FrankH

I should add that of course people of any "race" can be racist. I am sure that I have some attitudes which might be construed as such. I'm not proud of them, and try to overcome them.

I am very sorry to post again on this thread about anything else but the excellence of the RB dancers. But from my own personal experiences of life, I feel I have something to add. I have already posted that I think most of the objections to La Bayadere are an example of "PC gone mad", so I hope no one thinks I am a member of the "PC Brigade". Unless you define that as widely, as I'm afraid the Sun, Mail, Express, and certain other popular newspapers do, so that it means anything which isn't liked by their owners, editors and journalists. If such as Quentin Letts, Nick Ferrari, Rod Liddle, Paul Dacre etc. were to regard me as "PC" (if of course they actually cared about what an ordinary person such as myself thinks), I would regard it as an honour. (I am actually so un-PC that a friend described me as more right-wing than Margaret Thatcher. And if you knew some of my views you might agree!) This may indeed be the most tolerant country in the world. But that doesn't mean that intolerance doesn't exist. Surveys have repeatedly shown that a significant minority, usually around 10% or so, of Britons are strongly prejudiced against people of other races, are in fact "white supremacists". I myself have experienced the effect of this. Quite a few times. I regard myself as fully British, indeed more specifically English. But my parents were Chinese, and I was actually born there. We came to this country in 1948, when I was two, my parents fully expecting to return to China after a few years (my father was a student of English Language and Literature). Unfortunately, only a few months after we arrived, the Communists won the civil war. My father thought, with very good reason, that it would be unsafe for him to return. So we became in effect "Asylum Seekers", that dangerous type of human whom Katie Hopkins, former columnist of both the Sun and the Mail, delightfully described as "cockroaches". My parents were always grateful that this country gave them shelter, and remained anglophiles all their lives. As for myself, my sister and brother, we have known no other home. I could provide quite a list of the sort of racial abuse - some overt, some subtle - that I, and other members of my family have received over the years, but I won't, as it would be tedious. I'll just mention one. In one of the schools I attended as a child, in the 1950s, one staff member never referred to me by my name. Instead he called me, and addressed me to my face as "Ugly". Many times. He wouldn't have been able to get away with that today. And the very tendencies which have made such behaviour unacceptable, are the ones which would now often be derided as "PC". Now of course PC has gone too far in quite a few instances (as with criticism of La Bayadere), but not a few of the most ridiculous examples reported by the Sun/Mail/Express have been shown to be either distortions, or downright lies. The journalists may not have made them up themselves, but they were only too willing to believe those who did. And of course there have been genuine cases of absurdities, usually associated with student politics. The trouble is that these incidents, real or not, have allowed racism, sexism etc. to reappear in the guise of defence of "free speech". Well, I defend free speech. Katie Hopkins, Donald Trump, Jacob Rees-Mogg (whose father once sent me a very nice letter), etc. have every right to say what they believe. And others have an equal right to disagree without being automatically labelled as PC, lefties, Marxists, and worse. This is not, I hope, a sermon from the viewpoint of perceived "moral superiority". I do not claim to be by nature nicer, kinder, and more tolerant than any of you. If I were "white" I could possibly be extremely racist. I would hope not, but I certainly can't be sure. And I would certainly say that despite the nasty incidents of racism, my general experience of other people, both in the UK and elsewhere, has been good. I thank all those many people, mainly white, with whom I have interacted, who have treated me with kindness and respect. While matters on this front have become better than in my youth, I fear that recent events in both the UK and the USA are turning the clock back. Whatever side is "right" ( and I don't mean right-wing!) in the Brexit/Remain or the Trump/non-Trump "debates", what is sad is that our countries have become even more divided, with bitterness and hatreds - and not just between races - being exacerbated by populist politicians of the worst sort. It is surely incumbent on all of those who wish for the better side of human nature to prevail in our countries, to be more careful and moderate in our language. As at least three posters have stated in this thread, it is simply a matter of being respectful and sensitive. Thank you very much for your kind and considered posts.

