Spreading the Word. Persuading the Public to Buy Tickets for the Unfamiliar

[FLOSS]

We have all, at one time or another,noted the public's failure to buy tickets for works with which they are unfamiliar.Often the ballets in question are far from obscure.It is noticeable that the Hochauser's exercise considerable care over the ballets which the Bolshoi and Mariinsky bring to London. As I said in another post you can't blame the public for only buying tickets for ballets that everyone performs.The public is entitled to assume, until the contrary is proved, that if Swan Lake,Romeo and Juliet and Nutcracker are the only ballets that everyone performs that they are the only ones worth seeing.

 

Companies with headquarters in London seem to assume that if a work has been reviewed in the national press that all they have to do is to tell the public outside London when and where the work in question is being performed.At least that is how it seems from the booking/publicity material that I receive.Marketing departments seem to be incapable of doing what their title suggests they do. They seem to be very good at identifying ballets that have failed to sell the required percentage of tickets but incapable of actually selling tickets.I don't think that anything that I have read in a glossy brochure from Covent Garden, apart from casting details,has ever persuaded me to buy tickets for a performance there and its not much different as far as ENB is concerned.

 

Now it is alright if you know something about the major choreographers and the up and coming ones,the repertory and the back catalogue but if you don't the publicity material does not tell you why you should buy a ticket.In 2005 if I recall correctly the brochure issued by Covent Garden said far more about The Lesson than it did about La Sylphide.Is there any company that gets publicity right? If they do what form does it take?

 

Do the smaller companies manage things better by developing and maintaining brand loyalty and trust so that the audience comes to performances because it trusts the company's choice of repertory?

 

Is the problem with the Royal Ballet that the exciting pioneering phase occurred so long ago that no one thinks that it has to work on outreach and keeping the public aware of the brand and the product?

 

But however good the companies get at selling the product there needs to be a public for them. The Royal Ballet should do more to get out into the country. If touring is too costly then perhaps they should go back to sending younger dancers out to deliver programmes akin to Dance Bites and Ballet for All.The BBC has a major role to play in all this. It should be doing more to educate the public about ballet,dance and the arts in general.It does a great deal to entertain but precious little to educate.There are a whole pile of recordings that should be lurking in the archives somewhere, unless of course the tapes have been wiped.In the context of the debate about its future could it be shamed into making them available and making dance programmes a regular part of its out put including a Christmas ballet?

 

Here is a small sample of what should be in the BBC archives Sleeping Beauty from 1978 with Park and Wall in the lead(de Valois' production, part of her eightieth birthday celebrations); part of the Sibley Dowell Sleeping Beauty from the late sixties;recordings from 1979(Ashton's seventy fifth birthday)of A Month in the Country and Les Rendezvous;Massine's Mam'zelle Angot(part of the Queen Mother's eightieth birthday celebrations 1980);Markova masterclasses from Dance Month with Barbieri and Ashmole;Fonteyn's Magic of the Dance (1979)and John Drummond's two part documentary for Omnibus about Diaghilev using interviews with his dancers.All the superlatives(an early documentary about Dowell);the Tribute to Ashton could all do with being shown again.A standard monthly dance slot on BBC 4 is not too much to ask.I am sure that there must be as many people engaged in dance in this country as there are in darts or snooker.

 

As far as new programmes are concerned Sibley,Seymour,Mason,Dowell,Benjamin and Peter Wright are all obvious subjects for documentaries. I agree that Deborah Bull would be ideal as the presenter rather than Darcey Bussell.

 

I shall be interested to find out if anyone posting on this site has come across companies that manage to get it right as far as education and audience building are concerned. I think that the evenings in the Clore fail to do any more than preach to the converted as the tickets are so hard to come by. What is needed is not events for people who can get tickets for the Clore but programmes that are accessible to students who go to ballet classes and ordinary members of the public who don't know much about dance but might be interested if the information was made available.

Edited August 10, 2015 by FLOSS

[Pulcinella]

BRB have this season introduced free pre-performance talks, available to Friends and ticket holders and bookable Company Class (fee payable) at most of the venues it is visiting as well as at the Hippodrome. Details are available on their What's On page and also on the Hippodrome site, where tickets can be booked. This is obviously an attempt to bring more information to the General public and to encourage them to join the Friends.

 

I agree with Floss that the BBC could do more to educate the public by showing more dance on TV and re-showing programmes from their archives and that a standard monthly dance slot on BBC 4 is not too much to ask. When I remember all the ballet that there was on the BBC in the fifties and sixties (and this was before we had BBC2 let alone BBC4) I really think that the BBC only plays lip service to ballet on TV. I know this was for opera, but would the BBC clear their schedules on BBC2 to show La Traviata because it had such rave reviews for Angela Gieorgieu as they did in the eighties (not quite sure exactly when it was). I think not.

