Douglas Allen

I don't know what are the current avian arrangements, but in the past one bird was trained to follow the light and the other bird was trained to follow its mate. This didn't always end happily and the final pas de deux was sometimes not always followed as closely as it merited due to birds fluttering around above one's head. For the same reason it was generally thought desirable for Pigeons always to be the closing ballet of the evening. On a couple of occasions when it wasn't the following ballet was slightly disrupted by free-flying objects around the auditorium!

I caught this programme yesterday. I intended to watch it unless the Liverpool v Bournemouth game was particularly good. It wasn't, with a predictably bland and stereotypical commentary, so I switched to Sky Arts for the film which, alas, I thought to be also somewhat bland and superficial. It was nicely shot with an interesting use of deep focus but it neither informed me about Peck's motivation or ideas nor did it convey any clear impression of what the completed ballet looked like. It was all bits and pieces and somewhat incoherent to boot. The process of the creation of a ballet was better conveyed, but the motivation and the ideas were not. Simply to observe without commentary is inadequate for comprehension unless the editing process is sufficiently sophisticated.

It looked beautiful, though, with lots of nicely composed shots. It was also good to see Albert Evans in action during the rehearsals - a brief, but touching, reminder. 

Hey ho! You can't win them all. Some works must have the right to fail. Not every ballet will be a work of genius, but people need to be encouraged and try things. If a work is adequate, revive it once or twice and then let it go (cf Bintley throughout his choreographic career), if a work is disastrous, recognise the fact quickly and let it disappear quickly (e.g. Macmillan's Olympiade and Ashton's The Creatures of Prometheus) but let people try. The Acosta Carmen, I fear, is in this latter category and needs to be dispensed with as quickly and humanely as possible. The sad thing will be if it obscures Acosta's glittering and marvellous career with the Royal Ballet. Let us remember him as a remarkable dancer who produced exceptional performances over many years and thrilled and delighted just about everyone who saw them.

It would have been better if some experienced theatre and ballet director (but who?) could have been on hand to advise and help, but the failings are as much choreographic as directorial and no choreographer would willingly accept interference (no matter how tactful) from another choreographer - so the best thing now is to remember Acosta the dancer and move on from this piece as quickly as possible.

Perhaps next time, if there is a next time, a smaller scale work in a less-exposed location would be worth trying.

Earlier in the programme I felt that neither dancer in Faun had quite the degree of self-absorption the piece ideally calls for, though it was on the way to being good. The Tchaikovsky almost always comes up fresh in part because Balanchine tinkered so much with it for the different dancers that when the curtain goes up you're never quite sure what choreography you are going to see. The first four men I saw in this were Villella, d'Amboise, Martins and Baryshnikov and they all performed quite different texts. The women they partnered were Verdy, McBride (twice) and Farrell. They had fewer differences, but differences there were! As such, in this work, I'm reluctant to criticise timings, steps or emphases. I thought both Salenko and McRae were rather good (at times, dazzling) and the performance was both exciting and enjoyable.

bangorballetboy - a six year old being taken to stand through Raven Girl! - She must have been very naughty  at home because it seems a very severe and cruel punishment. Perhaps Social Services should be informed.

In general, I subscribe to the Robert Morley view of lighting. I remember when , years ago, on a chat show he expressed a fond appreciation of subtle lighting effects so long as lighting designers remembered that when Morley was on stage the instructions should be "Let there be light, more light and yet more light".

Shocking news, made more so as it was so unexpected.

It seems so recent that he had such an "exuberant" time at his farewell performance in 2010. The fact that it was so recent makes the news seem worse in some way.

I first saw him in 1988 at the American Music Festival (he was in Feld's The Unanswered Question)when he had just joined City Ballet and he was a major player with City Ballet over the years. I loved him in Temperaments and I loved him with Wendy Whelan. He worked well with Justin Peck as well.

So very, very sad. He was only in his forties - never knew his exact age.

Might I suggest the following (in no particular order):

A Wedding Bouquet and Scenes de Ballet - Two great ballets by one of the greatest of twentieth century choreographers and both works are not to be found in many other companies' reps.

Les Biches and Les Noces - Exactly the same reasons as for the Ashton.

Dances At A Gathering - A great ballet which in the Royal's interpretation (at least when first performed) showed considerable differences in nuance and emphasis to NYCB's performance.

Nothing really to do with the Don Q pronunciation, but Floss' comment on the idiosyncratic approach by ROH staff to appropriate pronunciation reminded me of the paroxysms they got into when Thomas' opera Hamlet came into the rep about 15 years ago. They all pronounced the composer's name in the French way, but the title came over in English by some, without the "H" by others  and with the latter group some further dispensed with the "t" while others emphasised the final "t"

Quite a melange.

Alison, To the best of my memory, the handstand/cartwheel ending to Alain's solo has al.ways been in place. I go back to the late sixties with this ballet and, though I didn't see the initial run of performances, everyone I've seen as Alain, starting with Alexander Grant, has ended it thus (with, admittedly, varying degrees of athleticism and emphasis!).

An interesting point, cavycapers, about Cojacaru's footwork. Would you care to elaborate?

