bridiem

Oh woe. I will miss her so much. She really is unique and the most tremendous talent. I hope she will remain involved with the company.

Happy Birthday BalletcoForum! And so many thanks to the moderators who do such a fantastic job, day in day out, to ensure that the Forum is the stimulating, enjoyable and valuable 'resource' that it is. Happy Christmas and thank you.

I think the Fonteyn programme was ultimately unsatisfying because it raised lots of questions but answered them very superficially or not at all. e.g. if Fonteyn really felt that at the height of her performing career she was lost personally (and I know she said this herself), was this reflected in her performances? How could she be such an effective performer if she didn't know who she was? Was her performance style able to overcome this, or was it evident in any way? Or did performing compensate for her personal unhappiness? The quality and effect of her dancing was also raised but all the comments about this were very brief and we then moved on. I have always found Fonteyn a great enigma. Nothing she said publicly (either in interviews or in her autobiography) was truly revelatory, and she chose to keep many aspects of her life private whilst apparently living it in a glare of publicity. That is (was) her privilege, but it means that a documentary seeking to 'explain' her life needs to be very diligent in looking behind appearances. This one kept saying that it was going to do so, and then pulling back at the crucial moment. But I enjoyed it anyway, because of the interesting film footage and knowledgeable people being interviewed (even if very briefly). But it portrayed Fonteyn's life as being so sad - I wonder if she saw it as such. I hope perhaps not.

Oh for crying out loud (which I nearly did). At The Sleeping Beauty at the ROH last night, the NOISE during the music between Acts II and III was totally deafening. That beautiful music being played for all it was worth by the (real, living) orchestra, and the audience treating it as if it was an advert break on the TV. Perhaps partly the fault of the ROH, because the house lights were raised to some level and that was all it needed for the audience to start talking, moving, checking their phones, etc etc. Ridiculous!!

I thought Sarah Lamb was exquisite, and Vadim Muntagirov shone as her Prince. Nothing too flashy, just a beautifully elegant response to the music. The supporting cast was excellent too - Francesca Hayward and Alexander Campbell gave a fine rendition of the Bluebirds (hers being one of the finest I've seen in recent years), Claire Calvert a magnificent Lilac, Kristen McNally having an absolute ball as Carabosse, Yasmine Naghdi and Beatriz Stix-Brunell as fine a pair of sisters to Flori as there can be! The corps de ballet looked glorious in the set pieces too - so an enjoyable evening was had from yours truly.

Yes I thought it was a lovely performance too. Muntagirov was quite astonishing technically and very touching and credible dramatically. Lamb danced beautifully though I did find her perhaps a little too sophisticated and confident, given how young Aurora is supposed to be. Hayward and Campbell were terrific Bluebirds and SO SO musical! I also thought that Hayward shone as the Song Bird Fairy; for me she was the only fairy who had that other-worldly, strange quality that a fairy should have (well I imagine a fairy should have, not having met any). The others were more like lovely young women; she came from another world. And again supremely musical.

I personally don't like the costumes for this production (not sure if any are new or not this time round?), except for Act II which is lovely and has a more muted palette; I find the rest a bit too pantomimic. And the performance reminded me how very challenging Beauty is; everyone was clearly stretched to their utmost. I think they will relax into it as the run continues - made me think of FLOSS's comments about how the classics keep a company on their toes (so to speak) technically.

Seeing this old thread revived I can't help but say that (nearly) all my "favourite male dancers" are French: Ganio, Heymann, Bullion, Thibault, (the list can go on), the order depending on a particular day, mood, performance. In male dancers I value la finesse et  l'élégance more than manhood.

I know what you mean but I hope it doesn't always have to be either or! Though I suppose it depends on how 'manhood' is defined. I can think of quite a few dancers who I would say combine both qualities (e.g. off the top of my head amongst dancers I've seen recently: Alexander Campbell, Marcellino Sambé, Akram Khan, and I'm sure others - too early in the morning to remember!).