[jm365]

First to declare an interest - I used to work for BBC Television.

 

I completely agree that it is a shame that ballet/dance is no longer a major part of the output.  But it is very expensive to produce and the audiences on the whole are smaller than for opera - and there isn't all that much opera on television either.  Not a real excuse, but ........

 

On the question of repeating material from the archive - as I have said before on the old forum - this is a question of copyright.  In the past, rights were only bought for two showings at the most.  Video cassettes, and now DVDs, did not exist and therefore the question of acquiring rights did not come up.  Programmes were often co-productions with either commercial video companies (the two most often used no longer exist now) or other, foreign broadcasters.  To try to clear many of these programmes now, when dancers, choreographers, designers, musicians etc are no longer alive, would be a very, very difficult job and probably uneconomic.

 

I wish there was a solution to this.  There are many programmes I would love to have as DVDs.  But the market is small when you compare it with drama.

Edited August 10, 2015 by jm365

[Bluebird]

 I know this was for opera, but would the BBC clear their schedules on BBC2 to show La Traviata because it had such rave reviews for Angela Gieorgieu as they did in the eighties (not quite sure exactly when it was). 

 

That Traviata broadcast was  in 1994.

Edited August 10, 2015 by Bluebird

[Ellie]

And that is why ballet is considered elitist. It is not included in the national curriculum, unlike sport or music, which with luck a good teacher would spot talent and potential and perhaps be able to channel the child in the 'right direction'. How many families under financial stress could think about sending their child to an extracurricular ballet class - let alone paying for or being knowledgable about JA programmes or the fee assistance that is available at vocational schools ? So the TV audience for ballet is small because it is not a popular form of entertainment. Therefore the BBC can't afford to produce and give screen time to ballet ...as such, ballet becomes even less popular as it is not easily available to the general public. I know that the main ballet co's in the UK are making great strides via outreach programmes and long may this continue. I know a couple of lovely, professional ballet dancers who were discovered this way. I think we need to start from the grass roots.

[FLOSS]

I'm not sure that any of us really know what the size of the television audience for dance programmes is. After all the potential audience covers a wider demographic than the opera going audience from children who go to dancing classes and their families to those who actually go to to see performances. It could easily be from four or five to ninety five. I recognise at once that the real weakness of this potential audience is not really its limited size but the fact that it is probably seen as a predominantly female audience and therefore having less right to expect the BBC to allocate resources to its interests. And then there is the problem that while elite sporting activities are acceptable any other elitist activity is not and all arts are elitist and therefore unacceptable.

 

The point as far as I am concerned is that the BBC spends a great deal of time and money entertaining the public and precious little time educating it.When it comes to the arts it seems to me that it makes a pretty poor showing.It has four main television channels and yet its arts output is nowhere as extensive as it was in the 1960's and 1970's when it only had two channels.The difference is that at that time there seemed to be a lot of people at the BBC who thought that the general public had a right to know about opera, ballet,serious drama and major foreign films and that they had a duty to make these arts available. The same sort of ethos that led to the establishment of the Open University.Now it seems to be more concerned with superficial entertainment and celebrity than with producing and broadcasting serious arts programmes on a regular basis.

 

The problem is that the BBC seems to approach arts programmes as if they all have high production values requiring expensive excursions abroad so that the person fronting the programme can be filmed standing in the actual theatre in which the first performance took place or require a celebrity as intermediary so that the audience will feel comfortable with the art form.A prime example of this latter approach was the ghastly series about opera that the BBC made with Harry Enfield. Documentaries do not need expensive foreign location shots, although they must be great fun for those involved, nor do they need talentless overpaid celebrities. All they need is people who are or have been practitioners who are good communicators and people who are skilled programme makers.Some of the best programmes that the BBC produced at that time were a series of masterclasses given by Alicia Markova. Three people in a dance studio working on a sections of a ballet.The programme on Les Sylphides was riveting television and it was so simple and compared with much of the output not at all expensive.An example of the sort of thing that I have in mind is the sort of education programme that Pacific North West Ballet produces for its audiences.

 

I am afraid that I am rather cynical about the BBC's claims that it can't issue recordings because of copyright issues. That was the BBC's standard response to requests that it should issue records of some of the great performances of classical music that were in its archives.But then everything changed when other companies began to issue recordings from their archives suddenly the BBC issued its BBC Legends series.Not every recording issued on that label was over fifty years old or made by someone who was dead.It does not explain how the Sibley,Dowell Cinderella from 1968/9 came to be issued on VHS,sold on,and then issued on DVD both in this country and in the US.Something that has happened to several other BBC ballet recordings. I tend to think that "copyright issues" are trotted out to fob off the public much as claims about the impact of The Freedom of Information Act are.A perfect response for someone who does not want to lift a finger since unless the enquirer has specialist knowledge they are in no position to challenge the answer.

