bridiem

Wonder if you can have moderate stylised decapitation?! Sorry, just thinking aloud...

I echo this exactly!

I wouldn't have remembered the choreographer's name, but Osipova performed Ave Maria at SW last year. I had the same reaction as you, Sim; and even if the piece wasn't intended to be religious, I would be unable to listen to such music and ignore the religious connotations/source. I'm also not sure why you would be inspired to use such music if you didn't want to reference its meaning. (The work wasn't great anyway, which sort of added insult to injury.) (I accept that it's possible to make a work that isn't specifically religious to religious music; but I don't think you can - or understand why you would - effectively disavow the music. e.g. MacMillan's Gloria, which isn't specifically religious but nevertheless reflects on the music in such a way that it produces a work of real profundity and illumination, in respect of both the specific themes of the work and the religious nature of the music.)

I find the whole 'virtual reality' (and computer games) concept very underwhelming. It seems to me to be designed for maximum 'experience', and for a sense of (virtual) physical participation, rather than for the appreciation of a creation by someone else in which our role is to be an open-minded and open-hearted recipient. There's a lack of humility about all this. I don't want to, and am not capable to, participate in (e.g.) Swan Lake; that's fine. What I do want is to see and experience a magnificent production of Swan Lake as an audience member. It's not all about me; it's about what's being created.

What a brilliant performance this afternoon. O'Sullivan was a wonderful Juliet, bringing fresh nuances and sculpted beauty to the familiar steps. So many interesting and moving details. When her nurse took the doll away and placed her hands on her breasts, O'Sullivan's expression was one of total fear; as if she somehow foresaw the tragedy that lay ahead. When she was being courted by Paris, she was flattered and curious and happy to flirt shyly with him - until she saw Romeo. That moment when they set eyes on each other was stunning - the proverbial thunderbolt, leaving both of them stunned, shocked, unable to comprehend what had suddenly happened. And thereafter, she couldn't bear even to touch Paris, or have him touch her. Her heart and mind and body were with Romeo, and his with her. Only gradually did their shock soften into the realisation of love, the joy and wonder and opening up of their worlds to each other. Sambé was perhaps the most passionate Romeo I have seen - expansive, powerful, musical, and absolutely in thrall to Juliet. Both danced so quickly, so lightly, but with great physical finesse. You really believed that this couple were in love, and the terrible finale was unbearably sad. I thought that Luca Acri was a fantastic Mercutio - incredibly fast, dynamic, laddish, charismatic; his death was traumatic. And Romeo's revenge on Thomas Whitehead's domineering Tybalt was shockingly fierce and realistic. Gary Avis dominated the stage as Lord Capulet, and all the dancers performed with such commitment. The female townspeople in Act I fought each other so violently I was a bit afraid there would be a higher than usual pile of bodies in the middle after Escalus's appearance... What a performance, and what a ballet.

Clearly, in their 'philosophy' the arts per se are no longer relevant to a society - it depends on their content. (The 'relevance' of which, as Sim points out, will be assessed by a small number of people at the ACE.) That's incredibly disturbing. Philistinism of the highest order, at the highest level.

The problem is linking the 'Emerging Dancer' concept with the 'People's Choice' concept, which this scheme does. If the People's Choice element includes everyone except principals, it's clearly not exclusively for an emerging dancer, it's just for a favourite dancer who isn't yet a principal. (Not yet being a principal doesn't count as being 'emerging' in my book; most dancers will after all never make principal.) It would be nonsensical, and indeed pretty insulting, to vote for (say) James Streeter as my choice for an 'emerging' dancer, whereas I would happily vote for him as simply my choice for recognition as a dancer. If they really want to have one 'emerging' dancer nominated by the company and voted for by judges, and another (or possibly the same?) 'emerging' dancer' voted for by the public, they obviously need to restrict the number/rank of dancers for whom the public can vote. (Though quite why they want to pitch the company and judges against the public in this way I don't know. If the public chooses someone other than the company's selected 'finalists' - assuming they actually vote for an 'emerging' dancer rather than an established one, which is where all the confusion lies - doesn't that imply that the company and the public are out of kilter with each other in terms of what they see/value? Which might be interesting, but would be a bit worrying for the company I would have thought.)

Neither did I, Fonty. It didn't appeal to me and so I didn't give it any great attention. Having now looked at it more closely, I think my first reaction was preferable.

Yes, and I hope that she continues to use that profile for pursuing projects like the recent programme about dance and mental health, which was excellent.

From a selfish point of view, I hope they don't replace her with a ballet person/someone in whom I'm interested - I only started watching Strictly when DB became a judge, just out of curiosity, and then I found myself having to watch the darn thing every Saturday evening AND every Sunday evening for months on end! I too have other commitments!! (i.e. other things to watch on TV...). I think she's done a good job in showing that a ballet person can be down to earth, funny, nice, etc; but I'm not sure the show/having her on it has really done much for the promotion of ballet as an art form, except that I hope maybe a few Strictly viewers have gone on to watch live screenings she's also fronted. But then promoting ballet as an art form clearly isn't its remit.

