Bruce Wall

Why do i think the change won't make a substantial difference. For those very special (largely operatic) performances with ticket-selling names - e.g., kaufmann, Domingo, etc. - there will ALWAYS be ticket limits I think. For the majority of other events it will be merely business as usual ... and, of course, the ACE mandate (given that is a substantial portion of one quarter of the overall ROH budget) will STILL require that 20% of the house be reserved/retained for the 'general booking' period.

These are (i) Diana Vishneva; On the Edge - (another outing by the producer of Kings of Dance and Solo for Two) in April - and perhaps more excitingly - (ii) Ballet Folklorico de Mexico in July. The Balcony is currently closed for both (although there is a £15 bottom for the latter which is considerably lower than for the former). Given the date span of the items now being shown for next (e.g., 2015) summer it very much looks unlikely that any one of the major Russian companies (e.g., Bolshoi, Mariinsky, Mikhailovsky, Stanislavsky) will be appearing at the Coliseum as had been rumoured in some quarters hereabouts especially knowing that the ROH is unavailable to the Hochhausers over the period of the next two summers as it will be under the specific oversight of the ROH/RB itself. I wonder - (i) having shown itself such a potent fiscal (e.g., money-making) entity when the Hochhauser's last presented it at the ROH and (ii) knowing that the RB enjoyed such a keen success at the Bolshoi Theatre this past summer - if the RB ITSELF might not present the Bolshoi Ballet as a capital (fund raising) venture for the charity during part of one of those summer programmes. It would be understandable (i) from the sense of calculated risk; (ii0 knowing that they have an ACE funding level cut over the next three years and (iii) - as noted here recently by Sim - their determination to discover more independent ways of seeking funding for the institution itself. (In such circumstances the initial producing funds would, of course, have to be independently raised.) I believe in one of those videos that were briefly posted on BcoF during the period of the RB 2014 summer tour that K. O'Hare (in and amongst the translation into Russian) spoke of closer ties and possible cooperative links with the Bolshoi and Mr. Urin. Such, I'm sure, would be keenly appreciated by the Russian giant especially given the drastic fall of the rouble over the past two weeks. Friends of mine in Russia have said that the fear quotient in that regard is currently massive.

Oh, dear, Jane. I don't think I was thinking too much about the specific usage of language/terminology. (I have to do that oh, so much in my day job as it is ... lest the lawyers come knocking.) Please don't read too much into it. Perhaps 'called in' was a bad choice. I should have stuck just to 'replacing'. I simply wanted to let people know about the change in casting for the Saturday matinee. That is all .... especially as the casting has not yet - or had not yet - been altered on the ENB web and I read of this change in Moscow elsewhere.

Here is a video new item from Russia (in Russian obviously) celebrating the Mikhailovsky's opening at the Koch Theatre with Giselle. Osipova is featured.

Oh, don't worry, SPD444, I get them ALL the time .... and now with even more frequent (and frightening) regularity .... Even now I think I can see 'second childishness' beckoning at my window. .

This I believe has been mentioned - by the ever astute John Mallinson - in the newly announced SW season umbrella forum. (I may, of course, be wrong .... or that item might well now have been pulled.)

Sadly Cojacaru will not be dancing in the ENB Swan Lake matinee as scheduled this Saturday in Milton Keynes as she has been called in to replace an injured Smirnova in La Dame Aux Camellias opposite Ovcharenko with the Bolshoi in Moscow. (I would image those two will be very fetching together in the Neumeier.) Poor Smirnova has been replaced in many of her Moscow performances this season and has been additionally pulled from the Tokyo tour commencing next week. I'm sure we all pray she makes a speedy and full recovery from whate'er it may be that is ailing her.

I have not seen their Giselle - but I have seen their Nutcracker, Swan Lake and Sleeping Beauty. (i believe I have written accounts on all three if you wanted to reference them.) The ideas involved in the productions I have always found to be (i) tasteful and (ii) often profound given their means. They do travel with an orchestra and have always been overall good value I think - certainly when compared with some of their other Russian brethren of a like ilk on similar regional trails. One is so very deeply appreciative of the fact that MCB (i) respect these major classical works and their attending audience and (ii) somehow manage to take them into areas of the UK that often other - even substantially subsidized - companies cannot seemingly manage.) I certainly would not fear/hesitate in pluming in their favour. Not at all. I, myself, look forward to seeing their Giselle on 15th January 2015 at the lovely Richmond Theatre. Please do report back if you do attend, Moomin. I would love to hear what you thought.