Edited August 10, 2015 by FLOSS

[Pas de Quatre]

Great post FLOSS! 

[FLOSS]

It struck me that I have said nothing about individual companies. Both Sarasota Ballet and Queensland Ballet seem to have created audiences that trust their respective director's artistic vision and taste. Queensland's artistic director has increased his subscription income base from one thousand plus to seven thousand plus and his audience trust him sufficiently to buy tickets for programmes of works which the audience does not necessarily know.Iain Webb at Sarasota has, by his programming decisions  and excellent coaching, established a national identity and perhaps an international one for his company as a company that performs Ashton's works extremely well.I don't know about his ticket sales but it strikes me that Kobborg is programming some interesting things in Romania.I think that it is clear that all three directors have a clear artistic vision and know where they want to take their companies.They also have good taste as far as choice of repertory is concerned and the ability to  identify works that will develop their dancers and entertain their audiences.

 

Programming is important but it is only part of the story.Whether a company is relatively new or an old established one there are elements that are essential to creating and maintaining audience loyalty and most of it comes from the top.It seems to me that a company must not lose sight of the need to take account of its audience's tastes and expectations and its need to develop them. Arguably ENB has recently provided two examples of how not to do it. Neither Manon nor Le Corsaire sold well out of town. But the changes in BRB's touring pattern suggests that ENB is not the only company to suffer from some form of audience resistance/indifference.It would be interesting to know what it is that has happened to the dance audience outside London.

 

Is it competition from other types of entertainment?

 

Is the problem that trips to the ballet are associated with grandparent's birthday and Christmas treats so that classical ballet is seen as old fashioned and therefore unappealing to a young audience?

 

Is the popularity of the "mighty three" attributable to the cost of tickets and  the audience's certainty that they will have a good evening in the theatre and get their money's worth if they book for them?

 

Is it the fact that as a result of the lack of media attention to ballet as an art form that it does not have the element of excitement that other forms of entertainment do?

 

Is it simply that ballet and dance are not in the air in the way that it was in the 1970's and that it is seen as the preserve of the older audience?.

 

Is it lack of media attention and in particular the BBC's failure to give dance anywhere near the level of coverage that it did in the past?

 

As Wayne Eagling made it very clear that the ENB's national tours lost money and that the Coliseum season was essential to the company staying solvent I wonder whether anyone has ever tried to find out what makes the audience outside London tick? Of course the problem is that you need to survey the non attenders but there are ways of doing this.It would be interesting to know whether there are any fundamental differences between ENB's London audiences and those elsewhere, and what differences, if any, there are between  the Covent Garden Amphitheatre audience and the ENB audience.

 

A company needs a clear identity.It can not afford to try to be all things to all people as it will be in danger of disappointing everyone.Larger companies have a duty to their audiences to show them the best of the past,the best of the present and to create conditions in which the choreographers of the future can develop.Perhaps the problem  is that companies like ENB have painted themselves into a corner as far as their touring repertory is concerned as however exciting its new productions may be to a London audience it will be seen as a waste of resources if they can not attract audiences outside London.Is the problem perhaps short termism and the dominance of the bean counters? Serious and regular media.coverage will help ballet as a whole but perhaps the real problem lies inside the individual companies where the accountants seem to have far more power in relation to things artistic than is good for them or the art form. I sometimes wonder how far the founders of the three oldest companies in the country would have got if they had been subjected to the same  level of scrutiny that directors are subjected to today. But perhaps the truth is that they were more in touch with the tastes and interests of their audiences than some of today's directors are .De Valois was certainly a practical woman of the theatre as was Markova and Rambert clearly had the ability to identify people who would be able to make works that would intrigue and entertain audiences.Just a thought, is part of the problem that some directors are too concerned with making serious artistic statements to notice that they have lost touch with a significant part of their audiences?

 

I look forward to reading other people's view on the cause of the malaise and its cure.

Edited August 11, 2015 by FLOSS

[Ian Macmillan]

But the changes in BRB's touring pattern suggests that ENB is not the only company to suffer from some form of audience resistance/indifference.It would be interesting to know what it is that has happened to the dance audience outside London.  

 

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose?  Perhaps nothing has happened to the audience outside London.  I've quoted this several times before but, in the ROH 1959-60 Annual Report, the following was said, no doubt written by Madame De Valois:

 

"The company's provincial tours ... have revealed the essentially conservative nature of provincial audiences, who have preferred to play safe with the classics rather than risk a triple bill of novelties, and the repertory has been modified in consequence."  With that said, and on a similar tack to earlier posts in this thread, the report goes on to pray TV in aid:

 

"Television could play a helpful educative role here if, instead of concentrating on presenting the classics which are particularly unsuited to the medium, it showed some modern ballets which would seem better adapted to the limitations inevitably imposed by the screen."

