RB Winter Season 2016 Casting

[alison]

I hadn't registered the absence of Morera from Rhapsody, but then she *is* in Two Pigeons, and it does seem to be company policy these days not to put dancers in more than one segment of a mixed bill.

[Jamesrhblack]

I hadn't registered the absence of Morera from Rhapsody, but then she *is* in Two Pigeons, and it does seem to be company policy these days not to put dancers in more than one segment of a mixed bill.

However, Choe and Hay are in both Rhapsody and Pigeons,...

[ToThePointe]

I feel really disappointed by the Giselle casting to be honest. All the expected names are there which is wonderful and I've never seen Nunez in the role so am excited for that, although it's not a role I've ever connected her to. The problem I have with the casting is that there weren't any surprises. I think Emma Maguire could make a lovely Giselle...Although I'm not usually a fan, I think Choe would be lovely in this role too, and as a First Soloist she should probably be given more opportunities than others for Principal debut roles considering the whole point of a First Soloist in a way is to prepare the dancer for their Principal career. I absolutely love and admire Kevin for really mixing things up and bringing some light on the younger dancers in the company; showing the audience that the Royal Ballet isn't just made up of a few great Principals but instead has phenomenal dancers throughout all of the ranks but I do find it a bit frustrating that some dancers seem to miss out on opportunities that should probably come their way.

 

I also think that this was an opportunity to play around with some new Albrecht's. The role is demanding, especially Act 2, and could help fish out the Danseur Nobles in the company...

 

The problem with the casting debate is that we will never know what goes on behind closed curtains (!) and we all have our subjective opinions on who should dance what!

[aileen]

I agree about the unexciting Giselle casts particularly as it was only performed two years ago. I feel that Lamb, Nunez and Cuthbertson should make way for other dancers. There's no need for them to dance in every programme.

 

Re Marquez, doesn't she have the last Juliet in the run? Perhaps that is significant.

[alison]

However, Choe and Hay are in both Rhapsody and Pigeons,...

 

Ah, yes, you're right.  Okay, that doesn't follow, then.

 

I remember that a number of years ago numerous watchers (me included, I think) praised Choe's style in whichever soloist role she was dancing in Giselle at the time, and said that they thought she should have a chance at the lead.  That's never happened.

[alison]

I agree about the unexciting Giselle casts particularly as it was only performed two years ago. I feel that Lamb, Nunez and Cuthbertson should make way for other dancers.

 

Why the last two?  They've both hardly ever danced the role.  I think Cuthbertson may have done only one run due to injury, and not sure that Nuñez has done more than two.  Come to think of it, I'm not sure Lamb has danced it that often, either.

[aileen]

Really? Giselle is performed pretty regularly at the ROH and these dancers have been around for a fair time, Nunez especially. I don't see the need for these three dancers to reprise a role which they only danced two years ago and which will probably come back again in another couple of years.

 

Looking at the casting again, Lamb is only down to dance one Giselle, which is a bit odd unless there is a schools matinee.

Edited July 17, 2015 by aileen

[Sunrise]

I think Lamb only made her debut in Giselle in the 2014 run. Nunez was given Giselle relatively late in her career too (along with Juliet and Manon) - Alison might be right in that she's only had a couple of runs in it.

Edited July 17, 2015 by Sunrise

[Sunrise]

I do agree the casts aren't very exciting, though I'm really keen to see Nunez and Muntagirov dance together.

[BalletcoForum Moderators]

A post in this thread has been hidden whilst it is considered by the moderators.

[Jacqueline]

I think Lamb only made her debut in Giselle in the 2014 run. Nunez was given Giselle relatively late in her career too (along with Juliet and Manon) - Alison might be right in that she's only had a couple of runs in it.

As I recall, Sarah Lamb was going to dance Giselle in 2009, presumably this would have been her debut. Her Albrecht would have been Viacheslav Samodurov (spelling?) but both pulled out, I think due to injury. Certainly with Lamb as she broke her foot I believe.  I remember this as I had a ticket for the matinee and in the end I saw Cuthbertson and Pennefather. 