Thanks John for this information. So there was a slip. I hope the young lady involved didn't feel too bad about it, because she retrieved the situation in line with the excellence of the RB's corps. It really didn't matter much whether the snake was there or not. Even though many of us didn't see it, it didn't, at least for me, make things any less believable. Which again makes me wonder about whether we needed the tiger to show that Solor is a "warrior". In his interview I think Vadim Muntagirov said that showing you were a warrior involved mainly leaping about a lot and looking fit - both things he is certainly extremely good at. He doesn't need the added proof of a mangy creature which, as has been pointed out, looks like it died of some ghastly disease. I suggest that when La Bayadère is revived, the tiger is omitted. And we don't want Peregrine yanked out of worthy retirement, to play a part he is as ill suited for, as Melissa Hamilton is for the more classical roles in ballet. I suggest that instead the tiger is replaced by "Captive enemy warrior". And there is a perfect person to play this role. I refer to Mr Ian Taylor, the chairman of the ROH, whose recent statements, in particular in the interview he gave to the Evening Standard, have aroused the ire of many, both in this forum and elsewhere. Especially the rather peculiar idea that because the Ring sold out so quickly, they should have made the ticket prices higher. This has been a PR disaster which I would hope he would wish to redeem. Imagine then Mr Taylor, strung up upside down (naked of course)*. That would be highly symbolic of victory in the battle between the forces of pure art, led by the divine Muntagirov, and those of ... well, the opposite, epitomised by Mr Taylor. He could use the increased publicity and interest that such a spectacle would generate, as a reason to raise ticket prices still higher! *I apologise, most sincerely, if this image will keep you awake at night, or put you off your next meal. My only excuse is that it's very late, and I'm getting old.

They should have spent more on the tiger.

Concerning Anna Rose O'Sullivan - there's a live rehearsal on youtube at the moment, in which she is featured.

In the absence of a real dead tiger (what a controversy if there was one!), why not simply omit the mirth making substitute? Would that alter the narrative in any way? I suspect everyone on this forum already knows, but if anyone has missed it, the Royal Opera House have put up on youtube some (short) videos on this ballet. In one of them Leticia Dias, mentioned earlier in this forum, is highlighted, along with Romany Pajdak. That video is entitled " What it takes to perform classical dance's most demanding corps de ballet number".