 

It's possibly no help in pursuit of cause of a malaise and a cure, but all of the above was written during what many now look back to as the "Golden Age" of British ballet - yet we now sustain more companies up and down the land than was the case then.

 

And, Floss, purely out of interest, why do you single out the Covent Garden Amphitheatre audience as your comparator with the ENB audience more generally?

[Two Pigeons]

I think you have covered so much in your excellent posts FLOSS that all we can do is lament and agree. It is pretty clear that the BBC's attitude to ballet may be regarded as minimal. I do remember ITV showing some ballet over the years, the Makarova/Dowell Swan Lake and the Asylmaratova (sorry for the spelling) Bayadere being two examples but from decades ago.

 

Added to that there is the Darcey issue. Given the BBC's propensity to constantly promote itself we get Darcey in so much because 'Darcey means Strictly' so she can cover anything from Audrey Hepburn to a highy subjective list if her favourite ballerinas. Much preferred commentators such as Deborah Bull and Tamara Rojo get shunted to the occasional outing to BBC4. Sky Arts have undoubtedly made contributions but here again, ballet is being sidelined as there is so much more available product for Opera, even though this tends to be gimmicky productions of the same works from the 18th and 19th centuries.

 

I would love to have some reruns of the programmes you have mentioned above, to which I would add the Collier/Dowell Cinderella, Park/Wall Sleeping Beauty and the Evdokimova/Schaufuss La Sylphide.

 

My regular company is BRB and I share the views expressed by a number if people the way the repertoire is going. It would be nice to think that the company has such a loyal audience, both in Birmingham and their regular touring stops such as Plymouth, The Lowry and Sunderland that they could take on some of the Royal's rep, such as Manon, Onegin and La Sylphide. However, there are real problems here. The major one is that the loyal audience just isn't large enough. The company has real problems filling The Hippodrome for triples, no matter how attractive and worth seeing, and less familiar work. It is not 'a destination' in itself the way that the Opera House is. To be honest Covent Garden will always be pretty well attended irrespective of what is being shown as there is such a strong corporate presence.

 

Added to that, there is the second issue that the present management of BRB seems to be concentrating far more on 'new work' than importing existing ballets from other sources. Given how much 'new work' has been produced over the last 20 years practically none of it has been recorded and televised. We have a new version of The Tempest due next year. It may be utterly fabulous and a raging success but I cannot see the audiences piling in for such an unfamiliar work. However, if the BBC or cinema owners broadcast yet another relay of The Nutcracker it will probably be a sell out.

 

There is one untapped source of ballet which I really wish the BBC or Sky would utilise and that us ballet from Europe. I get the impression that there are sone real gems put out on Danish, German and French tv which we do not get the chance to see. Given that Sky keep showing Opera from Australia and places like Barcelona I wish they would extend this to ballet.

 

My last wish is that the Cranko estate would loosen their stranglehold on his repertoire and let us have proper recordings of his works.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Two Pigeons

[MAB]

I'm not sure that any of us really know what the size of the television audience for dance programmes is. After all the potential audience covers a wider demographic than the opera going audience from children who go to dancing classes and their families to those who actually go to to see performances.

 

No it doesn't.  I have commented before on the younger audiences for opera than for ballet at the ROH and the existence of radio stations such as Radio 4 and Classic FM give people immediate access to the art form and can thereby pique their interest. 

 

Just because hoards of kiddies go to ballet lessons it doesn't mean their parents would actually be prepared to take them to a live performance, or be able to afford it for that matter.

[Pas de Quatre]

When ENB brought My First Swan Lake to Poole Lighthouse, all the performances were very full. The one I went to had masses of enthusiastic children with (in general) their mums.  So a great success.  But nothing has been done to capitalise on this.  It remains a "one off".  ENB comes to Southampton, but that is too far for most families with children - only Saturday matinées work, but prices are so expensive.  Smaller groups touring more frequently might help build up an audience.

[Jan McNulty]

No it doesn't.  I have commented before on the younger audiences for opera than for ballet at the ROH and the existence of radio stations such as Radio 4 and Classic FM give people immediate access to the art form and can thereby pique their interest. 

 

Just because hoards of kiddies go to ballet lessons it doesn't mean their parents would actually be prepared to take them to a live performance, or be able to afford it for that matter.

 

 

I agree about the families of young dancers MAB.  I think it is a real issue.

[Beryl H]

This is a very interesting topic, I think the sad truth is that there is a big decline in the regular ballet audience, possibly they have been priced out, or else ballet just isn't as popular as it was when I started in the late 60's, I don't really know why this is, definitely there was much more ballet on the BBC, intelligent programmes too, including documentary series by Margot Fonteyn, Peter Schaufuss and Natalia Makarova.  I think the huge rise in ticket prices has to be a major factor which is why the ROH doesn't suffer so much as they have some very wealthy patrons.