The trouble is that no matter how wonderful the female principal is, if the prince is not equally wonderful/convincing the performance as a whole just doesn't work as it should (for me). Which is why performances that DO work completely are so rare and so much to be treasured. E.g. I've seen countless brilliant performances by Tamara Rojo, including in the classics, but very few where for me the show as a whole has been equally sensational because I think she has so rarely had a partner who was completely her equal. Unlike lucky Cojocaru, who has had Kobborg; and (e.g.) Lesley Collier, who had a range of brilliant male partners.

Thanks for the info Alison. I would have expected Darcey to get a better time slot for Margot and in general. Hasn't she been on Christmas Day in recent years?

I think the Nutcracker documentary is on Christmas Day, so that's quite enough prime ballet!!

I loved Woolf Works but I didn't agree with Alessandra Ferri that at the end of it you knew everything about Virginia Woolf. I'd say it was more impressionistic than actually narrative. But very effective as such.

As he was making unpleasant racial comments and not talking about the price of sugar or the current state of the railways or some such I think it is probably almost a duty to tell him to shut Up if one can only be brave enough at the time....but if you are shy this is very difficult thing to do .....I'm not shy but was brought up not "to rock the boat" so it's sometimes hard to put your head above the parapet and stand up for what you believe in .....but I'm am getting better as get older!!

In the end some very to the point wit can win the day but only about two in ten times can I think off the top of my head .....usually on the way home on the bus ....but a bit late then.

I always think of things too late too. I remember many years ago my sister and I were at the ROH and a man was rude to us in some way - I can't now remember the details. But I do remember being so proud of my sister - I was just ready to slink away feebly without responding, but she didn't miss a beat: she looked straight at him and said loudly and scathingly 'GO BOIL YOUR HEAD!!'. Not exactly wit, perhaps, but highly satisfying.

I went to the cinema relay. Absolutely dazzling. Fantastic performances and complete commitment from all. Gary Avis the most tremendous Drosselmeyer - evoking the power of the act of divine creation in his command for the tree to grow and grow and grow, thereby creating and releasing the love that ultimately frees his nephew. And delighted to see Sir PW come on at the end. A great evening.

The Hollywood Reporter today:

Ballet Star Sergei Polunin Lands Roles in 'Murder on the Orient Express,' 'Red Sparrow' (Exclusive)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dancer-star-sergei-polunin-acting-murder-orient-express-red-sparrow-952594

Crikey! Is there no limit to his talents?! I was already looking forward to the new version of Murder on the Orient Express and now I can't wait!

I must be missing something...I can't see any strain at all in MB's dancing in Linn's clip! On the contrary, his solo is still better than most we see today, and his partnering firm, fluid and considerate, allowing Ferri to float like a feather on a gentle breeze. Beautiful.

I can't either, Sim, and I actually prefer the maturity and authority of his later performance. But the earlier is pretty special too!

 

Here is a link to Ferri dancing with Baryshnikov in Giselle just so beautiful

Fantastic! Thank you so much LinMM. Very moving seeming two such brilliant dancers at the height of their powers. (Though of course Ferri is still brilliant now.)

Thanks Alison, I thought I had seen either an asterisk or mark next to a name then an explanation given lower down, similar to when a particular character is being sponsored.

I think that's only on booking info - but it would be great if it was on the cast sheet too. (But perhaps some in the audience might then feel short-changed in that they're not getting an experienced interpreter of the role! Don't know why they don't do it.)

Great review and photo, DQF. It always amazes me how fresh dancers look at their curtain calls (at least after classical works, when they seek to maintain the mystique) - as if they've just been having afternoon tea or a stroll in the countryside. How do they do it??!!

 

I can only speak for myself, but I now choose to embrace and cherish the present, FLOSS - or at least as much of it as I can.  I KNOW I'm not going to like everything but I have found the adoption of this attitude helps me to move forward in my interests and blessedly - to some degree - stops me from simply replaying a previously broken record, a recording from the past, which I now know can never again 'BE'.  