I was excited to find this clip on Youtube. It is ALL in Russian and shows - delightfully - Balanchine completely at home when speaking his native (as opposed to his adopted) tongue on the occasion of NYCB's visit to Moscow in 1962. It also shows some new class footage (well, new to me at least) and the glory that is a peak at Lincoln Kirstein (who did not like to be filmed) towering proudly over the table shared with Mr. B.) What a treat. Anyone who ever came into contact with that resounding profile never forgot it. It was entirely Ashtonian in its pride of scale.

I would imagine that is - understandably - a private rental ... and not under the aegis of SW's umbrella itself ... which would explain it not being in the first flush of the general booking. Funny, I seem to have got my 20% discount this time round ... and even applied a gift voucher (itself being a credit for not receiving the discount on a previous booking). (NB: If you don't manually remove the £2.00 in the donation segment ... you will be charged).

There is a notice on the SW website that says they are 'loading tickets between 9.00 am and 10.00 am' (whatever that means) .... and that tickets for the season as so kindly listed by Janet above goes on sale at 10.00 am today. Just now tried to go in and book .... seems it may be taking them a little longer ... Now working .... Got in and it goes into one of those enchanting queuing systems Although with an opening gambit of 209 it is nothing like the old days of the ROH and being usually placed over 1,000 .... .... or even the razor sharp bite of the opening day of the ENO Sweeney

I believe Alison that in the case of Ratmansky remounts that Mrs. Ratmansky often steers the helm (i.e., someone other than the prolific originating choreographer himself). Of course, in the Royal's regard, I'm sure he would perhaps fly in for a few hours of final oversight. P.S: I, too, feel that I preferred overall the RB's Metamorphosis triple bill in comparison to 'The Age of Anxiety' one .... and that had three original scores to boot! I well remember that I bought only one ticket for that Olympic series and ended up stealing my way into four of the five performances. In specific reference to the current programme I thought the final pas de deux for Rojo/Watson in the Brandstrup/McGregor outing was stunning. Of course, we will never know who choreographed what .... but I think I would put my money on Brandstrup in terms of that final pas' regard.

Wondering about pricing. I see that in Canadian cinemas showing the RB performance relays that there is one fixed maximum price for adults throughout the very large country (... i.e., one larger than the territorial USA ... and one where the entirety of the territorial UK could fit seven times into the province of Ontario alone) of $16.99 (or £9.44). There are reductions for seniors and students. In my local cinema (the Brixton Ritzy) the adult cost for these screenings - to anyone who is not a member of that particular cinema - is £20 (or $36.01 Canadian). These maximum figures are clearly before any of the fees (booking and otherwise) are applied by the particular cinema. I was wondering - given that I assume the cost of the equipment needed for the relay is relatively the same in each country - (i) why are the prices in the UK chains so varying and (ii) why is the British price of admission over double that of the Canadian one (or at least as charged at the Ritzy), especially when one considers the fact that the Canadians are literally thousands of more miles away from the originating source ... which in my case you could walk in just over an hour if necessary? (This is made especially potent when one considers that flying between Vancouver and Toronto represents a larger distance than flying between London [uK] and Toronto.) Does anyone know?