 

Audience apathy has to be blamed too, who would have thought that Osipova and Vasiliev coudn't even sell out one night at the Coliseum, one thing I noticed at Cinderella recently was lots of little girls in ballet dresses at both matinee and evening, why didn't their mums take them to La Sylphide, surely another little girl ballet? Cost probably, the Coliseum is a huge problem , and their ticket policies, interesting to see what happens to SPBT, there are large adverts appearing the in press now and the Balcony has been opened for some performances (another irritation to people who wanted the Balcony in the first place!).

[zxDaveM]

Seems these days it only counts if there is a phone in vote to decide the competition result. BAH!

 

So, it seems like all the dance budget on the Beeb is gobbled up by Strictly. There's none left for all the other dance forms, except the occasional Christmas ballet, or the young dancer (again, a competition). I too wish Beeb4 would show more, as they do show repeated documentaries from other fields, as well as a lot of cracking new stuff (I'll admit i'm a fan of the 4th BBC TV channel)

 

The ticket prices at ROH for ballet aren't that bad, even after price rises. You can still stand for a tenner if able and willing, and some seats with a reasonable view are still way less than Premiership footie, or International Rugby - or even seeing a band in a barn like Wembley Arena or the O2. Yes, you will pay a ton for a stalls seat, but that is comparable with West End shows and the above sporting examples. Sad fact of life today I'm afraid.

 

The ROH marketing bods certainly got me hooked, with inducements after I first went with some discounted follow-up shows - though I did get there on my own after seeing a ballet on TV that stuck in my mind. Making new ballets cheap to 'induce new audience' seems futile to me - if you've never been to ballet, you're more likely to go see Swan Lake as a first option, if you could get a ticket - and offering standing places to students doesn't seem the way to go to me - its only the die-hards willing to stand in my experience.

 

Anyone who can find a way of getting the new audience, especially the young audience they crave (though I'd have thought slightly older people are more likely to be drawn to ballet for the first time - like me - as tastes change with age) will get minted!

[Pas de Quatre]

So how is it that Matthew Bourne and the Ballet Boyz manage to get such young enthusiastic audiences?  It may be that they have better marketing, but surely the big companies could match that.  

[Two Pigeons]

I think that Matthew Bourne is very effective in turning out works that are trendy, fashionable and appeal to a younger audience. E.g., vampires are big news at the moment, let's have one in the Sleeping Beauty. Also the company makes a point of being all embracing and not stuffy. Admittedly it isn't really ballet either but they are sufficiently different as to be popular and get their works filmed.

 

As I remember their ticket prices are, on the whole, cheaper.

[aileen]

Until recently, I would have agreed that the prices of stalls tickets were not dissimilar to the prices of 'good' tickets for West End theatre performances. However, the prices for the better seats at the Coliseum and, particularly, the ROH have gone up a lot in the last couple of years (the tickets for some performances at the latter exceed £100) and many people who go the theatre occasionally as a special treat don't want to stand or have a restricted view. The ROH is a destination in its own right and benefits from quite a lot of corporate entertaining. The RB also benefits from being able to space out its performances more, rather than having to schedule individual programmes into a single week as the touring companies have to do. It was notable that the RB's performances on the recent US tour did not all sell out. I think that the audience for classical ballet is quite small and that a large proportion of those people who enjoy an occasional performance of Swan Lake or Nutcracker are never going to enjoy a modern programme of dancers in nude pants and vests dancing to a loud percussive score. A lot of people want to see tiaras and tutus; for them, that's what ballet is about. The other thing that might draw them in is a well known title/story eg Streetcar, Gatsby, Dracula; foreign titles eg Le Corsaire, La Sylphide will not. I don't know how MB and the Balletboyz manage to attract so many young and enthusiastic audiences. Does this happen when they are performing away from Sadler's Wells?

[FLOSS]

Ian, I am not in a position to undertake any sort of sociological assessment of the composition of audiences for either the Royal Ballet. or ENB by class, age, education or other socioeconomic factors. In making a comparison between the audience in the Amphitheatre and that for the ENB I had in mind that these two audiences will have bought their own tickets rather than being corporately entertained also the range of ticket prices will not be not that dissimilar.

