Bruce Wall

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.

NYCB in their playbills lists ALL DANCERS performing. To do otherwise would be in breech of the union regulations and they would be brought up on charges. Where there are cast changes they are (i) changed in the electronic casting notices; (ii) announced from the stage if late - and, if in time, (iii) have paper inserts in the playbill itself. Sometimes all three.

DQ - 3 Cellist - 2 Dante - 6 (You get to see the greatest range of the Company here - and they look so comfortable in it) Limit - 1 Northern - 3 Nutcracker - 3

Deleted - see below

Overall I had a good time at the gala this afternoon and it was a wonderful way to bid a long farewell to TAB after their short UK visit of 2023. I am fairly lucky in that I have seen the original casts in the full length pieces that others have said they like to see with their original companies (both American) A few points - and I'll reference 'serenade's review quoted above - as it seemed to be along the lines of so many. Harlequinade - This is another of Ratmansky's reconstructions of a Petipa ballet according to the Stepanov notations lodged at Harvard. I thought - much as I did about his performance in the Emeralds PDT - that Marcus Morelli was - in a word - well two - simply SUBLIME. I SO would like to see more of him. He has I'm sure a great future. He was well matched here by Sharni Spenser - surely one of the strongest ballerina's in the current Company - in terms of technique, musicality and dramatic aptness. I thought too the corps also danced very well and it was lovely to see Robert Perdiziola's exquisite costumes featured on the ROH stage. What I really missed was the mis-en-scene he created - i.e., the scenery - which was in both its motion and colourful sweep entirely bouffant in its airiness - and managed in its various guises to somehow lift the entire piece. Those, however, were built for a much larger stage and would in their construct certainly not be apt here. (Much as the size of the Met simply swallowed up the intimate nature of Cathy Martson's fine Jane Eyre created for Northern Ballet.) The NYT critic wrote 'This Harlequinade' suggests, at least, that not all Petipa deserves full restoration'. I have to agree. I think it is much better when it comes as a simple quotation as here. I happily joined in its thrill. If you wanted to see a two act reimagining of the same, Balanchine did one for NYCB which is a total 'family' delight - and features a large company of children who - as ever with Balanchine - dance the same steps as the adults. Of the Tchaikovsky PDD I thought one aspect of today's performance highlighted one difference (much as 'serenade' referenced) from those seen locally. That was in Chengwu Guo's solo variations. Both were, I thought, very fine indeed - and made especially so because of the vociferous silence of his landings which allowed the choreography to WHOLLY join in its celebration of the music. This is due to the deep plie he deployed - one that Balanchine always insisted upon and such as he ensured were wrought by the NYCB Company men through the teachings of Stanley Williams. This tradition carries on rightfully to this day. Balanchine demanded this from his men as for him then - as at NYCB today - music ALWAYS comes FIRST. (Where Balanchine wanted the feet or other body parts to be heard he would choreograph such into the works themselves much as many on this board will have seen this week in the Rubies' foot (Tall Girl) and hand (Principal Woman) slaps. I well remember in rehearsal (on those occasions I was lucky enough to attend) Balanchine would turn to Robert Irving (his conductor) and have him speak to the dancers FIRST before he addressed them himself. This, too, separates the NYCB traditions from other companies with very different and certainly much valued priorities. On Everywhere We Go - I first saw this Peck work (created in NYC in 2014) during NYCB's Paris visit in 2016 at its premiere there with the original cast (i.e., the whole piece) at the Chatelet. Memorably it had 22 curtain calls. The Parians had already come to love Peck's works as the POB already had a number in their rep, and indeed a creation, 'Chien et Loup', made expressly for them that year. While I was delighted that one of the larger Peck ballets of which there are now a great many was being featured here (even if only in part) at long last - and I sincerely was - it did look strangely squished on the smaller British stage. The full swell of Peck's sweep - which certainly you could get an indication of thanks to TAB here - was (inevitably) missing and you could sense the dancers attempting to measure space. Too, the magic of the changing symbols backdrop was somewhat 'short-changed' as a result. Seeing the extract today I certainly don't think this would be an appropriate address for the work as a whole. (Rotunda - a work from Winter 2020 which I was at its premiere in NYC - is very much a Peck chamber piece and will be well suited to British stages when it is shown by NYCB at Sadler's Wells next year.) I loved the fact that they listed the dancers after the first names of the original cast members. (They don't do that in NYC!!!!) You can hear the wonderful (and now retired) Sterling Hyltin speak about creating her part in the original production in a NYCB video here.) Can I just add that I thought Yuumi Yamada was ENTIRELY EXQUISITE in Sterling's role. What a tremendous dancer she is - and her speed is very much akin to that you would witness seeing this ballet in the relative largess of its State Theatre home. Certainly her performance cheered me no end and was a highlight of the overall day and assuredly in this very happy run. Thanks you so much TAB.