I think this is an interesting point, Floss. I consider myself a fan of K. O'Hare and much admire his long term policy of building the RB Company from the bottom up. This is vital both for the artists themselves as much as for the generational build of the RBS itself and the growing urgency for sustainability in terms of a 'newish'/renewed RB audience. So crucial on all counts. O'Hare's endeavours thus far are already bearing fruit (Reece and Sambe being recent cases in this particular point) and this year's key RBS graduates (say Katsura, Braendsrod and Dixon - if even now O'Hare is lucky enough to lay hold on them - and those being ONLY the ones I myself have been privileged to see dance) bode especially well in terms of ensuring a brilliant world class RB future. (Certainly I, for one, would very much hunger to watch those artists named develop over the long term.) For this reason I think it is key that major works (even those originally established elsewhere) that actually teach the company TO dance - works like Ashton's SV, MacMillan's Concerto and so much of the Balanchine rep - be as frequently exercised as the more-money-spinning and rightfully core narrative works, SL SB - and now Winter's Tale, et al. I, too, think it is grand to want to have a 'new' Ratmansky ... but equally AS important - in terms of carrying both the artists and the audience with you, Mr. O'Hare - to share in those key works which have earned Ratmansky - and his rare kin - their rightful respect. Here I think of such works as Ratmansky's Concerto DSCH, Namouna, etc. or, even say, Peck's 'Year of the Rabbit'. I, myself, would love to see Scarlett's Asphodel Meadows be cherished in as many world ballet rosters as, say, McGregor's Chroma is (e.g., POB, NBoC, SFB, AB, etc.). In a similar light how wonderful it might be to have Robbins' Fancy Free (another ballet treasured in world companies) at the RB so that it too could be held up next to and alongside, say, the development of the current 'Age of Anxiety'. (I'm quite certain that 'Anxiety' is still a work in progress.) Both share the same period, number of characters, composer and (in large measure) setting. I have this distinct feeling (although no proof) that the germ for the idea of 'ANXIETY' might well have come from Scarlett's enhanced exposure to a greater slice of the Robbins' canon during the considerable period of his own work in other companies and - who knows - perhaps even specifically Fancy Free. Certainly the Robbins has a wonderful sense of humour embedded within the structural walls of its characters, one ultimately making those same appear all that much more touching/humane in the end.

Just wanted to mention that the snazzy Royal Canadian Air Force bomber jacket that Dyer wore with such style in the Scarlett was only slightly marred by the addition of what we now know as the Canadian flag. That flag would itself not have existed at the time of this setting or indeed the time of creation of either Auden's, Bernstein's (and how glad I was that they didn't cut his STUNNING score) or indeed Robbins' NYCB balletic take on The Age of Anxiety (in which the choreographer himself would dance aside, amongst over 40 others, Tanaquil le Clercq) although it would have for the later rendition made by Neumeier. That particular flag would not be FIRST raised until 1965. At this period (e.g., that of the setting of Scarlett's ballet) the Union Jack would have been the particular colonial ticket for the 'true, north, strong and free'. They too would have been proudly standing for 'God Save OUR King'.

SORRY - WRONG SEGMENT QUOTED .... (sadly you can't go back and alter such even in the 1/2 hour 'edit' window as proscribed) ... MEANT TO ISOLATE I did talk to and overhear several people who really enjoyed the Brandstrup piece, but it didn't grip me at all - I found my attention wandering constantly. .... I will say the lighting scheme was pretty good however. Oh, dear. I had quite a different reaction to the lighting of the Brandstrup. Yet another 'seeing in the dark' ballet where what shards of true light on the dancers exist are so severe in and of themselves that they make it almost painful for (at least my) eyes to focus with any consistency. The shadows themselves are sharp enough to stab. I well realise I may be alone in this .... and that my difficulties may be but the result of advanced age and ocular decrepitude, but I found this specific aspect (e.g., the so called 'illumination' - or rather lack of it) of this particular 'Ceremony of Innocence' guilty of being rather unpleasant. The relative stability of Tipon's lighting in 'The Age of Anxiety' came - or washed over - as a balm-filled Valhalla on reflection.

Seems they're coming down before the poppies

Also I seem to recall a significant solo section created for the very talented James Hay ... but perhaps I am wrong in that ...

A moving interview with this ballet icon here - who looks/sounds oh, so much younger than her extraordinary 72 year nomination. What an inspiration she is. I was so lucky to have caught the end of her 28 year reign at NYC ballet and to see her dance some of those many legendary works she created for Balanchine.

You can see a rehearsal of the opening number from LITTLE DANCER here. If you pull through to 5.35 you can see Tiler Peck dance up a storm in the title role in the final minute. Don't know at what point this was filmed in rehearsal. It certainly was before they were in the theatre - where they are now and are currently performing. Word of mouth apparently has been very positive. The show 'officially' opens at the Kennedy Center on 20th November ... and closes on 30th November? Will Broadway beckon? Time will tell. (If so, the Fairchild clan (husband Robbie in American in Paris opposite RB's Leanne Cope, wife Tiler Peck (Fairchild) in Little Dancer and sister to the husband, Megan Fairchild in the current On the Town revival on the Great White Way) could ALL be up for Tonys. That would be a NYCB record methinks.