[capybara]

 

Looking at the casting again, Lamb is only down to dance one Giselle, which is a bit odd unless there is a schools matinee.

 

It seems there is a 'family matinee' at some juncture.

[FLOSS]

I don't think that you will find that any of the dancers cast as Giselle this year have danced the role more than half a dozen times on the Covent Garden stage. Nunez was still dancing Myrthe in 2006 and danced her first Giselle in 2009. Morera was still dancing Myrthe in 2009 and danced her first Giselle in 2013.So for me, at least, most of this season's Giselles are work in progress rather than the finished article.But perhaps Giselle is always work in progress as far as the dancer is concerned.The fact that nearly all the dancers listed for Giselle in this revival danced it in 2013 does not concern me at all as they are still in the process of claiming the role as their own.

 

It is disappointing that Takada is the only new Giselle.Casting dancers like Hayward or Nagdhi for a couple of performances would have given them an opportunity to work on the role with Peter Wright in the studio and would have really shown that O'Hare is committed to developing the company from the bottom up.Casting Stix-Brunell in Two Pigeons is a step in the right direction but there was an opportunity to do more without ruffling too many feathers.

 

I am more concerned by the fact that the role of Myrthe has clearly been downgraded in the mind of management so that it impacts not only on act 2 but on the ballet as a whole.For some years management has thought that the role of Myrthe is not sufficiently important to be announced in advance of the performance.In 2013 it became clear that it no longer considers it important enough to be cast with any real care.Having grown up with Myrthe being treated as a major role to be danced by Principal dancers like Mason and Bergsma the 2013 performances were particularly disappointing because the Myrthes as a whole were weak and lacking in stage presence.It was not the fact that management was trying out a couple of young dancers, one of whom was Tierney Heap that was the problem. The problem was the experienced dancers cast as Myrthe who did not provide a sufficient technical contrast with Giselle. None of the established dancers were sufficiently steely and strong in dance and stage presence to make a real contrast with Giselle.

Edited July 19, 2015 by FLOSS

[zxDaveM]

Casting dancers like Hayward or Nagdhi for a couple of performances would have given them an opportunity to work on the role with Peter Wright in the studio and would have really shown that O'Hare is committed to developing the company from the bottom up.

 

 

 

Had they been, it would have made my year!

[barton22]

I am more concerned by the fact that the role of Myrthe has clearly been downgraded in the mind of management so that it impacts not only on act 2 but on the ballet as a whole.For some years management has thought that the role of Myrthe is not sufficiently important to be announced in advance of the performance.In 2013 it became clear that it no longer considers it important enough to be cast with any real care.Having grown up with Myrthe being treated as a major role to be danced by Principal dancers like Mason and Bergsma the 2013 performances were particularly disappointing because the Myrthes as a whole were weak and lacking in stage presence.It was not the fact that management was trying out a couple of young dancers, one of whom was Tierney Heap that was the problem. The problem was the experienced dancers cast as Myrthe who did not provide a sufficient technical contrast with Giselle. None of the established dancers were sufficiently steely and strong in dance and stage presence to make a real contrast with Giselle.

I agree with this.  I wish the Royal would cast Myrtle as a principal role and if they are going to cast more junior dancers get them properly prepared for the role.  It was pretty uninspiring to say the least in the last run of Giselle.  (I feel the same about the Royal's approach to casting the Sleeping Beauty fairies - they are generally not cast appropriately and need principals or company members who can dance at principal level.)

[aileen]

I saw several Giselles and Beauties last time they were on and I don't think that I saw one really good Myrthe or Prologue fairy.

[FLOSS]

I think that the roles that suffer most from being cast without due consideration being given to the need for stage presence and technical assurance are Myrthe and Lilac Fairy.Although as far as Lilac Fairy is concerned while my preference is for technical command such as Bergsma and Mason possessed you can be almost as effective with marginally less technique but the ability to project great beneficence which is how Porter performed the role.But while she did not possess the blistering technique of Mason and Bergsma she shared their presence and ability to command the stage and she was able to do the Italian fouettes that have recently defeated so many of the dancers cast as the Queen of the Dryads.