The local Curzon cinema was sold out full for La Bayadère. It hadn’t been for Mayerling. As someone whose knowledge of ballet is very limited, I hadn’t realised how popular La Bayadère must be. In my days before 2014, as a very low-key ballet goer, I had even heard of Mayerling, but not of La Bayadère. My random observations on what was a very enjoyable first viewing of this masterpiece. The music. Although “classical” music is the performing art which I know best, I knew nothing about Ludwig Minkus. So I google his name, and read of his great importance in the history of ballet music. The music suited the ballet very well. At one point in Act II it sounded briefly as it were about to morph into Émile Waldteufel’s Les Patineurs, which would have been most inappropriate for the mood of the Act! There were some fine passages, especially in Act III, but as a whole it wasn’t very memorable, and, unlike Tchaikovsky, I wouldn’t go to a concert just to hear the music. Act I. Very long, and at a couple of points I found my attention wandering. Fortunately something always happened to refocus my attention, otherwise I might well have dropped off. Did one of the corps have a fall? Out of the corner of my eye, while looking at another part of the screen, I saw her pick herself up from the floor. I wondered if she had slipped over. She rose in a suitably graceful manner, so it might have been part of the choreography. An advantage of being ignorant as to what should have been happening, is that I am not disappointed if something goes wrong, unless it’s obvious. I couldn't see a "snake". Had somebody forgotten to put it in the bouquet? Act II. I can quite see why this is sometimes presented as a showpiece by itself. It stands out as the highlight of the ballet – and yet has very little, if any, part to play in the narrative story. What a beautiful, magical experience to see it performed so well. Perfection in this very difficult piece would surely be almost impossible, but the wonderful RB corps got very close. As for the three main shades, I can only echo the praise of the more knowledgeable on this forum. Unlike another poster, I found Yuhui Choe as impressive as the two others, but then I don't know what the choreography should be. Act III. Again, my ignorance as to what should actually have been seen, meant that I was less disappointed than others with such things as the relative invisibility of what was going on behind the “scrim” (what this is, is another thing I learned from this forum), and also with the darkness of the scene, which I presumed must have been meant. The main dancers. If there were any flaws, I probably wouldn’t have noticed them. The main three were all superb as far as I could judge. The close-up view of the screen gives a good view of how good they are as actors. In this I thought Osipova was especially convincing, although I gather that some think she over-acts. Ballet dancing at the highest level is a more physically demanding activity than any sport – apart perhaps from the Iron Man/Woman type of extreme sports – and is made even more so, because the dancers must try to hide the physical stress they are under. Even so, there are things which cannot be disguised. I suspect La Bayadère must be a very demanding ballet to dance for the principals, as at least two of them were quite visibly breathing very hard after their solos. This was especially so with Alexander Campbell after his solo, and the bronze “skin” seemed to highlight this. The curtain calls were among the most touching I have seen, because of the inclusion of Natalia Makarova. If this performance is ever released as a DVD, I shall buy it, and among the other highlights, note the reactions of the cast, and especially Osipova, to the appearance of this “high priestess” among them. One final thought concerning that dreaded, and much misused, term “Political Correctness”, which parts of the media, and the far right which they serve, have managed to make a worse crime than racism, sexism, xenophobia etc., and has enabled all these sorts of things to be revitalised in a virulent form. The original use of the term did have some validity however, and there are certainly some incidents, especially those concerned with student politics, where the term is correctly used to indicate an unjustified, often inane, sort of over-preciousness about “offence”. So how are we to judge La Bayadère, without falling into that trap? I use a rule to judge these matters. Does the item – book, play, film, comic act, ballet – etc. have the effect of inciting, increasing, or entrenching, distrust, dislike, hatred, misunderstanding, towards particular ethnic groups, races etc.? It seems obvious to me that La Bayadère does not incite dislike or hatred towards Indians. Nor does it make them into comic figures, which is a perhaps valid criticism of the Chinese dance in The Nutcracker. Anyone who is not prejudiced against Indians will not be made so by La Bayadère (unless they are very odd people with mental problems). La Bayadère is clearly an example of fantasies about the Orient, and may be an example of “Orientalism”, but if so, it is a mild and harmless form of this. To object to it, is really PC gone mad. And as some have already pointed out in this thread, there are far more serious issues and dangers which face humans today.

He didn't call for the work to be removed. He mentioned a number of reactions to the ballet - among which he wrote "Others would like to see the work excised from the ballet repertoire altogether". It is quite clear that what he wrote is true. Some would like it to be removed. That doesn't mean he agrees with it.

The fact that La Bayadère has been put on at all, should surely lessen the fears of those who think that this country/the world has been taken over entirely by the "PC Brigade", which is what Richard Littlejohn/Quentin Letts/Rod Liddle/Mail, Sun, Express etc. want us to believe. Actually PC has become a practically meaningless phrase, used by right-wingers in the same way as left-wingers use the term "fascist". They both now simply mean people/ politicians/ ideas you don't like. Whatever - I am very glad that La Bayadère is being shown this evening at my local Curzon, and looking forward immensely to watching it, and hoping that it will be as compelling as Mayerling, so that my dread of falling asleep in a performance doesn't come about. I have been instructed by the various disagreements on this forum as to the quality of different dancers' performances. There are near-objective standards of performance, but that provides only a basis for appreciation in the arts. So much of arts appreciation/criticism etc. has to be subjective. That's a warning that, if I feel up to it, and have the time, I may feel tempted to post a review of my reactions, even though they will be those of a ballet ignoramus.