I thought Osipova (her last in this run) and the entire company breathed stunning life - nay, defining poetry - into a miraculous MONTH tonight. Curious what others thought. Hayward and Hay were simply breathtaking in their dramatic detail and Bonelli has so grown in the depth of his characterisation over but a few performances. (I think I have seen all of this particular contingent.) Congratulations to Reece Clarke for a most commendable job. I saw his formal SV debut last night (am truly shocked that no one here has commented thus far on such an occasion) ... and tonight he was even more steady at the helm. The future potential is clearly obvious. Indeed, SV gave a good account of itself I thought - better methinks than was witnessed in SdeB. They are of course - all three - rightful jewels in the RB crown. Long and repeatedly may they glitter in London - and via the cinema - the world. Must now get some sleep.

Source A wonderfully shot selection of shorts. Watching the 'veterans' slot it made me think how many of these veterans have not been seen in London (sadly) in their major rank capacity if at all. The last time NYCB appeared here was almost nine years ago and then - previous to that - almost a quarter century before. Watching Kathleen Tracey who is now a ballet mistress .... it made me think that she and her sister (Margaret Tracey who was a principal) would never have been seen in London at all. (Many here, of course, would have seen her I'm sure in NYCB's more frequent seasons in Paris.) I know how much a local connection is for many readers, so I am glad I can point out that Martin Harvey (ex-RB) appears briefly in his role as husband to Maria Kowroski, NYCB principal. It's lovely to see how casually Craig Hall's husband is incorporated into those proceedings. Times they have changed. (It 's hard for me to imagine that Kowroski is now the oldest NYCB principal after the retirement of Wendy Whelan. I well remember when she [Kowroski that is - although I could say the same about Whelan who I remember when she was in her SAB graduating class programme) was thrown into her first principal role (as a dominating Siren to the dazzling Damian Woetzel's Prodigal Son) when she was but 17. It was, I promise, a VERY good year ) Just watched the 'inspirations' tab ... and found it ... erm ... inspiring

Too chez. I had, myself, considered writing a note in light of the ACE funding (albeit that it has been slightly reduced over the next three years it still remains the most heavy subsidy of any cultural institution in the UK [and from purely a monetary value the USA as well]) inquiring as to an 'equivalent access provision' for the impoverished ... (oh, I'm SO sorry - in ROH speak I should perhaps best say the 'general public'.) It seems to me that there will be approximately ten standing spaces on the Linbury's U stream (where you must be tall enough to see over the gaggle of heads themselves having to lean forward to see the full stage) as opposed to the current nomination in access of near forty in the current Linbury on its variety of levels. I wonder if that would go against the original 'Sainsbury Family' funding provisions? Perhaps not. Then, I thought (to only me, myself and I of course) what really is the point? They will do, of course, what they will do in this regard .... as they have in the past .... and regardless of what we write .... and we - buried in the ever increasing proletariat ranks - will have to settle and be grateful for our slice of an ever more heated scrum. I believe this may be - in future notations - referred to as 'our right' if not our downright 'privilege' .... or so it certainly seems in regard. say, to such matters as as the stalls circle standing room in the main house. (I, myself, can no longer comment on that however. I sadly find I can no longer afford even that on any regular basis. Now - on those rare occasions when I - a general booker no longer affording the 'friendly' ranks of privilege' - can snatch a place for something seemingly special - it is ... as perhaps the ROH team best intend ... a 'special' treat. I am, I promise, deeply appreciative on those occasions .... HUGELY .... but remain even now oh, so grateful to know that I can - even in my dogged and doddering age - still 'remember that ROH of yore'. The one I first came to know and love. )

One performance of Giselle that rivals Osipova's in my heart is that of Gelsey Kirkland. The small solo from the first act has long been seen on Youtube. Recently I see that they have added the title character's entrance in the second act. You can find that here. I seem to recall she literally melted into air ... or so it seemed to me at the time. I remember in the 80's being invited to a private screening by the woman who make these silent films - totally illegally - on Super 8. (Those were the days, huh .... NOT!) I remember seeing segments from Nureyev in his only performance of Fille ... and other key rarities. I laugh now when I think back on this. Back then people would heatedly complain when they got (such stunning artists as) Martine van Hamel or Eva Evdokimova on even a triple bill cast. How times have changed.