Bruce Wall

FAO MODERATORS - Wonder if the commentaries dealing specifically with the Prisca Zeisel affair (short of the initial news item) might be worthy of a separate strand since it now seems to have taken on a life for itself. I so value this specific BcoF strand as it gives valuable and immediate news about work/events in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. I fear the over abundance of current commentaries on just one specific issue might muddy this oh, so valuable and certainly much valued service.

Tiler has two performances as the Rubies Lead to dance in the first week of the NYC Ballet 75th Anniversary Season - casting here* - commencing on 19th September and even more I assume on the weeks that follows which sadly led to her Leeds absence I'm sure. Not surprised that the male role was featured in her ballet as - and noted by her in an Leeds interview - she staged key passages of the piece with herself and her partner, NYCB principal Roman Mejia, initially demonstrating to the Company. (Would love to have been a fly on those walls.) Without doubt he is one of the world's star dancers now - as referenced by Ratmansky. It's impossible (at least for me) to take my eyes off him at any point while he is dancing. So look forward to seeing this piece in the LInbury after the NYCB Fall season. *(Now that Tiler is doing Rubies with Mejia it means that she won't be doing Emeralds which is heart breaking as she was SO good in it. Still, can't wait to see Mira Nadon with the wonderful Davide Ricardo in those assignments. Also doing the Rubies is Megan Fairchild - who is IMHO a 'better-than-ever ballerina in this the Autumn of her career and the stunningly young and vibrant Emma van Enck - who attended the RBS prior to going to SAB. She makes her debut in the Stravinsky alongside the wonderful Brazilian Jovani Furland in his initial NYCB outing in this role - (although he may well have danced it before with MCB). As to Diamonds Sara Mearns will I'm sure glitter - being too better-than-ever since her return - at least in my experience - alongside Russell Janzen in his final NYCB performances. So look forward to seeing the combination of LaFreniere - who was so vivid in the Balanchine/Robbins' Firebird last Winter and Chan - who is the very personification of strength and elegant precision. So much to look forward to. Above all I can't wait for the opening night - when three ladies who were in the Company in 1948 when the 'official' NYCB began its exciting life will be present and each act is set to be introduced by originators from the respective ballet - which in terms of Rubies will mean McBride/Villella and for Diamonds - the ever-eternal combination of Farrell/Martins. So much to look forward to in the House that Balanchine built.)

Dear Bridiem - I see - JUST TO BE CLEAR - I ONLY mentioned Evdokimova in this instance because I thought she was a spectacular Titania in Onegin opposite - as I recall - Sombart. (He danced with so many great dancers in the role.) I have to say I saw Evdokimova dance much more with ABT - where she was a 'house dancer' - more than I did anywhere else. Indeed, in a way it made me laugh. I remember some people complaining when Evdokimova was on - much as they foolishly did with the stunning Martine van Hammel (did you ever see her????) because they weren't what they deemed as one of the ABT stable of stars which was vast at the time. She gave oh, so many thrilling performances both in principal and soloist roles. I especially enjoyed her in Tudor.

Dear Bridie, with all due respect - I'm not aware that I quoted you AT ALL. I was merely commenting on the choices for Oneign as I thought I said: 'In terms of Oneign'. I'm sorry that you took offense at mine - and i must confess I have certainly just done the same at yours - but I know -at heart - that it was simply a matter of confusion so it is not an issue whatsoever. I send every good wish.

Am I just VERY old? .... I'm amazed - nay, flabbergasted - in terms of Onegin that not ONE person here reflects the likes of Haydee (for whom the role was created after all), Maximova, Seymour or Evdokimova for Titania or Sombert or - for heaven sake - Cragen in the title role ALL OF WHOM DANCED IT FOR LFB IN LONDON BEFORE THE ROYAL EVEN ATTAINED IT (and that is to take NOTHING away from the likes/heights of Cojocaru, Rojo, Reilly or Kobburg). It's interesting certainly to me that the selections outside of the Royal - and the now historic Russian visits - in so many instances seem to be ones celebrated on video (e.g., Baryishnikov in DonQ - Did he ever it dance it here? I'm not certain ... I thought he really danced here very little - perhaps a tad more than some, like Damian Woetzel who the great man said 'out-Baryishnikov'd HIM') Vividly I remember seeing Baryishnikov in DonQ many times but that was with Kirkland and Bujones (as Espada) during the so-called 'dance boom' -- and was certainly not on these shores.

