Jamesrhblack

If you watch the interview with her on the Opus Arte Swan Lake DVD (Nunez/Soares) she makes it very clear that she was trained to do them to both sides. Ms Nunez reacts in incredulity. From much later in her career, there is video footage of her as Odile at the Bolshoi. The turned in arms look strange to modern eyes (well mine anyway) but her virtuosity is definitely impressive....

The interesting thing about the Trovatore situation was that the house was needing to explain to an audience why Mr Domingo would not be singing notes not written in the score but which have become "traditional." In certain places in Italy, if a singer were to sing it "come scritto" rather than interpolate what has become traditional there might well be a riot and that's when the fruit would come out...

And, of,course, Yanowsky "got" Reece Clarke ;-)

I fear that in opera there are indeed occasions when singers will omit certain passages in order to rest and prepare to interpolate high notes unwritten by the composer. Conversely, some years ago, the Royal Opera actually issued a statement to explain why Mr Domingo wasn't singing the traditional high C's as Manrico in Il trovatore, as he and Maestro Haitink had determined to sing the role as it was written,...

I think a gentleman who can do both rather splendidly was also promoted and I'm delighted that they will dance together next season....

One indication will be if she still dances Nutcracker at Christmas I guess....

Unless The Third Principal has muscled in ...

Not that I'm a cynic, but Marquez was useful as small, Salenko useful as higher profile, and Ms Hayward now the next big thing....

However, Galeazzi and Morera achieved promotion without dancing Beauty or Swan Lake and only came to Giselle later in their post principal years....

However, Heap was a wonderful Myrtha last time round let alone this and j gather she sizzled as Carmen, Calvert was just glorious as Hermione on Tuesday afternoon and I couldn't take my eyes off Hayward. With their pairing in Nutcracker, I think we could seeing rather more of the Hayward / Campbell partnership, sad as that may be for Choe....

I am so very pleased about Alexander Campbell's promotion, although I imagine Janet McN will possibly be even more so. Hurrah!

The company box right over the pit. It's certainly a partial view but great to be able to see the dancers so closely whilst, of course, keeping an eye out for the conductor ...

Looking forward to this afternoon, although I've been invited in a professional capacity by the conductor and I understand my seat reflects this ....

I can't remember what Seymour did as Odile but I do remember that when I saw Fonteyn she did a ménage of turns round the stage not the foutëes. Should she therefore not have been cast?

Thanks for this clarification of the Nerina story FLOSS. I may be wearing retro spectacles, but I have a very clear impression, albeit I was very young at the time, of Maina Gielgud executing the foutëes sur place with LFB in 1973. We were sitting in the very back row of the London Coliseum balcony and the view was extremely clear: I can still remember my late father explaining to me after the act why that was such a particularly impressive technical achievement,,,,

I think Nerina did that to get back at Nureyev having disapproved of one of his interpolations in to Act Two of Giselle....

I'd also add that when referring to a "dance actor" or "dance actress'" I would think of an artist who has the specific ability to create expression through movement quite as many as anything extraneous. I agree that we shouldn't always hark backwards but for me David Wall had this absolute ability: you really didn't see the joins. I didn't see enough of Seymour to be able to have such specific recall, but I'm confident that she had much the same ability, and although neither was a virtuoso in sheer technical terms (although Wall was certainly very able shirking nothing and I've a hunch Seymour was technically stronger than seems to be assumed given the standards imposed by De Valois) with neither dancer was the actual dance quality made secondary.

If it's a "Guardian thing'" sounds like a good reason to ignore it ;-)