 

I thrill to watch the films - so many here that are listed as 'lost' - in the stunning archives that Robbins' legacy has fostered for me and our world.  I cherish the fact that it is still so free and open.  Now, however, I equally long and lust to walk out of those NYPL revolving doors and into the theatres that surround it - be they in NYC or Paris or London or anywhere else - and watch the development of dance - of dance life - as it is NOW.  

 

Just think, FLOSS, how lucky - in so many respects - WE ARE.  

Lovely post, Bruce - thank you. I do want to say however that I think it's perfectly possible to embrace and cherish the present whilst at the same time demanding respect of the past (where merited). And to refuse to embrace some particular things in or aspects of the present if they fail to do so. But yes - we are lucky to be able to live and appreciate NOW (just as others were lucky in the past, which was their NOW).

There are also many who would disagree with Mr Dowler.  There is a slightly Brexity whiff of "everything was better in the olden-days" about some of these pronouncements and I think the picture is inevitably more complex than many reviewers will allow.  Laments of diminishing classical standards inevitably return to "foot in the ear" extensions and the slowing of pace at the expense of musicality and shaping.  When misplaced, those things are to be regretted.  However, I imagine it would be difficult for many of us, accustomed as we are to today's standards of turnout, precise placing, core strength and powerful jumping to re-adjust to watching some older performances where such things were far less consistently executed across many companies.  

 

This is NOT to deny a need for musicality, thoughtful phrasing and an understanding of the stylistic differences between different works.  And those are all things that young dancers joining a company need to develop/deepen their understanding of, on top of the high base level of technique that graduates of the best schools now bring.  Of course some are more successful in their development than others.  When reviewers and audience members have been watching ballet for many years and seen some of the greatest performers of all time, it is inevitable that many casts will suffer by comparison.  Anyone can perceive a "visible effect" such as Dowler sees, if one's vision is blinkered and selective.

 

So while I have seen many performances over the past few months/years that were less than optimal, that was also true at any time in my decades of ballet watching.  I think we could afford a little more generosity and a few less sweeping dismissals.

 

ps. Dowler's definition of "classical/neo-classical" is also sufficiently vague to back-up any argument he chooses to make.  Is he just including Balanchine and Ashton as neo-classical? Or is it anything danced in pointe-shoes? Where do Wheeldon and Scarlett stand? Depending on how you cut it, you could use those definitions to make the opposite argument.

Firstly, please be aware that whereas to some Brexit is redolent of a backward-looking 'whiff', to others it is associated with a forward-looking breath of fresh air.

But back to ballet... I think it's very true that we have become gradually accustomed to a different style of dancing over the years and a return to the past (if there were a single 'past' to which we could return, which there isn't) would be for most people very difficult to absorb. I also think that some aspects of the changes have been impressive, and that styles do change over time (though not necessarily in a linear direction). I love many of today's dancers and have been so grateful as one generation of wonderful dancers has been succeeded, almost miraculously as it seems, by another. But it's precisely the gradual nature of the change that is deceiving; I have had a vague sense for a long time that something important was being lost (as well as much being gained), but I couldn't articulate what it was and since I find so many current performances superb in a sense it didn't seem to matter that much. So seeing the two different performances of Voices of Spring (on another thread) was actually quite shocking for me because Park and Eagling were not my favourite dancers and I have always loved Cojocaru and Kobborg; but the difference was so clear, and not in favour of C&K. Sometimes it's too easy to get used to what you see in front of you and accept it without question, especially if it seems in some ways to be an improvement on what went before; so it's quite salutary to be forced to look at it afresh.

However, I STILL think C&K are brilliant! I'm just rather more aware now of how they (and others) differ from dancers of 20+ years ago, and where the differences may not always be an improvement.

Debra Craine has a long piece about Peter Wright  in this morning's Times, which includes the news that a paperback version of his book is in preparation, and that he thinks it will be much better as he didn't have time to edit the hardback version properly.