I've always thought that she had just about the best footwork  of any Royal Ballet dancer of the last twenty or thirty years. Even when she was appearing in corps roles Cojacaru 's footwork was noticeable for speed, precision, placement and articulation. Thinking about it, the last dancer in the company with feet as delightful (though she didn't have great speed) was Ferri and before that, Sibley.

No dancer is without fault and you can criticise Cojacaru on a number of grounds, but not, I suggest, on footwork.

So  little Bournonville. Rather disappointing.

If you're really looking for autobiographies, then Theatre Street by Karsavina is a must. The best edition is the one published by Dance Books because of the huge number of rare photographs published there.

For biographies, try "The Worlds of Lincoln Kirstein" by Martin Duberman. It's highly informative while maintaining readability.

If you think you might like something readable, a bit gossipy but reliable, have a look at "Buckle At the Ballet" by Richard Buckle.

I got the impression you are looking for some fiction. S.J. Simon and Caryl Brahms wrote a series of books about the troubles and travails of life in a touring Russian Ballet company. The first (and probably best) is "A Bullet In The Ballet".

Gore Vidal writing as Edgar Box wrote a couple of ballet novels which are a lot of fun. The first is called "Death In The Fifth Position" and is deliciously fun especially if you can put the real people into their fictional counterparts!

A word of warning - Floss' suggestions are absolutely correct, but, be very cautious with Cyril Beaumont.While being factually accurate, his prose style is deadly. Dip into his works (especially the Complete Book and the three successor volumes) for information, otherwise they are useful soporific!

I've always regarded Giselle as a romantic ballet with the title role calling for a romantic ballerina or a classical ballerina who can adjust her playing rather than a soubrette per se. Fille needs an approach more purely soubrette rather than classical or romantic. As such, Fonteyn, Beriosova and Sibley were remarkable exponents of Giselle but (even though Sibley did attempt it) all were not really ideal for Fille. In the same way, Albrecht is demi-caractere rather than classical.

Can I add how much I agree with the comments Floss made in post #75?

I believe the first performance of The Nutcracker by Festival Ballet was December 26 1950 at the Stoll Theatre in London.

Just a quick comment about the Nureyev version: he produced (and largely choreographed) a version for the Royal Ballet in the late sixties, revisited this and made additions in the early seventies and made further amendments a year later. He reproduced the first version for Sweden and a few years later reproduced the second version for Paris. The changes were primarily of some costumes, additional choreography for what had previously been orchestral work (including the entre acte and a transition) and some slight changes to the corps work in Act II.

The work was broadcast on BBC2 when new and this was released on VHS and subsequently on DVD. Paris' version is also available on DVD.

The version is rather grand (large scale corps work, big Georgiadis sets )  and is distinguished by lots of dancing. It also has the distinct merit of not being aimed particularly at children. It's a very Freudian interpretation. In my opinion it's Nureyev's most successful full-length ballet (possibly alongside his Don Q for the Australians) and is my favourite version of Nutcracker, just ahead of the Balanchine. The Peter Wright Birmingham production is not bad - it's just let down by the paucity of dancing in Act I and by having the lead dance only the grand pas de deux. ENB has aimed all of its versions over the years squarely at the "family and children" market and they need to be assessed by different standards. Most of their versions have been colourful, charming and dross. The only reason for going to see them is to see particular dancers whom you like.

The death is reported in St Petersburg of Alla Sizova, one of the most distinguished Kirov ballerinas of the post-war period. She was 75 and had been suffering from cancer.

She danced almost all of the leading roles in the classical repertoire and was renowned for her elevation and batterie. An indication of her talent and the esteem in which she was held was that on her graduation form the school, she was accepted into the Kirov company as a soloist, becoming a principal within a couple of years. Her regular partners included both Nureyev and Soloviev and later she was partnered by Baryshnikov.

Sizova was not only immensely talented, she also kept away from the various political cliques almost endemic in ballet companies in the late Soviet era and was popular and liked by other dancers. She was kept off stage for about two years in the sixties with a major back injury, but returned to performances with few concessions having to be made. There are several examples of her work available on You Tube for anyone interested in seeing a great dancer in performance.

I agree with both Bruce Wall and Floss.

Pre 1970 the New York audience response to Macmillan's works was largely positive (without regarding him as the equal of Ashton, let alone Balanchine or Robbins), and was based largely on The Invitation and Romeo and Juliet. However, after Ashton was forced from the Directorship by Webster in the summer of 1970, Macmillan, as Ashton's successor, came in for much hostility from the New York fans, not because of inherent failings, but because he wasn't Ashton. When Macmillan failed to arrive in New York for the first performance by The Royal Ballet after he took over as director, the criticism intensified and was both personal and professional. Romeo was always exempt because not only was it manifestly a fine work but it also tended to feature Fonteyn and Nureyev and Sibley and Dowell - both well-entrenched New York favourites.

My memory suggests that Ashton was always well received in New York, though don't think that the New York audience is homogenised. The City Ballet people would always tend to see no-one ahead of Balanchine, and the ABT and Joffrey people would be predisposed to favour Ashton, though there would always be a significant overlap of people who liked both and wouldn't see ballet as a race.