I'm not sure about 'definitive' for - as I get older which it seems I'm rapidly doing the older that I get - I begin to doubt my own memory which I used so to depend upon. That said the other night I stumbled across a video of Suzanne Farrell and Peter Martins in Allegro Brilliante and I realised that was the first cast I saw in the ballet. Like SO many with Suzanne she marked them for me forever - even in face of the truly blissful mastery of Tiler Peck whose musical zeal blazes in it. Even when I watch the roles I saw Suzanne in - oh, so many - certainly second movement in Symphony in C with the changes Balanchine put in for her, the last movement in Vienna Waltzes, Chaconne and - 12 oh so memorable times in Diamonds - I see her shadow even now. It was her back. It STILL leaves traces - much as Wendy Whelan did in so much - certainly Robbins' The Cage - and especially those many pieces that were created for her - a vast amount - including Forsythe's Hermann Sherman and much Ratmansky (for whom he said she was understandably 'a muse'), which include such world masterworks as Concerto DSCH, Pictures at an Exhibition, Namouna, and Russian Seasons. These women haunt. It's strange as when I very first saw them I wasn't sure that I liked them at all. (I remember Wendy joining NYCB fresh from SAB - where I'd certainly seen her in the showcase - and she wore bright, BRIGHT red lipstick and you could watch her mouth the counts. Indeed, we used to say: 'Count along with Wendy'.) Rapidly I became devoted - and still am. That is, I suppose, testament to their definitive talents for which I am EVER so grateful. Another performance I will always remember was at a (half empty) Wednesday matinee - DECADES AGO - of La Sylphide (Erik Bruhn's production) in Canada. I was taking my PhD and had bunked off to see the ballerina, Nadia Potts as I rather liked her. I forgot who was originally cast as James - but he was replaced at the last minute. There was an announcement on the vast theatre's tanoy. They had brought a graduating student in from SAB as the replacement. They said the name but I certainly didn't note it at the time. The curtain went up and - MY WORD - once seen, NEVER forgotten. Certainly I have NEVER seen the role BETTER performed. I was dashing around afterwards asking patrons and staff who he was. No one seemed to know. I went around to the stage door and the Doorman told me the name: Fernando Bujones. ENOUGH SAID.

For me - in my own mind - the answer is a definitive 'no'. There is just so much that comes flying in our direction nowadays - and we all have to determine what is useful and what isn't - in every walk of life. If it isn't dancing in their (i.e., the dancers' regard) - then as far as I'm concerned - in terms of my own personal interest in DANCE - it isn't relevant. I simply don't now have the time to spend on such frivolities. There are limits, of course. If a dancer insists on having Putin tattooed on themself .... then .... well .... I'm sorry ... FOR ME ... that's where it goes beyond the BEYOND!!!

Interesting to see that ABT will be doing Woolf Works in 2024 - I had thought that the Royal might have wanted to hang on to those rights but I suppose in the current climate an American tour by the Company will not exactly be on their cards. Understandable. I wonder too if Ferri will appear in its American premiere season as she spent the large body of her career, of course, with ABT. I'm sure that would certainly be celebrated when ABT is at the MET. 'ABT will present the North American premiere of Wayne McGregor's Woolf Works at Segerstrom April 11-14, 2024'

Now working for me too. Hadn't previously.

The email does say you can follow the link for the performance castings - but it really isn't functioning at the moment. Maybe it just needs to be updated. I'm sure that's what they intend.

and ... at least for me .... just 'bits' will not suffice.