A second viewing last night confirmed initial impressions from the premiere. There is much that is good, even more than that in Acts 2 and 3 but the structure of Act 1 doesn't work at all: there is just too much narrative exposition and it is surely significant that the emotional and dramatic temperature rises as the ballet continues as there is more dancing, and Scarlett is very good at conveying character and emotion through movement. The friend I was with, who is interested in dance but would not consider themselves an expert, picked up immediately that the Tavern scene is redundant. I'm sure it is there (as is the Tomb scene) to cover technical changes but I am sure other, more convincing choices could have been made. Certainly, Act One has too much emphasis on Victor's relationship with Elizabeth at the expense of his response to his creation. We need to see more of that if the depth of his, and The Creature's, misery is to read in Act Two. Some people have grumbled about the dancing servants in first scene. Even in a narrative ballet I'm not convinced that everything has to be literal. Surely, the intention is to create an impression of a settled, hierarchical world where everything is essentially in balance as in Shakespeare's use if dance as a resolution in several of his plays Similarly, isn't the return of the children in the Pas de Deux to show that as yet Victor and Elizabeth remain undeveloped emotionally. Similarly, doesn't Elizabeth wear the same dress in Act Two to show that she has remained unchanged unlike the journey that is destroying Victor? As for the book, we need literally to worry that The Creature has carried it around for seven years and only now discovered it. Perhaps he'd just not realised its significance. Surely, what matters is that he finds it at a point where he is able to understand its significance. This time, the Third Act registered most strongly (at the Premiere I'd found Act Two spoke most to me) and I was impressed again at the score's ability to contrast nineteenth century pastiche dance (also in Act Two) with a more broodingly intense response to the emotional situation. Nehemiah Kish was tremendous. His loose, long limbs really have the impression of having been stitched together and he conveyed both real misery in his solos and malice in his interactions - the forceful courtesy to Elizabeth ("You will acknowledge me") was chilling and he was aided in this by Sarah Lamb's wonderfully expressive eyes watching with a horrified fascination. I've enjoyed Tristan Dyer in several works since he caught my eye soaring across the stage in perfect unison with Akane Takada in DGV and was interested to see him in a principal role. He has an attractive presence, beautifully neat feet and legs and an emotional directness that is very compelling, his big solo at the end of Act One was thrilling and he handled the demands of partnering Lamb and the much larger Kish extremely well, the slight awkwardness with the latter seeming almost to enhance the situation. His relatively compact stature may work against him in a wider repertoire (I appreciate that hasn't held McRae back) but this was an impressive and affecting performance. Good work from Luca Acri as Henry (as fleet but less characterful than Alexander Campbell I thought), beautiful fluidity and emotional engagement from Yasmine Naghdi (more affecting for me than Meaghan Grace HInkis) and a wonderful study in icy restructure that crumbles from Kristen McNally. Hugely impressed again by Guillem Cabrera Espinach as William - a real dancing role beautifully acted too. So, much to enjoy and engage with. Revisions to the Act One structure and presentation, some cuts in the dance numbers in the next two acts and cut the bodies on the steps - they just look ridiculous to me - and there could be a very accomplished ballet here that engages our minds as well as we seek to take responsibilities for our actions and behave with honesty to those around us.

The key word is "nonetheless." Macaulay writes that Watson's appearance creates a theatrical impression but "nonetheless" is deterred by his technical weaknesses. He also writes in the same article that "For many British observers, Mr Watson is as special an artist as Ms Whelan (inference, to USA observers), so he makes it very clear that his is a personal observation and not necessarily a universally agreed one. You can't get more critically fair than that, surely.

But the point is that he doesn't dislike his skin and hair colour: he writes that they help him make an impression on stage and that he thinks he's "lovely when not dancing." He also points out that he has been extremely positive about other dancers who share Edward Watson's colouring such as Moira Shearer and David Wall, In terms of technique, Edward Watson is evidently a highly accomplished dance actor and his performance, in particular, in Mayerling is surely outstanding. I didn't see his Albrecht and don't know if his non appearance in much of the remaining classical repertoire has been personal choice or an acknowledgement that his particular talents do not align with those roles. When he was appointed principal, there was some discussion on the old forum as to his suitability for promotion but judicious choices of repertoire and evident hard work seem to have silenced much of that. My understanding is that Macaulay is much more of an Ashton than a MacMillan man and it may well be that Edward Watson's highly idiosyncratic dance style is a long way removed from what Macaulay regards as his classical ideal.

Well, the reference to his hair and colouring in the NYT article cites that it helps him to make an impression on stage so I'm not sure that is "negative." I agree that Macaulay isn't complimentary about his dancing but a critic is entitled to his opinion, as is a member of the public (of course) and he gives his reasons for that, whether or not one agrees with him.

Macaulay"s issue is not with the colour of Edward Watson"s hair or colouring. He is not impressed with his dance style, and, as a professional critic, explains why. People may not agree with him, but it's a personal opinion for which he gives reasons. This "anti a Ginger" misinterpretation seems almost wilful.

Monica Mason did dance a couple of performances as Aurora in the 1974/1975 season....

Marquez and Campbell were an absolute delight last time. They dance really well together: she is a fantastic Lise and he's a natural Colas. Also, it'll probably be the last chance to see them dance together. Mind you, everyone has been eulogistic about Morera with Muntagirov too...