But the fact that it isn't evident to everyone shows that charisma, like beauty, is something which is essentially in the eye (or other sense) of the beholder. The eyes of most beholders may agree at any one time, but that fact doesn't make it objective. Any more than the fact that this year Classic FM voters made Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture (which the composer himself despised) the most popular piece of classical music, means that it is objectively more beautiful or charismatic than, say, Swan Lake, or Beethoven's 9th symphony etc.etc.

Thanks, bangorballetboy.

Sorry to intrude, but I think I may inadvertently "reported a post" on this thread. My connection to the website is far from perfect, and sometimes jumps about. I may have clicked on something when I intended to merely scroll the view up! I wouldn't have the arrogance to report any post - unless it were grossly offensive, which few if any of the posts on this supremely civilised forum have ever been.

Thank you Alison. I think I may have heard about Darcey Bussell's dyslexia, but my memory these days is not good. Perhaps nervousness might affect the mental things she has to do to counteract her condition - but that's just my speculation.

I hadn’t had enough sleep (my ongoing sleep apnoea problem), so almost decided to give the Curzon screening a miss. However as I had never seen Mayerling, and had a ticket I bought some months ago, I decided to brave it. I’m so glad I did. It was a screening of the RB in Manon a few years ago which, along with a couple of other things (the first World Ballet Day was one), made me take a much greater interest in ballet than previously. That Manon was superb, but in my opinion, Mayerling surpassed it. It was one of the most compelling performances, in any of the performing arts, that I have ever seen. I am still far too much of a beginner in knowledge and appreciation of ballet to give an informative review, as so many on this excellent forum can. However I would just like to record the impressions of a member of the “general public”, as a tribute and thanks to the RB for their Mayerling. The music. I am not particularly fond of Liszt’s music. I’ve the impression that it tends to be showy and superficial. But this music wasn’t, and fitted the ballet perfectly. Its lush, melodramatic hyper-Romanticism including screeching dissonances, pointing up so well the dark and disturbing storyline. The orchestra played a large part in the success of the production. I was impressed by all the leading dancers, and it may be wrong to single any out. However it is impossible not to talk about Steven McRae. I gather from the posts of the more knowledgeable, that he was not impressive when he first took this role, but he must have improved because I thought he was sensational. His acting skills are now very good. The part of Rudolf almost invites over-acting, but he only very occasionally approached this point. And to add to the acting, what tremendous physical condition dancers must be to dance this part. No wonder that a number of pas-de-deux were cut from the original, as it would have been too much for the man dancing Rudolf. Even with the omissions, I wonder how many “tons of ballerina” Steven McRae must have lifted last night! And then to have to perform one of the most important PDDs at the end. All while having to disguise the effort required. This is yet another reason why it is so annoying when you get remarks from those involved in sports such as football and rugby, which imply that ballet is an activity for weaklings. It was good to see Kristen McNally other than as a presenter on World Ballet Day. Yes, perhaps she was a bit young to portray the Empress Elizabeth, but it was nice to see her get a real meaty part. The corps again were magnificent. I think the quality of a ballet company depends at least as much on the corps as on the principals. When we were given sequences where the corps was in full view, I was again impressed with the acting ability of all on stage. It must be particularly difficult to do this when you are not the centre of attention, but required to be part of convincing background. The fact that several of the female dancers in the corps, in Act II, wore high heels, rather than pointe shoes, made me wonder how ballet might have developed if en pointe dancing hadn’t been invented. As for the PDDs, has there ever been choreographed a more violent PDD than the ending of Act I? Or a more erotic one than the ending of Act II? My sleep apnoea means that I have a tendency to fall asleep if some performance, in arts or sports, is not compellingly interesting. I thought of asking the people in the neighbouring seats to give me a dig in the ribs if I fell asleep and started snoring. However as they were both women, I decided that might be misconstrued. As it was, I only briefly, during the very long Act II, felt my attention wavering, and it was soon cured by yet another compelling piece of action. I gather from comments I have read in this forum, that Kenneth McMillan is not universally admired by ballet-lovers. My impression from both Mayerling and Manon, is that he was a true genius. I thought the quality of the presentation has improved. There was, I think, rather less of the “cutting off” of the feet of the dancers in the filming. Also I felt that Ore Oduba presented very well. Darcey Bussell has improved – though she did scramble one of her sentences, perhaps indicating that she is still a little nervous. The transmission on several occasions began to go wrong, but happily the worst was a second or two where the picture and sound were both lost. I don’t blame those who haven’t bothered to read my ramblings in this post. I just had to put down my experience of a remarkable evening. Thank you, The Royal Ballet, for such a memorable experience.