What you don't hear in those clips above is Mr. Toonga talking about his journey WITH BALLET. Indeed he doesn't mention the word in terms of his own work. Surely if it is going to be 'a development of 'ballet as an art form' it needs to be AN INTER-ACTIVE CONVERSATION - hip-hop included - but with the emphasis in/on the balletic idiom. This is where, for example, it is VERY different from Kyle Abraham's association with NYCB. He comes from a not entirely dis-similar background to the RDT's current charge but is willing and has embraced the balletic idiom in his NYCB efforts. It is in this aspect that I previously struggled vis a vis Mr. Toonga. That said, I can now clearly see how this fulfils the established theatrical commitment of the RDT - much, say, as it might, Adventures in Motion Pictures - which I now see as a close associate of the RDT in terms of their own purposeful drive - and, heavens knows, the former has been gloriously successful in carving out a dedicated audience. Moreover, they truly cover this nation - as well as international ports. They could quite rightly lay claim to a 'National' tag. For now I look forward to seeing what and how Mr. Toonga develops - and really can only type those words with any sense of comfort as I've now clearly settled in my own mind what the over-riding structure of the core organisation supporting him in reality is. (Thanks be to the RDT's noble leader.) That said, I must confess I have not been particularly taken with those pieces I have seen of Mr. Toonga's work. I will keep trying. I'm sure there is something there to gain. Just look at the response from the RDT artists. I look forward to his future RDT development. I can only now feel he is in a 'right place' FOR HIM - as he seems, himself, to suggest. Good luck to him I say.

And here was me thinking that they might well be 'Call[ing Him] Madam'!

I have a feeling it could be a good couple of decades yet - and may well see a goodly number on this board out. Certainly I can't beat them - (wouldn't want to try) ... so I've proudly joined in support of the RDT Triumvirate well before their parade dances by - but - in more than equal measure also seen - as I felt was critical for me - to have a rightful balance where at least the frolicking leap of the forward march of the balletic idiom could stand at core. Certainly I well know time waits for no man, (sorry, person). (In answer to Dawnstar, - since you quoted me - I know it is hard but I think we should be oh, so grateful for what we DO have. We ARE privileged to have ENB and BRB as much as the RDT. There are many on this planet who dream of having access to such. Sadly I will miss ENB doing Theme (will have to make do with NYCB doing it) but I'm so glad I'll be able to see a goodly many of the Skeaping Giselles. Before the dates were announced I had thought I'd miss a chunk. I so love that production - one more akin to the Ratmansky that the Wright. I oh, so ADORE that fugue. Also to answer a number of notations as to a desire for foreign companies: I think these will become - at least in the foreseeable short-term - (now there's a contradiction to dwell upon) - that it will be very UNlikely. I think we have to remember that the 2023 TAB visit will inevitably have been agreed at the time of - and I think most assuredly BEFORE - the pandemic. Certain costs and procedures would have been contained at that time. Much in this world has changed. The UK government hugely upped the arts touring requirements and visa costs for foreign entities. Thus you really haven't heard any other announcements short of individuals and I suspect you won't. The Americans had just earlier done the same - to an even greater extent. I doubt you will be seeing the RDT - as a Company, say - in NY at any point in the near future. Look at the Kennedy Center - apart from the past annual Russian company visits - one after the other - their season was chocker-blocked with international dance - including a lot of ballet. The last season and next features virtually has NONE. It's all indigenous - and cut down at that. Tis a different world. The Europeans are freer in this aspect - so Paris remains a haven - but even there it's not as keen a stunning array as it once was.

Bingo, capybara. The TIN that I was referring to was the verbal one I heard with my own ears - delivered as it was in shards and only - but politely - issued when pressed. I think, as ever, we have to look between such lines and let our native instincts fill in the proverbial gaps. We don't, I think, have many other options in real terms. It seems on this Forum many have been more than accurate in doing so in the past few years as reality itself has illustrated. I, too, would love a written statement. I suspect that kind of material - where it is to be found - is woolly at best and lodged in funding applications scrawled by paid consultants who are simply feeding back what the particular money sources have already fed. In short, dry spin. That's a different kind of dance altogether!