 

From the annual report for 1959/1960 it would seem that the fact that the audience for dance outside London likes full length ballets has been a well known fact for nearly sixty years.Has anyone ever tried to find out why? It could be that the audience believes that they are getting more for their money in terms of costumes, music and dancers.Perhaps  members of the audience have read Richard Buckle's quip about triple bills always including  one ballet you will loathe and are merely seeking to eliminate the risk.. Perhaps it is ignorance of the ballet repertory. But why should the general public know about any ballets that they haven't heard of or seen? Why should the mothers who took their children to Giselle have taken them to La Sylphide if they had not heard of it?  The advertisement did not tell you anything about the ballet except that it was set in Scotland. Isn't it strange that hardly anyone sees the necessity to sell the product. I know its not a commercial business but would not you think that someone would have identified  that the problem of poor ticket sales lies in large part with the companies rather than the public? 

 

If I want to find out about opera in general or a particular opera there are books ,recordings, DVDs, broadcasts of operas on Radio 3 and regular discussions about new opera recordings on CD Review with operas featuring in Building a Library at regular intervals. There is nothing comparable for would be ballet goers.The lack of ballet based products tells you a great deal about the status of the two art forms..

 

Mab When I wrote about an audience with an age range of  four to ninety five I was writing about the potential television audience for dance programmes not about theatre audiences. I agree that.even though ticket prices are not exorbitant  when you consider the costs that have to be covered they are unaffordable for the average family.I am not sure that comparing the prices for tickets  for ballet performances and sports events really takes us very far since the majority of the population would probably recognise that the former is an unnecessary luxury while the latter is a necessity.

 

Aileen I am not sure that the RB's failure to sell out on their US Tour is evidence that the audience for classical ballet has declined.They went to cities that they haven't visited in years,their repertory was not exactly enticing.and when they were in New York they were in direct competition with ABT, I think that the repertory and the casting was a disaster waiting to happen and suggests that O'Hare doesn't really understand what his company represents to the US dance audience. Have a look at what the critics said about it and the comments on Ballet Alert and you will see what I mean..

 

So everything is a disaster and ballet is a doomed art form. Does anyone have any suggestions for solutions?

Edited August 12, 2015 by FLOSS

[Melody]

I think, in answer to the thread title, that you can't persuade people to buy tickets to the unfamiliar, especially these days when family incomes are getting increasingly stretched. It seems to me that the best way to sell tickets to the triple bills and the non-core repertoire is to make those ballets less unfamiliar. Television would be the easiest way to do that, but it seems as though TV is letting us down at the moment regarding ballet coverage. Back in the ballet golden age, it was part of popular culture in a way it isn't now. I'm not sure if that's because of the fame of Fonteyn and Nureyev or if the more mainstream position of ballet is why they were household names then but maybe wouldn't be now.

 

I suppose in a way it's a bit of a vicious circle - when ballet is popular, there are more fiction and nonfiction books, more ballet-themed ads on TV, more ballet-themed fashion and cosmetics, etc, but when ballet is seen as an elitist form of recreation that's only appreciated by a few rich experts, there's no incentive for it to become part of the wider culture in this day and age of focus groups and poll-driven corporate decision-making, so people don't become familiar with it and they tend to avoid anything that looks challenging. I think the same thing happens with concert programmes - they can fill a concert hall for a Beethoven symphony and some Brahms or Tchaikovsky, but when you throw Schoenberg or Poulenc into the mix, even as one of three or four pieces, people just decide to stay home.

 

It's a shame that Darcey Bussell's popularity hasn't translated more into popularity for ballet as a whole, but the Strictly Come Dancing fans aren't going to make the leap to going to see a ballet triple bill without more incentive than Darcey's personal fame. It is a bit of a shame that youngsters doing weekly ballet classes don't seem to be motivated to go to the cinema to see the Royal Ballet or the Bolshoi performing even their full-length classics. Not sure if that's because they're usually timed for late evening midweek during the school year or if it's just lack of interest.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Melody

[FLOSS]

Do the people running the classes tell their students about them and encourage them to go? Do they even think about them? Perhaps the reason why children going to dancing classes don't go to the cinema to see performances has got more to do with accessibility, the cost of tickets and location of the cinemas showing the ballets.Two tickets ( I am assuming the presence of a parent or an older sibling) will cost somewhere in the region of twenty five plus pounds.I don't know if the cinemas involved give reductions for children. If they are anything like the reductions given for pensioners they are far from substantial.Not everyone has a cinema showing these performances on their doorstep and then there is the question about how much publicity is given to these performances. I know that you can find out which Royal Ballet performances are being streamed and where, but you need to know that they exist. I am not sure how much publicity individual cinemas give to their streamed performances. Television on the other hand is accessible in every home and does not present the same problems of cost. I know that the BBC is embarrassed by its first Director General much as the Royal Ballet seems to be by Ashton, perhaps it is more accurate to say that the institutions concerned have ambivalent attitudes to them.So it is just as unlikely that the BBC will suddenly revert to Reith's  principals  of broadcasting programmes on subjects such as ballet because the audience should know about them without worrying about the size of the audience, as it is that the Royal Ballet will suddenly put Ashton's works at the centre of its programming.

