Richard LH

I would have expected an announcement by now. There have been rumours as to who, but still nothing official...

Sorry yes I had overlooked those.

No appearance I am afraid, so his production and choreography has to be acknowledged "in absentia". The audience on this last night were particularly appreciative, with much enthusiasm and warmth, and indeed a partial standing ovation, for everyone on stage, after another brilliant performance at the end of a brilliant run. I was so impressed again by the commitment and skill of these dancers, many of whom had to perform multiple roles- Tomas Mock had three (a matador, the gypsy leader, and the lead fandango gentleman), and I noticed Dulcinea (Lara Turk) making an appearance again at the end as a fandango lady - something Don Q clearly missed ! And the wonderful Itziar Mendizabal was both Mercedes and the lead gypsy. Injury seems to be robbing us of male first soloists at the moment, but Nicol Edmonds, for Valentino Zucchetti, was a particularly striking Espada - I think he has a great future ahead. I believe I noticed a new face among the corps of ladies - presumably a student from the RBS? What a great experience for her... I loved Claire Calvert's sophisticated Queen of the Dryads....and as for lumps in the throat, I don't even need movement - just the gorgeous tableau of Dryads revealed by Amour at the start of Don Q's dream...virtually worthy of the ticket price in itself! And then they dance...The elegant classicism in Act 2 is superb. Mayara Magri put in a very assured and confident performance in what I believe was only her second time out in a full length "principal" role (what amazing fouettés !) , assisted by Alexander Campbell as her ever-attentive partner, and delighting us again in his own strong, character-full performance. My only criticism was with the casting of the "characters" this time out. I preferred the earlier castings for Sancho Panza to Jonathan Howells' rather timid version. And I love Gary Avis normally, but he over-played Don Q as a rather doddery old duffer, and I missed the dreamy poignancy of Christopher Saunders' romantic knight-errant. In fact after a while I tended not to notice Don Q at all last night. Gary Avis was much better as Lorenzo. In turn Bennet Gartside (Lorenzo last night) much better when he played Gamache - I suppose purse-gate (see Rob S above) didn't help although Campbell improvised very cleverly at that point. But Thomas Whitehead's Gamache was, again, a tour-de-force! We sat next to two ladies for whom this was their first ballet - what a good choice! As newbies they were understandably astonished that we had already seen this 5 times 🤭 (multiple viewings have failed to dim, for us, the pure joy of this ballet!) - perhaps they were less surprised by the end, as they were absolutely thrilled with it, and hopefully have caught the ballet bug....!

Next Thursday...

Not at all! But thanks for the explanation. Like Fonty and a few others I do think the topic has been worthy of some discussion at least, although how much more we can wring out of it, I am not sure !

Hopefully 4th will be good too!

After attending the Linbury screening of "Yuli" last night (which incidentally featured various Don Q snippets) is there any chance Carlos Acosta will take applause on stage tonight at the end of this successful run?

Ian I am not quite sure what you are referring to - do you have an issue with the topic itself, or just the tone of some responses ?

That is a good question, but from what I have seen, top rank female dancers today have an amazing ability to successfully portray both - as exemplified, I thought, in the recent RB triple bill where they were switching between the physicality of McGregor's Infra and the neoclassical grace of Balanchine's Symphiny in C. So as I see it, the physicality and athleticism that modern dancers (male and female) have now developed, does not necessarily preclude displaying the inner delicacy, finesse, and poetry of ballet to which assoluta refers above. In fact, in some ways a greater range and strength in movement, guided by good choreography, can provide further opportunities for displaying such qualities.

I wonder how they filled the role, after you decided to wake up.....

That does seem to happen sometimes when bookings first open, for some reason. But those particular ones are now all gone again!

It won't be any comfort of course, but for whatever reason, the first night of the triple bill, in particular, was pretty well booked up even a month ago when Friends booking opened.

SusanR if you mean the Firebird mixed bill for the matinee https://www.roh.org.uk/events/38774/tickets, whilst there is currently nothing below £68 in the stalls circle there are cheaper tickets available in the balcony or amphi. Hopefully you might find a compromise that suits. Symphony in C, let alone the other two on the bill, should not be missed !

But we are not responding, for example, to some informal chance remark, but to a fairly lengthy newspaper report of expressed views, given at a public event. https://oxfordliteraryfestival.org/literature-events/2019/march-30/evolved So the context is known. Any of us not present naturally have to rely on the accuracy of the press report and I did say at the outset that I was not sure how much was down to Darcey Bussell or the Arts Correspondent David Sanderson. Either way, it seems to me that the subject matter raised is reasonably worthy of discussion - I didn't start the topic just because Darcey Bussell was the reported source.

Surely not...! but I would suggest that the source in this case is rather more prominent, namely (I guess) the ballet figure most well-known currently to the general public. I doubt she voiced these opinions just off the cuff or simply because she felt under pressure to say something interesting. So I don't really regard this discussion in response, on the comparative roles of men and women in ballet, as "overthinking" (any more than anything else on BCF)!