I hope the paperback is an improvement. I was so disappointed by the hardback. There was interesting material in it, but it was very disorganised. Above all I was taken aback by the many unpleasant comments, often personal and unnecessary, especially about people who are still around (and with whom Sir Peter must sometimes still have contact, which seems a bit odd). The tone of the book really spoilt it for me. I wondered if Sir Peter had been encouraged to be as waspish as possible and hadn't really thought through the consequences.

Didn't see this in the links

 

"The clinical director of one of the country’s leading ballet companies has called for an anti-doping body to combat misuse of steroids, performance-enhancing drugs and supplements in the dance world.

Nick Allen of the Birmingham Royal Ballet has spoken out after an investigation uncovered evidence of steroid and amphetamine abuse in ballet and other dance companies."

 

 

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ballet-drug-abuse-prompts-call-for-anti-doping-body-qh2hf3k7l

Oh dear. I think I'd always assumed that the control, precision, awareness etc needed to dance well would very quickly be damaged by drugs and so this wouldn't be a major problem. I suppose the difference with dance as opposed to sport is that it's not competitive (I mean in the sense that sport is) so if a dancer takes drugs the main issues are their own health and any legal issues - they aren't 'cheating' in the sense that sportspeople are. But clearly dancers do need to understand the dangers involved; and companies have some sort of duty of care towards their dancers, and also need to be able to rely on them not damaging their bodies recklessly. So it's in everyone's interests to deal with this if it is a real problem.

Sorry, I am struggling with the links.  I can't seem to be able to put an imbedded link without the picture. This is the best I can do, if someone else wants to do them please go ahead!

 

 

Thanks very much Fonty - that was fascinating. Park and Eagling have an entirely different quality - quick, light, effortless, joyful. I love Cojocaru and Kobborg but here by comparison they seem almost stodgy, and much less musical. P&E are clearly just as strong, but look more beautiful and less 'physical' than C&K.

From what I can work out, the reputable agencies such as Ticketmaster have tickets allocated to them.  The theatre may have sold all their seats but you could still book through an Agency.  Of course the charge per ticket is how they make their money but the charges seem enormous to me.

 

I booked for BRB's 2017 Nutcracker today.  The Christmas production is no longer included in the Birmingham subscription which means that unless you go to the theatre and PAY IN CASH you get hammered with the booking fee (5% on line).  What really adds insult to injury is that you then have to pay a postage fee on top (starting from £1 but BRB postage is £1.50 - work that out if you can!!).  Talk about feeling ripped off!!!

But why are tickets allocated to agencies that are (effectively) NOT reputable - i.e. they're known to sell them on at many times the face value? (Or do Ticketmaster sometimes do that too?). And anyway why not just sell them all through the venue? (Do the agencies pay a lot more for them than we do?).

Booking fees are really annoying. If they didn't sell the tickets/have an audience, there wouldn't be much point putting on the performance. And often there's no real choice as to booking method so no way of avoiding them. I suppose if they didn't have them, though, they'd just charge more for the tickets. I don't know if the fees are really related to the costs of the booking systems etc, or just a way of getting more money from purchasers.

It always seems to start off well, but somehow by the time I'm halfway through it's beginning to be quite disgusting.  Don't know why   I don't think I've ever managed to get completely through one.

I've never FAILED to get completely through any pudding.

People on the tube who turn into the platform entrance and then just STOP. Does it not occur to them that if they want to get onto the platform, others might too?

those of you who go to BRB, be grateful you don't live in Toronto, where best seats for Nutcracker are the equivalent of 100 pounds (vs 66 pounds in B'ham, and I see you can go on a less popular day and get a seat for 47 pounds). Worst seats in Toronto are 50 pounds!

And it's even more expensive for the regular, non-Nut performances. Best seats are, wait for it, 156 pounds.

That's awful! If I lived in Toronto I would never have been able to go to ballet.   At least the ROH has some reasonably inexpensive seats.