I so agree, Bridiem. The fact remains that the Royal's (RDT) Director does not see such as a 'priority'. We can't get around this. I can only feel that the Trustees are fully on board with this - they must be - and they are, after all is said and done, placed there as OUR representatives - i.e., appointed to see the best forward movement for the Charity. It is clear if we wish an alternative as opposed to what once we clearly saw a mainstay - i.e., both perceived and witnessed - we must on balance go elsewhere. I, for one, have simply taken their firm guidance and, indeed, actions to heart. That said, I am pleased to support our fine Dance Theatre in its efforts. They are outstanding in this particular regard. They do what THEY say on THEIR tin, i.e., the one now current and set - as has been clearly indicated - for the foreseeable future.

I agree with your first paragraph's sentiments, Peanut68, as I think I suggested in what I wrote. I have come to terms now with what the Royal IS - rather than wishing for what it isn't - and seemingly has no intention of being (returning to?) within the foreseeable future. As I said we can only live but in our own time. I have simply found a way in which I personally can appreciate the core elements of the RDT (the Royal Dance Theatre) - and they are many as I have said - while still holding sway in the majority for myself to those companies where the balletic idiom remains prime. For me THAT is a priority. I realise that many cannot do this for any number of entirely understandably reasons - and certainly also that - equally understandable - it may not be as important a priority. I simply have found a way - for myself - to have a comfortable balance in terms of expectation. That is all. In terms of 'bests' - should those EVER be apt - and I often think that they aren't - I strive to think it might be the best of 'both' of these differing worlds within our time's remit. (Of course, time will ultimately tell. It always does.)