From yesterday’s Dance Links https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/men-now-best-at-ballet-says-darcey-bussell-xxr79n28g?shareToken=55fa1a42b81528b5cb464cec4d19a391 I find this a rather confused and poorly argued article, and I am not sure how much is down to the original source (Dame Darcey Bussell (49) at the Oxford Literary Festival) or the Arts Correspondent David Sanderson (age not given). “Men (are) now best at ballet” apparently because of technical and physical ability. Women are seemingly “struggling to keep up”. But no evidence follows for this sweeping assertion. Given the different attributes of male and female ballet dancing, and given all the many different forms of ballet across the world, how can you judge comparative male and female technical and physical ability in any event? Even if the assertion were true, being “best at ballet” is a lot more than just technique and physique. The article suggests that whereas classical ballet has always been about the women, some sort of “transformation” of roles for male dancers has been taking place. But the examples given (going back in time) refer to Billy Elliott (2000), Bourne’s Swan Lake (1995), Mayerling (1978) Manon (1974) and at the end of the article, further back to Nureyev in the 1960’s, and further back still to Nijinsky in 1911. The article also cites Ivan Putrov’s Men in Motion but whilst that work is more recent (2012) it is Putrov celebrating the role of the male ballet dancer over the last 100 years. So isn’t the truth that there has always been a certain to-ing and fro-ing as to the perceived comparative place and role in ballet for male and female performers? It is difficult to fathom quite how Darcey Bussell attributes any particular “breakthrough” of any “barriers” in the "classical ballet bastille” to “shows such as Strictly Come Dancing, on which she is a judge”. Nor to Matthew Bourne, whose work is not classical ballet, but more (as he describes it himself) “contemporary dance theatre”. Apparently “the changing dynamics and choreography of the ballet world could have repercussions for female dancers. A greater pool of technically proficient men, with more flexibility and precision than their forefathers, could begin taking the traditionally female roles that require, for example, en pointe manoeuvres”. Thus raising the issue of gender identity and fluidity again (and rather ticking the box in terms of current favourite subjects for media discussion). But is this putative “repercussion” really likely? Are there any examples other than that of Chase Johnsey at the ENB?

Does this count as a (free) "performance seen"? Hopefully this is a premonition of La Fille Mal Gardée coming back to the ROH next season. I think we should be OK in terms of financial viability for that one, but I am rather worried about Peregrine's absence......

Apologies, Jan, if I misunderstood. But my point was also that he had no previous track record in full length ballet.

I would hope critics judge the work on its own merits rather than according it praise based on a choreographer's other work, or that of the company concerned. In any event, it appears there was no previous full-length ballet from Akram Khan to influence them - the New York Times describes the origins of the work thus: "Glamorous ballerina takes over beleaguered ballet company, suffering from budget cuts and a second-string reputation. She hires a contemporary dance choreographer, who has almost no experience working with classically trained performers, to re-envision one of ballet’s most famous and best-loved pieces". In fact I may have overstated the degree of praise that the work has gained - on further reading, various published reviews are pretty mixed.

Posted at the same time as Fonty !

Yes, he says to Romeo "Why the devil came you between us? I was hurt under your arm", to which Romeo replies "I thought all for the best".

JohnS thanks for that, it includes a lot of criticism that I agree with, but says it much more eloquently than I could. The writer Leigh Witchel found some redeeming aspects in Act 2 but I am afraid even those escaped me. I think I need to feel some form of empathy or sympathy with at least one character in a ballet, whereas I didn't really have any for these - they all seemed pretty horrible, even Giselle, in the way she attacked the other women for example. Failing that, if characters are lacking, or if the story is rather weak, I would hope to be uplifted by the beauty of dance in itself - which for me was lacking here. Frankly, after the first quarter of an hour, I was thinking how much more of this is there to go? something I rarely find in a dance production. By the end, I felt I had suffered some 1½ hours of mild, slow torture - along with the participants. But perhaps that was the reaction Khan was hoping for.

I was trying to think of something for today, but couldn't. Well done Alison!

Ian, thanks, I was aware of the "re-imagined" story myself, and just made the point about others who might not be. I did notice Begona Cao, probably for all the wrong reasons....

I watched this but I am afraid I can't agree that it was a worthwhile way to spend 1½ hours ! I found it very depressing, all shade and no light, and lacking the beauty of form and musicality of the original upon which it is supposedly based. I realise it is not supposed to be a classical ballet, but I found nothing to be gained from moving away from that approach. Parts are really, really slow moving, and most of the rest is a very repetitive melange of angst-ridden choreography and mind-numbing sound (apart from when there is no music or sound at all). I didn't like the sticks, especially when the ladies had to have them in their mouths, or when they were used for a gratuitous, protracted torture of Hilarion. There was no explanatory synopsis provided with the BBC screening, so I would think anyone unfamiliar with the original story (and many who were) would be at a loss to know what was supposed to be happening. I wonder if this production would have got so much praise from the critics if it had been presented as a wholly stand-alone work? I tend to think that "re-imagining" a well-known classic is rather a cheap way to claim greater attention and kudos than the new work would have achieved in its own right. Matthew Bourne does this all the time, of course, and I feel much the same about his stuff.