 

I think that the Prologue Fairies present a number of problems:-

 

1)The tempi at which the variations are performed is slower than in the past.

 

2)They are not danced as a flow of movement which slows slightly to emphasise a pose but does not stop until the music stops.Today they are performed almost as freeze frame to freeze frame.This approach is most noticeable in the first variation but not absent from the others.

 

3)Casting.At one time the roles were danced by principal dancers or people on the way up who were being considered for possible promotion and they had stage presence.It have heard it argued that casting Principal dancers was a necessity at one time because of the gap between the technical abilities of the Principals and the corps but that with the higher technical standards that new recruits display it is no longer necessary to use such senior dancers. But it seems to me that this is only part of the story.There is also the need to cast dancers who are suited to the roles and are able to command the stage.And it is this aspect of the ballet's structure that has been ignored for a long time.

 

I know that there are those on this forum who dislike the idea of dancers being type cast but it seems to me that these variations cry out to be cast in a way that the choreographer would have expected.This section of the ballet was created to display the range and variety of the dancers that the Mariinsky had at its disposal, the soft slow lyrical dancer(Crystal Fountain),the dancer who excels in petite batterie( Song Birds/ Canari qui chante)and in the variation Temperament/Violent which was created to personify electricity, a dancer with ballon and real attack.Today these roles are cast in a monochrome one size fits all way and as a result they are dull and boring.Anyone interested in what the variations should look like or indeed what the entire ballet should look like could do a lot worse than trying to find the performance of Sleeping Beauty that the Royal Ballet gave in 1978 to celebrate de Valois' eightieth birthday.The performance is of the production that she had mounted for the company in 1977 and you can be certain that it looked right and was danced in accordance with her views of how the ballet should be performed.There was no criticism of the text that was danced the only adverse comment, at the time, was that it lacked the grandeur of the Messell production. The performance sometimes turns up on You Tube.

 

Years ago you would not have expected to see the degree of interchangeability of dancers in the Fairy variations that you see now. No one would have expected to see a dancers who was cast as the Fairy of the Song Birds turn up in different variations at other performances and yet now we can see the same dancer in two or three other variations.I can't put my finger on precisely when this changed but it only serves to diminish the impact of the Prologue.It is as if casting is undertaken by drawing names out of a hat. All this means that no one currently dancing then will have an exemplary performance of all of the variations and that will impact on their performance of the roles which so easily lapse into mere displays of technique rather than expressions of the gifts that they are conferring on Aurora.

 

I don't know how these factors interact to produce the performances that we see today but it seems to me that getting the dancers to perform at the right speed would be the place to start followed by sensitive and consistent casting.I wonder whether the La Scala performances of the Ratmansky Sleeping Beauty will prove to be a catalyst?

Edited July 19, 2015 by FLOSS

[Scheherezade]

I agree with this.  I wish the Royal would cast Myrtle as a principal role and if they are going to cast more junior dancers get them properly prepared for the role.  It was pretty uninspiring to say the least in the last run of Giselle.  (I feel the same about the Royal's approach to casting the Sleeping Beauty fairies - they are generally not cast appropriately and need principals or company members who can dance at principal level.)

And it would give under-used principals a chance to be seen more often on stage. Or have these roles now become so under-valued by the R.B. that principals would feel diminished by dancing them?

[Scheherezade]

Today these roles are cast in a monochrome one size fits all way and as a result they are dull and boring...... it only serves to diminish the impact of the Prologue.It is as if casting is undertaken by drawing names out of a hat. All this means that no one currently dancing then will have an exemplary performance of all of the variations and that will impact on their performance of the roles which so easily lapse into mere displays of technique rather than expressions of the gifts that they are conferring on Aurora.

 

I do so agree with you, Floss. The performances are largely indistinguishable. This may go some way to explaining why some consider this ballet holds less appeal for modern tastes.