Your initial comment today, capybara, FINALLY made me want to come out of my proverbial closet as per BcF which I've been privileged to be part of I believe since it first began and that was when the world still had the 'intranet'. I've been biting my lip for quite some time hereabouts. Much as you said of TAB, capybara, I no longer think of the so-titled 'Royal Ballet' as of the 'first rank' of BALLET companies. To my mind - in terms of the BALLETIC IDIOM - IT ISN'T. What it 'IS' Is it a great DANCE company - OF THAT THERE IS NO QUESTION. NO QUESTION WHATSOEVER. You can rest assured of that. It's the ballet bit in terms of the Royal that now sticks in my craw. The BALLETIC IDIOM is no longer at this Company's heart (and here I assume that it still IS at TAB). How could it be with the current Director's own philosophy? - and, yes, I'm certain Ashton, Tudor and the like are weeping in their graves. I can no longer bring myself to call it the 'Royal Ballet' - I just can't - I'm sorry - and that is JUST for my OWN peace of mind. I call it the RDT - the Royal Dance Theatre - as to my mind that is what it is - and IT IS A VERY FINE ONE AT THAT. As a 'Dance Theatre' the ROYAL IS ONE OF THE BEST. This separates it from ENB or even the current BRB methinks. Ballet companies can be very wayward beasts. Blessedly Paris are now turning back after an age in the balletic dark it seems. The greatest shame - THE GREATEST SHAME IN TERMS OF WORLD BALLET - AND THAT INCUDES THE UK WHERE IT PERTAINS - I STILL think is that Millipied left the POB - because he had - or was creating - a Choreographic Institute to be headed by Forsyth who - lest we forget - he had persuaded BACK to BALLET - (and THAT alone must have taken some doing) - and THAT I'm convinced would have had a major change for the perspective of BALLET in the 21st Century's cultural WORLD. Still, the Parisians were true to form and squelched that turn; one they had themselves so bravely initiated. People can blame Peter Martins for many things - and God knows they I'm sure rightfully do - (and let it be known I was never a huge fan of his choreography - a few bits excepted) but he DID what he PROMISED Balanchine he WOULD do - The company would STICK TO A BALLETIC IDIOM AND BRING IT FORWARD. Just look at huge amount of BALLETIC WORKS created for the various Diamond Projects (Hermann Sherman will have been one of those locals here will have seen). Jonathan and Wendy - at least from my perspective - are doing a GLORIOUS job in that regard too. IT AIN'T EASY. IT CAN'T BE. There's a world pulling against their tide. Given that they are at every single performance and rehearsal - or at least one of them if not both - it's easy to strike up conversations in this regard. STILL THAT OVERALL BALLETIC CONVERSATION IS NOT - AT CORE - HAPPENING HERE AT THE RDT's HEART. Let's just face it. What IS here, HOWEVER, is JUST AS FANTASTIC - BUT DIFFERENT. I am AS grateful for the current NYCB balletic conversations as I am for the STUNNING ACCOMPLISHMENT of the ROYAL (Dance Theatre) in their commitment to the contemporary paths of McMillan and McGregor and the forwarding of such. THAT TOO is well worth celebrating on a WORLD stage. WELL WORTH IT. It's just not BALLETIC at core. To call it that is I think a disservice to the what the previous Royal Director took such pains to foster and what the current one is clearly holding tight as his mandate. I celebrate both - much as I had in the past been proud to celebrate the so-called Royal Ballet - and I do sincerely cherish those memories - I was privileged to have them - but today it would be to diminish those (i.e, THAT heritage) were I not to find - or appropriately - have found a way to make peace with the current priorities and finding an appropriate terminology to acknowledge such. Of course we will celebrate the Royal Ballet's past with the Ashton - and I CAN'T WAIT - but it is the future that must hold within any current title. I NOW CHOOSE TO CHERISH THE ROYAL DANCE THEATRE. Were that NOT to be the case I would be joining One Pidgeon and WOULD BE OUT. AS IT IS, I cannot wait for the Royal to bring forward more new Dance Theatre for us ALL to celebrate. They do what they do OH, SO VERY WELL. It is the House they have built and it is a fine one. ..... Got that off my chest .... I'm certainly done for today .... as I've let my own work pile up .... but it was, I think, time and certainly worth it. For that, so, so much thanks, capybara.

Of course you are right - Thank you, Balletfanp. They were BOTH stunning. They seemed to feed a fire off each other. That said, I would love to see him do it with Hayward. Hayward is SO spectacular in that as she is in McGregor - as is, of course, Lamb. The Royal dancers seem to become especially rich in what is their now committed dance idiom by dancing both. This too is why the Pite sits so well with them I assume. Wheeldon is very clever in creating works especially focused for their talents. They are oh, so very different from those he creates for, say, NYCB, SFB or the Joffrey. He sets those works expressly to the home Company's style. I'm sure he is especially appreciative of these alternative opportunities. I should perhaps just add Peck (and that's Justin - not Tiler - although I have enjoyed the two things of hers I've seen too) to my list of Balanchine, Robbins and Ratmansky. I so adore, say, his Rodeo (now the first movement of Copland Episodes). I could watch it endlessly. I used to so want the Royal to do Rodeo - in its original format (which I still prefer only because of a couple of minor bits - such as the use of the rope - that have been removed from it as it now sits) - and that only because I thought it would be a brilliant way to bring young lads into the ballet. It so celebrates the football spirit which I know Peck himself is a fan of - and does so with stunning balletic delights. After seeing TAB squeeze that movement of Everywhere We Go onto the Covent Garden stage I now know it really wouldn't be fair either to the artists, the audience or to Peck himself. That, of course, beyond the knowledge that it too would not fit into the current Royal Company style as clearly defined by its rightly admired Director. I would, though, love to see BRB or ENB do, say, some of his chamber works. Belle Lettres is one I love and would work oh, so very well at Sadler's Wells - or Heatscape. Still, there are a world of Peck works now to choose from. I realise they are as foreign here - but then I know there will be a goodly number of world companies that will come to have these in time.