Absolutely. It also gives a sense of unprofessionalism. (And, it very rarely used to happen at the ROH.)

I loved the 'nightie'! I remember Lesley Collier dancing in it, and being for me the epitome of gentleness, grace and sweetness.

I'm afraid I was very disappointed with Nora. I think that if you didn't know the play (and hadn't read the programme, presumably - I didn't get one), you would have little idea of what was happening and why (as evidenced by the confusion of a young man behind me, who didn't know what the 'letter' was about and thought the 'voices' were the couple's children). I do have some knowledge of the play, and I found the ballet a very inadequate depiction of it. It's not clear what is happening in the opening scene, except that some document is being signed. It's therefore not clear why the husband should be so angry when he sees it. The early relationship between Nora and Torvald doesn't seem to me to give any indication that he is treating her as a child or inferior - it just seems happy and carefree. It's unclear as to why Krogstad suddenly tears up the document. It's unclear as to why Nora won't accept her husband's renewed love once his anger has subsided. And when she walks out, that momentous moment passes for absolutely nothing - she just walks off stage, and Torvald is left apparently confused (as I would have been in his shoes in this ballet). I thought the best part was when Torvald expressed his anger - very fast, expressive dancing, brilliantly performed by Jeffrey Cirio. Apart from that I thought the choreography for the leads was fine but uninspiring (though always beautifully danced); the 'voices' I'm afraid I found a really clichéd and dated concept in terms of externalising internal feelings/influences, with choreography I found hard to take seriously. I had really hoped to like this work, but (as you can maybe tell) I really didn't. Broken Wings: I still think this is visually spectacular, but unless already familiar with the life of Frida Kahlo not very involving. (Again, the young man behind me - who became my litmus test for the evening! - was bemused; his clearly experienced neighbour was explaining aspects of it to him afterwards, and he said 'so was I supposed to know that from what I saw?'.) I thought Katja Khaniukova was excellent and very expressive as Frida. The evening was fully redeemed for me by Bausch's Rite - absolutely thrilling, with a sensational performance by Francesca Velicu as the chosen one. Exhausting and gripping to watch. I agree with Lindsay that the ENB dancers were sometimes a bit too balletic; but I didn't in the end think that that mattered, because of the sheer blazing commitment they brought to it. I feel as if this is/should become a signature work for the company.

I think there would be some evidence of it at performance level (which there isn't), and also in the rate of injuries, which doesn't seem to me to be greater in women than in men. (Though the rate of injury does seem to be greater in both men and women than it used to be, though that's only an impression.)

You never know, Sim - if you hadn't woken up you might have gone on and saved the day, including 32 immaculate fouettes! Brava! 👍⚘

It did fill me with outrage to see the beautiful, graceful Sarah Lamb dressed thus. Look, and weep.

I agree that the change is a fact, but not that men are coping with it better than women. I see no evidence at all for that.

It is (much as I love it). And just to say that the original is also 100 per cent 'relevant'. Always has been, always will be.

I recently received a long, good quality printed booklet from Sadler's Wells for the forthcoming year. Very useful, and nicer than spending yet more endless time glued to my laptop. And I'm not a member of SW.

Sounds like a potential new ballet! (Well we've had Frankenstein...).

Yes, and I think that both female and male ballet dancers are now incredibly strong and perform to an incredible technical level. There does seem to be more emphasis on/evidence of great physical strength nowadays, in both sexes. But the strongest male dancer is always going to jump higher than the strongest female dancer, and I don't envisage Kitri holding Basilio up on one arm any time soon. Maybe DB meant that more big strong men are going into ballet now; but I've no idea if that is actually the case.

But should there not be/have been some sort of acknowledgement of what are effectively cast changes? (Dread subject.) I know no-one's presence at a gala is guaranteed, but if the end product is vastly different from that advertised for some reason, that should surely be acknowledged and explained.

I understood it was illness not injury that prevented her from dancing Aurora. And after all she did dance Juliet last week, which although not like Beauty or DQ is still quite demanding. Either way, I think that undertaking to perform in St Petersburg on one night and in London the next is a) asking for trouble and b) indicates a worrying lack of understanding of the physical limitations that even these incredible dancers have. I'm not criticising anyone, just reflecting.

P.S. Sorry - just realised this is the DVD thread rather than the broadcast thread! But my comment above largely stands.

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it, Richard LH. I haven't watched the broadcast yet, but I've seen it live twice. I think its weakness (and it's a significant one) is the story-telling, so it's a great pity there was no synopsis. (Why do so many of these broadcasts not provide a synopsis?!). But other than that, I find it has a dark beauty and forceful power all of its own - distantly related to but very different from the original. And I love the music and choreography (but then I love almost everything Khan has done). Unlike with Matthew Bourne (in so far as I have seen his productions), I think Khan really does both imagine and 're-imagine', and uses dance in ways both powerful and poetic. I'm only (very!) sorry that his own dancing days are drawing to a close.