[FLOSS]

I am not sure how or whether you can make your views known about under casting major roles. There was quite a lot of adverse criticism of Kobayashi's Myrthe in the streamed performance of Giselle in 2014.People just posted what they thought of her.It will be interesting to see whether she gets cast next year. She is a classic case of "civil service casting". We shall never know whether she would have been any batter if she had been given more to do early on in her career.But given who was in the company when she joined it you can see why she was not given that much to do at that time.

 

Getting the balance right between established dancers and the talented up and coming coming dancer without ruffling feathers must be almost impossible if the same ballets are performed every two or three years. That is why I expressed concern that Two Pigeons was not being used from the outset to develop dancers like Hayward and Nagdhi and their juniors.There is always a danger that by casting dancers like Marquez or guests like Salenko you are limiting opportunities for the next generation.The continuing ascendancy of Fonteyn at Covent Garden had a terrible effect on the careers of several generations of dancers.Ann Jenner gave an interview in which she said that it was dispiriting to know that the audience was going to be disappointed because "it was not Margot".It must be awful to know that you are regularly performing before an audience who would prefer to see someone else.

Edited July 19, 2015 by FLOSS

[capybara]

 Or have these roles now become so under-valued by the R.B. that principals would feel diminished by dancing them?

 

Apparently so. Some "people claiming to be in the know" told me - years apart - that firstly Yanowsky and then Nunez "would not dance Myrthe any more".

 

Of course, Nunez now dances Giselle but I recall that  Ananiashvili, of the Bolshoi, continued to dance Myrthe on tour after she had taken on the role of Giselle. So it can be done and one individual dancer can make the two roles look very different..

Edited July 19, 2015 by capybara

[zxDaveM]

well, just watching Giselle again - and Hikaru Kobayashi gave a fine rendition of Myrthe as far as I'm concerned. Her characterisation was flawless (and SO far removed from her own personality its almost scary). She is one of those Myrthe's who pulls Giselle out of the grave in time to the music pausing Giselle by her command, rather than Giselle already stopped and awaiting that stop signal. And her solo before the Wilis come on was enthralling.

I, for one, would be more than happy to see her cast again in the next run

[alison]

I think Yanowsky is on record as saying that she stopped dancing Myrtha because the jumping became too much, or something of that sort? 

 

I seem to remember thinking that Kobayashi was one of the better Myrthas in the last run.

 

3)Casting.At one time the roles were danced by principal dancers or people on the way up who were being considered for possible promotion and they had stage presence.It have heard it argued that casting Principal dancers was a necessity at one time because of the gap between the technical abilities of the Principals and the corps but that with the higher technical standards that new recruits display it is no longer necessary to use such senior dancers.

 

Back when I first saw Sleeping Beauty (1989) I definitely remember principals being cast as Prologue fairies.  Viviana Durante was one, and I think Karen Paisey another in the performance I saw.  However, back then the company had a real excess of Principals, so it may have been a question of making sure they had sufficient to do.

[Jacqueline]

Sorry if this has already been mentioned. I just noticed on the ROH website that the role of The Actress in the forthcoming 'Cheri' will be played by Francesca Annis.

Wow!! Alessandra Ferri and Miss Annis in the same production. 

[RuthE]

Sorry if this has already been mentioned. I just noticed on the ROH website that the role of The Actress in the forthcoming 'Cheri' will be played by Francesca Annis.

Wow!! Alessandra Ferri and Miss Annis in the same production. 

 

How did I not notice this before (while I could have still got a MG standing ticket) and why does it have to be in the middle of the one week of the autumn when I am already stupidly busy??

[LinMM]

Have been on the ROH website and am a tad confused as there are two casts showing for Saturday 16th January( sorry not strictly autumn period) this is the day Two pigeons is being filmed.

In one part of the site it says Choe and Campbell are dancing and in another Hayward and Hay!!

I wanted to go that evening because I have to be up in London for something very early on the Sunday.

I was delighted when I originally saw Choe was dancing that evening however yesterday on returning to the site it now says Hayward etc. but on looking around the website to check this I also found Choe and Campbell's name again!!!

so does anybody know for SURE who is dancing that evening?

[Sim]

Aren't Hayward/Hay dancing in Rhapsody on the same bill that Choe/Campbell are dancing 2P?