I think that is arguable as you suggest. Such a hiring would - in and of itself - no longer be - as clearly stated - 'a priority' - much as, say, Mr. Toonga's might not have been - or certainly so extended previously. But then I haven't seen Vadim in a McGregor work ... but certainly he is a fine McMillan artist. I so cherish the memory of him in Manon with Hayward. Pure theatrical thrill it was. I also loved him in Winter Dreams - and, of course, he is so celebrated already for his commitment to Mayerling. He seems to be happy that he is in a 'good place' for him - and, after all, he seems - more than many others - relatively free to travel the world to find outside fulfilment as well. As to the glorious bit, bridiem, some years back I would have struggled to hear myself type that. Most certainly. It was the current Director who helped me really to find a way. When I found a route where I knew that I would be able to cherish was was important to me I began - in earnest - to really go and study the McGregor works. I saw this Company grow in them. I know he doesn't choregraph 'to' music but rather against it. Still, I find much of this now so intriguing. It is a celebration of fate. To me that can be glorious. I love seeing how his pieces fall and - given his mathematical predilections - seeing how the puzzles work out. (That said there are some - like Multiverse - that I fear I simply can't abide no matter how hard I try.) Now this Company is rife with core artists who are specialists in the same; who can best lead you in this contemporary game. As long as I can have my Balanchine, Robbins and Ratmansky - my core forward balletic fix - (and I have 82 tickets for just the next current NYCB season alone - it's 75th - call me a 'NYCB promer') then I am more than game to join in the celebration of the McGregor cèilidhs. It has come at a cost certainly but I feel I have been the beneficiary of such.

There's a world doing it. I've seen McGregor works done by the POB, the Hamburg Company, the NBoC, ABT - the one NYCB disaster where it was found to be 'inappropriate' (and I say that so admiring much of his RB work where it is core) .... off the top of my head - and that's just me. Again, no one does it better than the current RB. They wear it like their own skin now. This - post Stock - is what they are being trained for. Indeed, I understand, that McGregor and Watson are now core in terms of the very selection of new dancers. This is is why it has grown so glorious. How I loved Untitled because of this. Be proud of what you have I say to myself. There's clearly a world that would love to be in your shoes.

I SO agree with you, Sim. Truly I do - and for that reason - as I noted in my remarks - I applaud David Hallberg for his sharing the range of works he has in his initial time with the Australian audiences. That is NOT one of this RB Director's 'priorities' or, indeed, his intention. As I say, you can't blame someone for NOT doing something they never intended to in the first place. This would have been clear at the time of his engagement. (He made it clear at the BA meeting noting that this was his intention from the outset - and I SO admire that kind of commitment.) We can all take it or leave it much as in life. At least there is something there to disagree with and not just general babble. He put his cards on the table. That too is surely a good thing. I admire that - whether I agree with the pack or not. That is MY choice much as it is yours, Sim. I remember once doing a session some years back in a NY prison and being lucky to have Kevin Kline - who's a Shakespearean fanatic with an encyclopaedic memory - in the professional mix. He gave the best advice I've ever heard given to a drama student - or indeed ANY student vis a vis instruction. He leant over to the prisoner, smiled and simply said: 'Take the best and leave the rest.' I remember hearing this at the time, turning and saying: 'Too right!'

This is true, Alison. There are some NYCB works that are SO large they simply could not be seen on a smaller stage like, say, the ROH's. I'm thinking here of things like Union Jack which Balanchine did as a Homage to the UK after the company had performed at the Edinburgh Festival. When Balanchine died there were 109 dancers in the company and 15 in the administration. (Hard to imagine today.) In works like that they have to use students from SAB. Certainly ALL apprentices are listed for each individual ballet they perform in and with appropriate notations. ALL NYCB company members are noted - even, say, as townspeople in Firebird. This is mandated by the union. (One of my favourite memories now is seeing Roman Meija as such - in those absurd wigs designed by Chagall. Try as he may he could not keep a straight face. It was his so very TRYING that made it so very FUNNY. Honestly, I'm SO glad I saw it - it was a show unto itself - especially when you now see the truly WORLD CLASS dancer he has become. He I know will be one for this Century - much as Baryishnikov and Woetzel were for the last.) You are quite right, though, Alison, where SAB students are used - and are not used in at least corps consignments - they are simply noted as being from the school.

