bridiem

I think the quote marks are significant here - ballet and opera audiences are certainly perceived as being from the 'elite' and the expenditure etc is therefore scrutinised especially stringently. And in any case, to be honest I would struggle to say that from what I see the ballet audiences at the ROH (I don't go to opera) fully reflect our wider society (though I also don't think that they're as 'elite' as many people imagine). Which is why I think the screen relays are so brilliant and so important - they can easily be seen by anyone, almost regardless of income or location, and that helps to justify the level of public funding for the ROH.

Interesting and very enjoyable selection of works, superbly danced by all. And I found the 'behind-the-scenes' parts strangely moving; Acosta saying farewell not just to classical ballet (soon, anyway) but to the quiet preparation and team work that goes into performances, and to his wonderfully professional Royal Ballet colleagues. And his own dancing was just sublime. Breathtaking and apparently effortless. A memorable evening.

Personally I can't wait to see Frankenstein - I think Scarlett has real talent and I'm hoping that everything will 'mesh' in due course. Though I'm a bit apprehensive too in case it has the defects of Sweet Violets (too busy, too confusing, too MUCH) writ large. Though SV also had merits (confidence, ambition, ideas, even good choreography). We'll see... And I'm clearly in a small minority in that I didn't enjoy The Winter's Tale at all. I liked the way it looked, most of the time, but found the characterisations and narrative unconvincing and the choreography uninteresting. However I may have been in the wrong frame of mind at the time so I've decided to try it again this time. I will attempt to be receptive to the good (and do a bit of homework on the play first, perhaps).

Seconded, in all respects. Thank you MAB.

Dance Europe reports that a memorial service for Bryony Brind will be held on 27 January 2016,11:45, at St Mary the Virgin, Essendon, Hatfield.

I thought the Acosta documentary was wonderful - fascinating seeing all the footage of Cuba past and present, and of Acosta throughout his life and career. Excellent interviews including with Tamara Rojo. Included extracts from Carmen and the on-stage farewell after the last performance, but is of much wider interest too. Brought home how incredible his 'journey' has been, and how brave he has been to follow it.

As far as I'm concerned Yanowsky is never less than compelling whatever she is dancing. Can't wait to see her in this (Saturday evening) since she's hardly dancing at all at the ROH this season.

I'm greedy - I'd like Nutcracker AND one or other of those mentioned by Floss! I don't always go to Nutcracker but I like to know that it's there when I want it (tut tut).

So shocked. She was the same age as me and I followed her career with such excitement - first Swan Lake so young, etc. She once gave me two signed pairs of her ballet shoes, one for me and one for my sister - she brought them down to me at the old stage door at the ROH with a lovely postcard she'd written. She was so sweet. She had a fragility and intensity that made her compelling to watch, as well as the most beautiful lines, long and yearning and sometimes a bit uncertain, like a young colt. Huge eyes and such immediacy to her dancing. So very sad. Rest in Peace.

I think that if presented as the cinema live relay was presented, all four would have been fine for a general audience. But I suspect that would just be 'too much ballet'. Unless it's Nutcracker or similar, the focus of TV coverage of ballet seems usually to be one famous/well-known person (e.g. Acosta, or Bussell, or Nureyev) rather than the art itself. There are (very good) exceptions occasionally, but in general they want an obvious peg to hang a programme on, and a triple/quadruple bill is therefore difficult to 'sell'. (Rather as the companies themselves find these bills more difficult to sell.) Which is a big shame. (Presumably 'An Evening with The Royal Ballet' would no longer work - also a big shame.)

Great, thanks for finding that out Jane.

Thank you Floss - really interesting and illuminating, as always. Would be fascinating to see the Ratmansky productions you mention. In relation to the online performance - the first night of this production was 14 Oct 1977 and was also led by Collier/Dowell etc, so it can't be that one, though I do remember the photo you mention. (I remember the publicity about Collier being the 'new' Aurora before the première - that was the month in which I saw my first ballet performances, so it holds iconic status for me! Though I was too late to book for the first night itself.)

Yes, I checked the database too to double-check the date I'd thought it was, but the date of the anniversary performance wasn't there. Frustrating how incomplete the database is, even in respect of 'significant' performances (and even more frustrating that it's not necessarily entirely accurate). I do wonder though if Princess Margaret/Ashton/de Valois would really have been at a schools' matinée? I didn't check all the online casts though (less dedicated than Geoff!); but it could just be one of the performances that isn't yet listed.