[capybara]

I have two casting summaries (from different sources), both printed off when the lists first came out.

 

On both, for the 16th Jan. at 12.30pm, Hayward/Hay are down to dance Rhapsody and Choe/Campbell are shown against Two Pigeons.

 

On neither list is there any mention of an evening performance but there are two shows on the 23rd.

 

This double bill is being filmed for live cinema relay on the 26th Jan., I believe.

[LinMM]

Ah that could be it Sim I've got confused about the casts of the two ballets.

 

Looks like definitely not an evening to be missed then.

I wanted to see Two Pigeons with Rhapsody ......as I know Choe is doing in December before Christmas as well so was so delighted to see her down to perform for the 16th.

I was just going to say must go off and book now ...but will have to wait till October 21st I think now no longer a Friend!

[LinMM]

Thanks Capybara.

[Pulcinella]

I think that the roles that suffer most from being cast without due consideration being given to the need for stage presence and technical assurance are Myrthe and Lilac Fairy.Although as far as Lilac Fairy is concerned while my preference is for technical command such as Bergsma and Mason possessed you can be almost as effective with marginally less technique but the ability to project great beneficence which is how Porter performed the role.But while she did not possess the blistering technique of Mason and Bergsma she shared their presence and ability to command the stage and she was able to do the Italian fouettes that have recently defeated so many of the dancers cast as the Queen of the Dryads.I think that the Prologue Fairies present a number of problems:-1)The tempi at which the variations are performed is slower than in the past.2)They are not danced as a flow of movement which slows slightly to emphasise a pose but does not stop until the music stops.Today they are performed almost as freeze frame to freeze frame.This approach is most noticeable in the first variation but not absent from the others.3)Casting.At one time the roles were danced by principal dancers or people on the way up who were being considered for possible promotion and they had stage presence.It have heard it argued that casting Principal dancers was a necessity at one time because of the gap between the technical abilities of the Principals and the corps but that with the higher technical standards that new recruits display it is no longer necessary to use such senior dancers. But it seems to me that this is only part of the story.There is also the need to cast dancers who are suited to the roles and are able to command the stage.And it is this aspect of the ballet's structure that has been ignored for a long time.I know that there are those on this forum who dislike the idea of dancers being type cast but it seems to me that these variations cry out to be cast in a way that the choreographer would have expected.This section of the ballet was created to display the range and variety of the dancers that the Mariinsky had at its disposal, the soft slow lyrical dancer(Crystal Fountain),the dancer who excels in petite batterie( Song Birds/ Canari qui chante)and in the variation Temperament/Violent which was created to personify electricity, a dancer with ballon and real attack.Today these roles are cast in a monochrome one size fits all way and as a result they are dull and boring.Anyone interested in what the variations should look like or indeed what the entire ballet should look like could do a lot worse than trying to find the performance of Sleeping Beauty that the Royal Ballet gave in 1978 to celebrate de Valois' eightieth birthday.The performance is of the production that she had mounted for the company in 1977 and you can be certain that it looked right and was danced in accordance with her views of how the ballet should be performed.There was no criticism of the text that was danced the only adverse comment, at the time, was that it lacked the grandeur of the Messell production. The performance sometimes turns up on You Tube.Years ago you would not have expected to see the degree of interchangeability of dancers in the Fairy variations that you see now. No one would have expected to see a dancers who was cast as the Fairy of the Song Birds turn up in different variations at other performances and yet now we can see the same dancer in two or three other variations.I can't put my finger on precisely when this changed but it only serves to diminish the impact of the Prologue.It is as if casting is undertaken by drawing names out of a hat. All this means that no one currently dancing then will have an exemplary performance of all of the variations and that will impact on their performance of the roles which so easily lapse into mere displays of technique rather than expressions of the gifts that they are conferring on Aurora.I don't know how these factors interact to produce the performances that we see today but it seems to me that getting the dancers to perform at the right speed would be the place to start followed by sensitive and consistent casting.I wonder whether the La Scala performances of the Ratmansky Sleeping Beauty will prove to be a catalyst?