Bergonzi, for my money, was the greatest Verdi tenor of the last 50 years and one of the greatest tenors of the Italian repertory generally since the second world war. From my (very limited) personal contact he was also an amiable, charming and genuinely nice man, I wasn't able to see him at Covent Garden in his debut there in Forza (1962 I think), but I saw him in all the roles he sang thereafter at the Royal Opera House. His greatest triumph, I think, was in the Ballo performances in which he appeared. They were sensationally good and I still remember how crowded was Floral Street with hundreds of people all waving money trying to buy tickets for the later performances.

It occurs to me that when it was first performed, the Nutcracker was part of a double bill (with Tchaikovsky's opera Yolanta I think). I guess performances have got a lot shorter these days!

A couple of people have remarked on tickets for Giselle being slightly cheaper at Covent Garden and have linked this to the length of the performance. I always thought that the price reflected the marketing people's belief that Giselle was slower to sell than other full-length ballets and that people needed the encouragement of slightly cheaper tickets. Am I mistaken in this belief?

Can I also add I really like the idea, put forward by Bruce Wall, of preceding Giselle with The Cage.

I see in today's Sunday Times it is reported that two members of the Royal Ballet are declining to join the company in Russia in protest about the anti-gay laws. The Royal Ballet's spokesperson appears to confirm the facts but has declined to give any names (allegedly one male and one female).

A few points arise:

1. For those whose aesthetic sensibilities are so refined that further work(s) to accompany Giselle would be unacceptable, then a late arrival at the opera House would satisfy, allowing the experience of Giselle to be unsullied by anything else, whilst those of us who like lots of dancing would be able to get our fill!

2. I always assumed that the reason why people train to be ballet dancers was to dance. Adding a ballet before Giselle would provide further opportunities when the major complaint in the Royal has always been the gaps between performances (for the principals) and the relative scarcity of opportunities for new roles (for the corps and soloists). More ballets mean more chances to dance.

3.The comment about injuries (made above) seems irrelevant. Adding a ballet before Giselle would simply mean that the company would be doing as much dancing as they do in a three act ballet such as Swan Lake, Don Q or Romeo and Juliet. What's the problem? I don't know the reason(s) for the recent spate of injuries/absences, but I refuse to believe that dancing too much had anything to do with it.

I'm with chrischris on this. Giselle may be a very satisfactory artistic experience (depending on the performance) but that's no reason for not performing another ballet before it. The Royal used to do this (I think they stopped in the sixties), as have, from time to time, the Dutch National Ballet, the Kirov and the Bolshoi. I still live in hope of seeing the Kingdom of the Shades scene as a prelude to Giselle! There are lots of good ballets that would be a good fit in a bill with Giselle - Bayadere, Symphonic, Rendezvous, Afternoon of a Faun, Serenade, Apollo ,Konservatoriet, Sylphides for example, just using a few examples from the Royal Ballet's rep.

Janet, many thanks for finding the article and embedding it on this thread. It was a task beyond my technical capabilities, I'm afraid!

I was surprised at MAB's response. Like others, I thought it was a positive and sympathetic article about balletomania and its expression on the part of fans. Macaulay's final sentence where he referred to it warming his heart summed up his approach. Ballet seems to attract aficionados perhaps more than usually prone to excessive manifestations of their enthusiasm. I'm sure we can all think of similar examples known to us. I should also correct one point in MAB's response. He refers to "...the unhappy lady...clearly emotionally unstable...afflicted." Everyone who was a regular at Covent Garden in the sixties, seventies and eighties will know the person concerned either by name or by sight. They will be able to confirm that she wasn't unhappy (well, no more so than anyone else) and didn't appear to be particularly afflicted or unstable (unless you count a particularly strong devotion to the dancing of Anthony Dowell as evidence of either). What was eccentric was her conviction that her presence in the audience was essential in giving Dowell confidence to perform at his best. However, she was a very knowledgeable observer of ballet. If Dowell did not perform at his best, she readily acknowledged it. She might have bizarre reasons for this happening, but she never attempted to disguise the reality of the situation. In this she differed from many fans who attempt to explain away technical deficiencies as artistic choices.

There were several others who had similar (if not identical) obsessions about ballet: the ones who organised flower throws, the Nureyev fans (including the ones who followed him around from country to country), the Fonteyn fans (not identical to the Nureyev fans, though there was some overlap), the Beriosova fans and the Sibley fans (big overlap between those two groups) and the Park fans (little overlap with any other group). They all had their particular quirks and obsessions which manifested themselves if different ways. My impression is that this has lessened somewhat in recent years (though it certainly hasn't disappeared) I think, in part at least, to the decline in the regular audience, largely due to cost. There are fewer people going to performances at Covent Garden three or four times a week than there used to. Costs of travel and tickets make this very difficult (unless you're very rich) and the monotony of the programming doesn't help.

Alastair Macaulay has an interesting article in Sunday's New York Times (sorry, I don't have a link) about the quirks of ballet fans. There are some interesting reflections from his time in England. Looking around now, some things don't change!

Many thanks Bluebird.