In previous WBDs I have generally felt that the Australian Ballet section was one of the best; usually slightly better than the RB section, and much better than the Bolshoi. However this year I found the AB section rather disappointing. In previous years I haven't found the chatting through the class and the rehearsals annoying, and would agree with David McAllister that explanations for the less knowledgeable (such as myself) are valuable. But this year, there was too much chatting. More objectionable, to me, was the fact that the chat quite often had no relation to what was going on at the time in the class or rehearsal. As someone who finds it quite hard to concentrate on two different things at the same time, I thus found much of the chat a distraction rather than a help in understanding. I also found one of the presenters rather annoying. However as it was possibly the first time she had presented something like this, that is forgivable, and I hope that she will improve if she is employed in a similar role in the future.

By the way, the entire Australian section is already up on Youtube. I have watched part of it with no problems, and have downloaded it very easily.

That may be the case. However in previous years of WBD on Youtube I have had no problems. This year on Facebook I have given up, as the buffering is almost continuous, with only brief snatches of actual viewing.

Thanks for the links bangorballetboy - otherwise I would never have found my way to the correct page. Unfortunately, I click on the start arrow, and nothing happens! I think I'm going to have to give up, and wait for the snippets on youtube. It was the very first WBD which got me really interested in ballet - so I'm very disappointed. I hope the RB section will work all right on my laptop. Best wishes to all on balletcoforum - I hope they are having a more successful access to WBD than myself

While I normally dislike the over-use of "celebrities", I actually find him quite acceptable. And I think the transmission is improved by someone like him alongside the ballet experts.

I should perhaps have said that good games of rugby are in a minority, rather than being a rarity, and that's probably what Brink meant as well. Most of the top level games I have seen on TV, or actually attended (two at the last World Cup, both involving the Springboks) have been enjoyable. But most rugby is played below the pro level. And even some pro games can be dire, the sort where most of the game is taken up with rucks and mauls, and when the ball eventually makes its way out, it is kicked away. I agree with you that Nureyev would have been good at rugby, had he taken it up. I believe that most top ballet dancers would make good rugby players, particularly in the flair positions (especially stand-off/fly-half, but also any of the backs or loose forwards), as the physical and mental requirements are quite similar - balance, co-ordination, quick feet, precision of movement, a high strength-to-weight ratio. And guts and determination. I believe that the amount of guts and determination needed to make it to the professional ranks in ballet is quite exceptional. And if any physiologist were to do tests, I would expect top ballet dancers to be on average fitter than top footballers and rugby players. It is thus extremely annoying when some football managers use ballet as a symbol for weakness.