I was looking through some of my old programmes recently and came across one for The Sleeping Beauty in 1972. The cast was as follows:

Aurora: Antoinette Sibley

Florimund: Anthony Dowell

Carabosse: Ronald Emblen

Lilac Fairy: Deanne Bergsma

Fairy of Beauty: Lynn Seymour

Fairy of Honour: Lesley Collier

Fairy of Modesty: Diana Vere

Fairy of Joy: Georgina Parkinson

Fairy of Song: Ann Jenner

Fairy of Temperament: Monica Mason

Gold and Silver pas de trois: Ann Jenner, Jennifer Penney, David Ashmole

Princess Florine: Merle Park

Bluebird: David Wall

 

Out of this list everyone at that time was a principal except for Lesley Collier (soloist) and David Ashmole (coryphee), both of whom later became principals. This meant there was a total of 12 principals in the ballet (actually 15, as Leslie Edwards, Gerd Larsen and Derek Rencher were also in it). The thought of seeing that many principals in Beauty today is unthinkable although there was a large number to call on in 1972. I don't mind lower ranking dancers being cast in the Fairy variations but there seems to be no consideration of the style being suited to the dancer.

 

I'm sorry to have returned to this subject but when I saw my programme I remembered this discussion and felt impelled to mention this.

[alison]

Update on the replacement casting for Rupert Pennefather:

 

http://www.roh.org.uk/news/cast-changes-casting-announced-for-romeo-and-juliet-the-nutcracker-and-giselle

[bangorballetboy]

I discovered a "calender style" cast listing for the Winter 15/16 period on the Friends page you get when you log in.  Much easier to read and helps on the Wheeldon casting, so for the sake of good order I'll set it all out here.

 

Rhapsody/The Two Pigeons

 

16 Jan (m)

Rhapsody: Hayward, Hay

The Two Pigeons: Choe, Campbell, Mendizabal, Mock

 

20 Jan,

Rhapsody: Osipova*, McRae

The Two Pigeons: Choe, Campbell, Mendizabal, Mock

 

23 Jan (m), 26 Jan†

Rhapsody: Osipova*, McRae

The Two Pigeons: Cuthbertson, Muntagirov, Morera, Hirano

† = live cinema relay

 

23 Jan (e)

Rhapsody: Choe, Zucchetti

The Two Pigeons: Stix-Brunell*, Ball*, Calvert*, Edmonds*

 

28 Jan

Rhapsody: Choe, Zucchetti

The Two Pigeons: Takada, Hay, Magri, Zucchetti

 

30 Jan (m)

Rhapsody: Hayward, Hay

The Two Pigeons: Stix-Brunell, Ball, Calvert, Edmonds

 

Wheeldon mixed bill

 

12 Feb, 16 Feb, 19 Feb, 11 Mar

After the Rain: Nuñez*, Soares*, Calvert*, Kish*, Mendizabal*, Underwood*

New CW: Osipova*, Watson*, Bonelli*, Ball*

Within the Golden Hour: Lamb*, McRae*, Cuthbertson*, M Golding*, Stix-Brunell*, Muntagirov*

 

13 Feb (m), 17 Feb, 10 Mar

After the Rain: Yanowsky*, M Golding*, Cowley*, Mock*, Heap*, Edmonds*

New CW: Cuthbertson*, tbc, tbc, Richardson*

Within the Golden Hour: Takada*, Dyer*, Hayward*, tbc, Morera*, Campbell*

 

Giselle

 

26 Feb, 17 Mar, 29 Mar

Osipova, M Golding*

 

27 Feb, 19 Mar (m)

Salenko*, McRae

 

17 Mar (m), 23 Mar, 2 Apr

Cuthbertson, Bonelli

 

22 Mar, 31 Mar, 6 Apr

Nuñez, Muntagirov*

 

28 Mar (m), 9 Apr

Takada*, Soares

 

28 Mar (e)

Lamb, Hirano*

 

1 Apr, 15 Apr

Morera, Kish

Edited October 6, 2015 by bangorballetboy
Edited to remove duplication