 

The interest in ballet and dance that existed during the period of the dance boom was the result of a combination of elements that can not be replicated at will.Two world class choreographers actively engaged in creating major works for their companies with many other extremely talented ones making great works that appealed to audiences. General  agreement that ballet was an art that had to be taken seriously; fairly general agreement about the aesthetics of  ballet, what ballet is and what it should look like and in the West at least that it is not an exhibition of dance . A large number of dancers who probably would not get into a school today let alone a major company, but who had real individuality and personalities,famous for their theatrical performances rather than mere technical facility. The continued presence of the pioneers and the pioneering spirit that had led to the foundation of companies here and in the US and the renewal of many older companies. Directors who had a very clear vision for their companies who were in touch with their audiences' tastes but because they were trusted were able to shape them to a considerable degree.Finally and by no means least the presence of people like de Valois and Rambert who were able to  speak with authority and enthusiasm about the art form and great critics who not only reported on performances but made you want to see them too.

 

Is the real answer that while Sarasota and Queensland Ballet are being led by prophet pioneers most  companies are led by people who are more like civil servants in the way that they run their companies? Perhaps that is the inevitable consequence of running a large company with an extensive repertory of great works. It is after all, as Dowell pointed out when he became director of the Royal Ballet,the norm for most companies to be directed by non choreographers.Perhaps that is the problem.

Edited August 12, 2015 by FLOSS

[Sunrise]

I think, in answer to the thread title, that you can't persuade people to buy tickets to the unfamiliar, especially these days when family incomes are getting increasingly stretched. It seems to me that the best way to sell tickets to the triple bills and the non-core repertoire is to make those ballets less unfamiliar. Television would be the easiest way to do that, but it seems as though TV is letting us down at the moment regarding ballet coverage. Back in the ballet golden age, it was part of popular culture in a way it isn't now. I'm not sure if that's because of the fame of Fonteyn and Nureyev or if the more mainstream position of ballet is why they were household names then but maybe wouldn't be now.

 

I suppose in a way it's a bit of a vicious circle - when ballet is popular, there are more fiction and nonfiction books, more ballet-themed ads on TV, more ballet-themed fashion and cosmetics, etc, but when ballet is seen as an elitist form of recreation that's only appreciated by a few rich experts, there's no incentive for it to become part of the wider culture in this day and age of focus groups and poll-driven corporate decision-making, so people don't become familiar with it and they tend to avoid anything that looks challenging. I think the same thing happens with concert programmes - they can fill a concert hall for a Beethoven symphony and some Brahms or Tchaikovsky, but when you throw Schoenberg or Poulenc into the mix, even as one of three or four pieces, people just decide to stay home.

 

It's a shame that Darcey Bussell's popularity hasn't translated more into popularity for ballet as a whole, but the Strictly Come Dancing fans aren't going to make the leap to going to see a ballet triple bill without more incentive than Darcey's personal fame. It is a bit of a shame that youngsters doing weekly ballet classes don't seem to be motivated to go to the cinema to see the Royal Ballet or the Bolshoi performing even their full-length classics. Not sure if that's because they're usually timed for late evening midweek during the school year or if it's just lack of interest.

 

I agree with this. I think the RB and NYCB are doing quite well in making their presence felt in social media - facebook, twitter, youtube, and I like ENB's edgy campaigns. I don't think the companies should rely on tv broadcasts - who knows, we may not even have a BBC or a tv broadcasting system in 20 years, and everything will be streamed on the internet. To answer FLOSS's point that there is a disparity in the information available in terms of radio coverage, etc, there already is a wealth of information on the online and it is easier to find information, seek out performances and make contact with dancers, than it has ever been. I think Misty Copeland is a great example of using her celebrity and life story as a hook into ballet. I was also impressed at the amount of attention that Sergei Polunin pulled in from that music video last year from non-ballet fans. I don't know how to turn that burst of attention into something more than the odd Swan Lake or Nutcracker visit, and I guess continued aggressive marketing, campaigning, free taster clips of ballet and promoting personalities online might be the answer. I know that not everyone would approve of using celebrity as an entry point into ballet, but there is so much that is otherwise competing for our attention (in the school curriculum and elsewhere), it is quite hard to hook in newcomers of any age, much less convince them to see unfamiliar works. To put it bluntly, rather than look back to see what worked in the past, companies may have to adapt or die.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Sunrise

[Ellie]

The Death of the American Dance Critic. 

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/08/american-dance-critic/399908/

 

I found the article interesting and relevant to this discussion. (mods please remove if I'm not supposed to post this here )

 

 

Edited to add: From Monday's Links, entirely relevant to this thread, and no problem at all about your repeating it here.