Thrilling to watch this! (Well, some of it - haven't had time to watch all of it yet). What has really struck me is how correct and how beautiful the dancing (and the performance as a whole) is; not correct as in dryly accurate, but correct as in perfectly proportioned, musical, fast, graceful, harmonious, joyous. Real dancing, with no apparent physical strain, so different from the extreme physicality of the way dancers 'dance' now. (I don't mean to disparage today's dancers - they are often wonderful, and are obviously required to move differently now, and they give what they are asked to give with enormous skill.) Only by seeing this old film do I fully realise/remember how much things have changed. Which is very sobering and for me quite upsetting. I'm a bit confused by which performance this actually is; it's not (as I initially assumed) the official performance of this production that was given for de Valois' 80th birthday (25 July 1978) in the presence of Princess Margaret - that was led by Collier/Dowell et al (and I was there and have the programme!). So Princess Margaret must have been at more than one performance (which I suppose wouldn't be all that surprising since she was President of the RB at the time). Wonderful to see Ashton and de Valois in the Royal Box with her at the start of the performance (though they seem to have disappeared by the end of it). Thank you very much to Floss for directing us to this, and to Geoff for posting the link.

Strangely enough I love both ballet and Strictly! But I'm not interested in ballroom dancing more generally, I'm afraid, so I do find the new format of DT unhelpful to say the least. And I wonder how many ballroom fans really want all that ballet coverage. I imagine the decision was taken on cost grounds, but it's a great pity in my opinion.

Accusing people who like The Two Pigeons of being 'Middle Englanders' (i.e., presumably, reactionary and narrow-minded) is pretty offensive (in various ways). I'm sure many ballet-goers (of whatever class, age and nationality) love 2Ps and Woolf Works, Ashton and MacMillan, Balanchine and Wheeldon, Fonteyn and Osipova, Tudor and Hofesh Shechter, Dowell and Acosta, Robbins and Akram Khan, De Valois and Mark Morris - and so on. That doesn't preclude criticism of some current trends in ballet, or of some repertoire choices made by the Royal Ballet (or others). And I'm sure that Kevin O'Hare would not have revived 2Ps based only on some letters he had received; he must also have believed it to be worth seeing again. (Similarly with the various works currently being suggested on the ROH website - he won't count up the 'votes' and schedule accordingly; he'll see how far the suggestions chime in with works he also wants to revive.)

Yes, I would love to book for Insights as well as performances, but they cost as much as or more than a performance. And when I do occasionally try to book one, it's usually sold out anyway so I tend to assume I won't be successful and don't pay a huge amount of attention to what's on. But it's a great shame - I hope the empty seats weren't too obvious. I will pay more attention in future...

Yes, I think Ferri's performance was very significant in the impact of Woolf Works. She couldn't be dehumanised if she tried. Maybe for once that inspired McGregor to use his heart rather than his head (or rather, his heart as well as his head).

Sorry - didn't realise you were joking! Whatever Ashton said himself (clearly not very respectful!), I do find the feel of Monotones very different to that of much of McGregor's work. Though I loved Woolf Works - the first time for me that he did allow his dancers to be people, and it was wonderful.

To me, the difference is that Ashton 'uses' his dancers beautifully and respectfully even when the movement is quite extreme. McGregor (most of the time) uses his dancers as bodies, not as people. Presumably that's his intention since he apparently takes pride in disregarding gender and the humanity of the human body. I have no interest in what the human body can do; I want to know what it can say.

Clearly no knicker-shame nowadays! Quite the opposite, in fact...

I fully agree that historical, social, political and personal contexts can all provoke interesting ways of discussing works of art, including ballets - I do think that ballet merits the same level of analysis as other art forms, though perhaps by its nature it's more elusive and at least in some cases somewhat less open to such contextual interpretations. What I don't agree with is defining a work by one or other of its possible contexts, or considering that it's 'escapist' to view the work on it own terms, as finally presented to the audience by the creator. Respect is due to the creator in that sense too.

I would say that the gay sub-text is NOT clear, or evident at all, unless you happen to know something about Ashton's life (which most of the audience will not). A sub-text is just that - something below the surface which influences an artist to create what he or she creates. In my view, Ashton was the ultimate romantic (whatever context that involved in his own life); and (as is described above) The Two Pigeons is about love. Any sub-text may (or may not) be of interest; but the 'point' of the work is the overriding theme which is evident to all regardless of any sub-text.

I was thinking along these lines. But I suppose you could argue that even where they weren't obviously transformative, these dancers (and others, obviously) meant that ballet could no longer be thought of as only the preserve of ballerinas simply by being so brilliant, by setting the bar for male dancers so high in their various different ways. Anyway I will look forward to seeing the programme.

Thanks Janet - I'll look out for it.