Then, OnePigeon, you won't find them at that address with the current Director. This is not his remit or intention. He has said that plainly and proudly. He is a man of his word. It is not his 'priority'. Take it or leave it. If you want to see the kinds of works you suggest you must travel. Having listened to him - and taken him to heart - and admiring his conviction - which I certainly do - that is what I now choose to do. I think we HAVE to be comfortable with this. As I say the Royal does the works of McGregor and McMillian as well as anyone in the world. (Although I have to say the Stuttgart Mayerling was a revelation for me). Be proud of that. I agree with capybara and anna, I don't think TAB is top rank - certainly in what they presented. But then I had the privilege of seeing the originators in a goodly number of those works presented - and, yes, I'm of an age that allows for that. In my postings about TAB I was careful to simply praise those Company artists I thought were good in their charges and I did think Sandra Jennings did a fine job of shaping the whole of the Balanchine. I feel the same often about the Royal's contributions of the same - especially where the musical standard - especially where it has been - and I use the word reservedly - 'orchestrated'. I'm not certain now that Balanchine, Robbins or Ratmansky are really right for this Royal - as much as I'd like to see some of the core dancers in those charges. I cherish the fact I can see them in what they truly are outstanding for / in - and applaud this Director for his dedication to the core choreographer's he chooses celebrates. That kind of conviction I do sincerely admire - whether or not his immediate tastes match with my own. There is still much to learn.

This really doesn't surprise me at all, capybara. This is - at least from what he said at the last BA meeting he spoke at - very much in keeping with the current Director of the Royal's core philosophy. He has been good to those words. You can't blame someone for not doing what, at heart, they intended to do in the first place. He was open about it there. I appreciated that. I clearly heard him at that time and took his words to heart. Indeed, post pandemic it has changed my own life. I used to organise short programmes with my work away (and I know it is a luxury that I can do so - but then, that too, I've long worked for) so that I could catch up with different ballet companies. (Of course, the obvious results of Brexit have played into the mix. We have been promised great benefits which seem now that they may be in a future I might not see so - as ever - we can only live in the time we have.) NOW I plan longer residences away (e.g., three months in NYC spread over the year, and terms in Paris, Munich, Hamburg and elsewhere) so I can keep abreast of current conversations which seek to keep the BALLETIC idiom alive - i.e., bring it forward. This is a personal choice. It is important to me and, I fear, much of Mr. Toonga's work and the like - and obviously there are a vast many who enjoy it - and I DO appreciate that - is simply not to my taste - try as I may. As my mother used to say: 'It has to be on the better side of the compromise'. This is - as ever - a personal choice. Of course, things MIGHT change - but after a lifetime's dedication to the balletic core - which I sincerely have to thank Balanchine for igniting and certainly fostering during the dance boom - I have, at heart, a certain dedication. It is as I say a choice. Certainly I wouldn't want to be anywhere else but in London next June for the Ashton - and so appreciate the work of the Royal in their core McMillian and McGregor endeavours. Especially those. No one - and I mean NO ONE - does them better. That is now what I go to the Royal for. I know this Director - given his commitment - will deliver. Certainly you won't want to see NYCB in either McGregor or McMillan. It would be disastrous. They tried with the latter once and on those dancers it went down like a lead balloon. Things such as dramatic contortions, contractions, continual hyper-extensions are simply not mixed wthin their core bread and butter. At the ROH they wear their rightful ownership of such SO proudly and I SO applaud that and feel privileged to be enveloped in their own joy in its deliverance.