Best combos so far this evening in TAB's fervid performance of Balanchine's triumphant Jewels. Bless Sandra Jennings for having curated so effectively on behalf of the Trust. Her work here speaks for itself. Once again Marcus Morelli charmed radiantly in the Emeralds PDT - how I wish I could see him do it again - but I was propelled to write now because of the dazzling enticement that was Yuumi Yamada's take on the second woman's PDT solo following his own. It defined soulfulness. She more than sparkled; she coruscated through the stealth of her grace-filled glint. To add to this rapture the euphoric flicker of Benedicte Bernet's sweetly dominant Diana in tonight's Diamonds added lustre to the ROH's historic gleam. This diminutive powerhouse appeared to gently stretch its very dimensions. Here one didn't require the skilled artifice of the recent RB Cinderella's lit circle rounds. No, sir - 'Why?', you ask. Simple. This ballerina didn't just glitter; she blazed. Everyone present was enveloped in the heat of her heart. Its reflective bliss practically blistered in euphoric communion. It was more than a delight to witness; it was a privilege.

Some people might find this recent Balanchine insight from this year's Vail Dance Festival of interest (you see a very, VERY brief clip of Tiler Peck and Roman Meija rehearsing Rubies PDD in it and Roman in Prodigal Son - CAN'T WAIT FOR THAT) with dancers from NYCB, POB and NBoC as well as Robbie Fairchild - and surprise, surprise - even the truly GREAT (and long retired) Damian Woetzel in the finale of Western Symphony. Enjoy. https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=310504644763250&ref=sharing

Thought tonight overall was a much tighter performance and wanted to pay special kudos to Marcus Morelli for stellar work in the Emeralds PDT. So lithe and clean with stunning dramatic accents to add to his overall sweep. (Would love to see him - as noted in his rep schedule - as Stanislav Nikinsky in Neumeier's Nijinsky. I can see him being excellent in that.) Also, Sharni Spenser shone with asserted musicality in the off-balance aspect of her first Diamonds solo. Happily the local musicians kept to tempi there and she more than brightly took their lead. She deserved the spontaneous applause. The orchestral rendering of Emeralds was - blessedly - also MUCH improved over last night's unfortunate effort. Well done, Jonathan Lo, for clearly making that happen.

Hi Anna - Sent you a PM.

Giving new significance to the term 'National'. .... Things ain't what they used to be ... or so it appears. As with so many other things hereabout .... it's diminished.

That's the Nijinksy Gala, Dawnstar, and has lasted that long for years. Next year's is the last under Neumeier's leadership and is scheduled to be six hours in length. I've always enjoyed those I've attended - and the much appreciated guest participants.

Too little; too late .... Should we be surprised? Neva!

Got my tickets - after waiting for the ones I had already booked to be returned unto their cyber space - bar one which was taken up by someone else in the interim understandably. Feel like they should PAY ME to be a FRIEND given the major frustration levels they have levied for oh, so many. The service - as ever - speaks for itself.

Shocking .... Outraged .... but not I suppose surprised .... Had booked 21 tickets so far - after much 'hanging' about ... Got Error 500 - had already had ticket limit ... went to pay for what I had booked and all that came up was the donation key. Fat chance that. Tried again - everything had disappeared. Again - Error 500. You've outdone yourself ROH.

Alison - based on the NYCB version - ENBS is just doing the four opening corps segments plus a modified finale without the soloists and principal participatory elements - and certainly minus all of their (i.e., principal and soloist) pdd and solos which make up a good portion of the original - which itself runs 40 minutes in total in its entirety. Hope that makes some sense. In short - and in answer to your question - no, it is not the whole thing - much as La Sylphide is very much a truncated concert highlight version. This allows the ENBS to also showcase brief premieres of work such as have been created for the students.

I have to say, Sim, it made me wonder what might be in those drawers below???!!!!