Reading A Fork in the Road, a "Memoir" by the late South African author André Brink (novelist, poet, and playwright), I came across an intriguing snippet, which indicates that Rudolf Nureyev was a keen rugby fan. This may be well known to many on this forum, but it is something that I had never heard of before. The snippet comes in the middle of a section in which Brink is talking about his own love of sport, and in particular of rugby. He writes that "If a bad game can be an insult to the emotions and the intelligence, a good and fluid game may indeed resemble a concerto or a symphony, a tone poem or a ballet." (As a rugby fan myself, I would agree with him, and also agree with him that a good game of rugby is a rarity.) This provides the context for Brink to describe what happened in the late '80s, when his "very good friend Gerrit Geertsema, then director of the Performing Arts Council of the Transvaal, made a trip to Paris to meet Nureyev and attempt to secure the rights for his company to produce the ballet of Don Quixote, for which Nureyev had devised the choreography." Gerrit finds that the staff at the Paris Opéra are extremely reluctant to allow him to meet the great man, but after much persistence, he gets the receptionist to contact Nureyev. She returns to tell Gerrit that Nureyev was about to go into rehearsal, but that he was prepared to see his South African visitor, "provided he would not take up more than five minutes." I will let Brink's book tell the rest. As in his novels, Brink does not use quotation marks: Nureyev expressed his regret for not being able to have a proper discussion. It would have been a pleasure to spend a few minutes with someone from the country of the Springboks. You know about the Springboks? asked Gerrit. I never miss any of their games on TV, Nureyev assured him. Unfortunately we do not often have the chance. It is not easy at the moment, with the sanctions, said Gerrit. But they are a rather formidable team right now. I saw them a week ago and --- You saw them a week ago? And right there everything changed. For an hour, like two excited schoolboys, they eagerly discussed the Springbok game; and the Gerrit was invited to accompany Nureyev to his rehearsal. In the late evening, exhausted but radiant, Gerrit was reluctantly allowed to go. As a little aside to their eager discussions, Nureyev mentioned that if he really wanted the rights to the choreography of Don Quixote, they were his. [Apologies if this is already well known to many members of this forum, but there may be some to whom this is new.]

Yes Jane, they can and do live in the same area in many parts of Europe and Asia. When they live in the same area, the house sparrows will be more urban, and the tree sparrows more rural. However when, as in much of SE Asia, only tree sparrows are present, then they are present in towns and cities, behaving much as house sparrows do elsewhere. I seem to remember reading that somewhere there were both species coexisting in cities, but I can't be sure about that. If that is true, I suspect that it is an unstable situation, and that one species, probably the house sparrows, will eventually oust the other from urban environments. To add to the interest (sparrows are actually very interesting birds) in parts of S and E Europe, W and central Asia, there is a third species of true sparrow, the Willow Sparrow, also called the Spanish Sparrow, which coexists with house and tree sparrows. Again, where the house sparrow is present, the willow sparrow doesn't live in truly urban environments. However is places such as Crete, Malta, Sicily, the Canaries, where there are no house sparrows, the willow sparrow has also become established in the towns, these urban populations taking on some of the behavioural characteristics of house sparrows. And then, to add to the complexity, in much of Italy, neither typical house nor typical willow sparrows are present. Instead there is the Italian Sparrow, a confusing creature because the males look like a mixture of house and willow sparrow (the females of all three types look more or less the same). Some regard the Italian sparrow as a subspecies of the house sparrow, others as a subspecies of willow sparrow. In fact, it probably originated as a hybrid between the other two. There are several other species of true sparrow found in Asia and Africa. One of them, the Golden Sparrow, has males which are bright canary yellow in colour, not at all like what most people in Europe might think sparrows ought to look like! You will realise that I like sparrows. Jane, you will be fortunate if you do find tree sparrows living in your woods. Not because they aren't suitable habitat, but because the tree sparrow has declined in numbers in the UK to a very low level. The reasons for this, as with the decline in house sparrows, are, as far as I know, not really understood.

Yes, tree sparrows in the UK are not associated with human habitations to the extent that house sparrows are. However in some other parts of their geographical range, which covers most of Europe and Asia, tree sparrows have become urbanised in the same way that house sparrows have become. This happens especially in regions where the house sparrow does not occur.

Dunnocks are also sometimes called "hedge sparrows". They are not the same as tree sparrows. Dunnocks are not true sparrows, but belong to a different family, the Prunellidae, the "Accentors". We have two species of true sparrow, family Passeridae, in the UK, the House Sparrow, and the Tree Sparrow. You can also tell dunnocks from the true sparrows by the shape of the bill. Dunnocks have thin bills like warblers and thrushes. True sparrows have stout bills like finches and buntings.

