 6 London Overground routes an individual line colour lets us improve the way our customers experience our network. It also gives each line their own name and identity.

• Euston to Watford Junction line – will be called the Lioness line – and will be yellow 
• Stratford to Richmond/Clapham Junction line - will be called the Mildmay line – and will be blue 
• Highbury & Islington to New Cross/Crystal Palace/West Croydon/Clapham Junction line – will be called the Windrush line - and will be red
• Liverpool Street to Cheshunt/Enfield Town/Chingford line – will be called the Weaver line – and will be maroon
• Gospel Oak to Barking Riverside line – will be called the Suffragette line – and will be green
• Romford to Upminster line – will be called the Liberty line – and will be grey"

Yes, and the rebranding apparently cost £6m.