I should have thanked Janet McNulty for her kind words after my account of the apparently grateful Mallard. In fact, I was encouraged to continue posting such accounts, but owing to constraints of time, couldn't do so for a few weeks. By the time I looked at the thread again, it had slipped far down the list. Looking at the thread made me worried that my effusions had effectively shut up other posters who might otherwise have posted amusing and/or interesting accounts of bird behaviour. None of my other observations have the drama of the one I described above, which remains the most extraordinary encounter I have ever had with wildlife. But there are other incidents I have observed which have reinforced the conclusion that birds have more intelligence, organisation, and emotions, than they are usually credited with. Anyway, here is another observation on bird behaviour which especially caught my attention. It happened in the same summer (2014) as the incident I described with the mallards, and on exactly the same stretch of water - Bluegate Gravel Pit, a large pond/small lake in the eastern part of Wimbledon Common. The incident highlights the differences in the marital arrangements and childrearing procedures to be found among birds in general, among waterfowl (Anseriformes - swans, geese, and ducks) in particular. On the one hand, most northern hemisphere species of ducks behave in a rather similar fashion to Mallard. The birds pair up during the winter/early spring. The male guards the female, protecting her from harassment by other males. However, once she starts brooding the eggs she has laid, fertilised by him, he deserts her. Thus she has to bring up the ducklings by herself. On the other hand, swans and geese go in for basically lifelong monogamous partnerships. Divorce can occur, but is rare (I've seen figures quoted as 5% for Mute Swans, and 0% for Bewick's Swans, i.e. divorce apparently unknown in this species, although I suspect that this may be because there haven't been enough studies). The partnerships generally end only with the death of one partner. The survivor then exhibits signs of what looks like grief. However, a second partnership may occur if a suitable partner turns up. Thus in swans and geese, both parents are involved in the care of the young. This has an effect on brood size. Because in most ducks, there is only the mother present to defend the young, predation takes a much heavier toll, even though the mothers are usually assiduous and brave in defence of the ducklings. And she has a much more difficult task in keeping control of a brood of lively young. Hence ducks tend to lay very large clutches of eggs, often well into double figures. While swans and geese usually lay less than 10. The presence of two parents means that the rate of loss through predation is much less. The incident I am about to describe involved a family of Canada Geese. I was standing on the bank of Bluegate GP, on about the same spot as I had the Mallard encounter I described previously. A family of Canada Geese were swimming towards the southern part of the lake, and about to pass me. The two parents were swimming in front, side by side, with five fluffy goslings right behind them. Suddenly, something seemed to change for the parents. They turned to each other, and one, or both, gave a low honk. Immediately, one of the parents broke off, let the goslings swim past, and placed himself behind the young. I say "himself" because that is the order which Mute Swans apparently generally take in convoy - the female at the front, the young in the middle, and the male at the rear - and I would expect that other species of swans and geese would do likewise. It is the logical order, because the males are bigger and stronger, and the rear - the blind side - is the direction from which danger is most likely. I'm not sure what, if anything, disturbed the parents. I don't think it was my presence on the bank - Canada Geese in urban areas at least are not afraid of humans. There was a Little Grebe (Dabchick), swimming around in the lake near where the change in swimming order took place, but I wouldn't think the geese would regard this as a danger. It could have been that the parents were simply enjoying a companionable afternoon "stroll", when one, or both, suddenly thought "Oh heck, the kids". Or maybe it had all been pre-arranged? A little while later I walked past the south end of the lake. The family were on a patch of grass, with the goslings grazing away. On either side stood a parent, head up, stock still. They didn't threaten me, but I knew that if I looked like I was going to threaten the goslings, one parent, or both, would have gone for me. Nick, one of the workers at the London Wetland Centre certainly found out the hard way, when he was attacked by a male Hawaiian Goose (a close relative of the Canada Goose), who thought that Nick was threatening his gosling. That male would have been especially jittery, as he and his mate had just lost two goslings, out of three, to a predator, probably a heron, a couple of nights previously. The marital arrangements of swans and geese is actually that most typical of birds - the majority of bird species go in for lifelong monogamy. Whereas only a minority of mammals manage such a degree of marital fidelity.