Edited August 12, 2015 by Ian Macmillan
See remarks

[jm365]

I think that another reason for ballet's popularity in its 'golden age' of the 60s was that there was a huge amount of coverage given to Nureyev and Fonteyn in all sorts of papers and magazines.  They were both so glamorous that I think a lot of people were inspired to go and see them - I certainly was!  That then for me developed into a more broad enthusiasm for ballet in general.  The lure of the 'star performer' shold not be discounted.  Nureyev in his early days was a mesmeric personality on stage, as well as the sort of male dancer one had hardly ever seen in this country at the time.  I knew almost nothing about dance when I first went to see him, but it is thanks to his performances that I became a fan of the art, not just of Nureyev.

[Ellie]

The Death of the American Dance Critic. 

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/08/american-dance-critic/399908/

 

I found the article interesting and relevant to this discussion. (mods please remove if I'm not supposed to post this here )

 

 

Edited to add: From Monday's Links, entirely relevant to this thread, and no problem at all about your repeating it here.

Thank you Ian - I clearly missed it !

[FLOSS]

Isn't there a problem about the internet etc as the trigger ? If I know about ballet and am really interested in it I might undertake research about a particular ballet or performer. If I am not that interested and only see ballet as an annual theare trip what am i going to come into contact with that is going to fire my enthusiasm or curiosity ?A star performer who everyone has heard about, but otherwise? Isn't there a possibility that Nureyev was considered newsworthy,in part at least, because dance was seen as interesting and his name was already known in dance circles? What I am interested in is the entry point.What is it? I accept everything that has been said about television as a dying media but it may turn out to be just as durable as radio. I seem to recall that its days were also supposed to be numbered.Reports of its death turned out to be greatly exaggerated and it may well be the same will be true of television. We still don't seem to have got anywhere near identifying the solution as far as enabling audiences to escape from the mighty three money spinners.

[Ian Macmillan]

 What I am interested in is the entry point.What is it? 

 

As I look back over the years at my own 'entry points,' it seems they appeared at times by which I was ready to 'enter' as consequences of a number of things.  I'd always been aware of classical music, but did not find or explore it any any depth until it began to fulfil something in me that I needed in my mid-40s.  Similarly, I stumbled upon ballet, something I'd always known was available, almost 15 years after that through meeting the lady, now my wife, who had been a dancer with the Royal Ballet and who was still teaching and examining in the field.  I may be unusual, but perhaps the answer lies in 'for everything there is a season' - and if that is more widely the case, we could stop worrying and let the future look after itself.

[Balletfanp]

I think the problem with using "celebrity" to hook in non-ballet fans is that there is likely to be a stampede for tickets to see that particular celebrity, but no interest in seeing other dancers perform.

 

It has been mentioned on another thread about possibly having Polunin back to fill the gap of Pennefather's sad departure, but I can see that being a problem in the wake of his hugely successful and publicised viral video - yes, you may get many people booking who wouldn't normally see a ballet, but they will all want to see Polunin and are unlikely to settle for anyone else (because they don't know anyone else). That would create a very unfortunate imbalance within the company which would be unfair to the other Principals and would be problematic for the company. This is all my opinion, of course, and I have nothing against Polunin (who is a wonderful dancer), but I think the "celebrity" tab can create more problems than it solves.

[alison]

I think the problem with using "celebrity" to hook in non-ballet fans is that there is likely to be a stampede for tickets to see that particular celebrity, but no interest in seeing other dancers perform.

 

As in, to be topical, how many Benedict Cumberbatch fans will ever go to see another Hamlet, or even another Shakespeare play, or another "classic" theatre play, if he's not in it?

 

(Although to be fair, I'd probably have given The Winter's Tale a wide berth until a couple of years ago.  Having seen the ballet, I might now give it a go - I believe there's a production of it scheduled somewhere? - so I can't really criticise )

 

 

but I can see that being a problem in the wake of his hugely successful and publicised viral video - yes, you may get many people booking who wouldn't normally see a ballet, but they will all want to see Polunin and are unlikely to settle for anyone else (because they don't know anyone else). That would create a very unfortunate imbalance within the company which would be unfair to the other Principals and would be problematic for the company. 

 

It's tended to happen already for Acosta and Bussell, but yes, I could see the virality(?) of the situation causing even greater problems.  And if he got injured/ill/decided to be a no-show, most would want their money back rather than see a replacement, I would expect.

 

We've had some interesting contributions so far (and I'll reply in more detail some other time), but to judge by those names I "know" I'd say they're predominantly from older posters.  It would be helpful to hear from some of the younger ones as well: how do you build an audience (preferably in a way that will stick) for the YouTube generation?

[Katharina]

As a child my "entry" to ballet was classical music. I play the violin and used to spend a lot of time in the local library, and next to the music shelf there was the dance shelf ... I then wanted ballet lessons but my mother was against it. The more obvious reason was that we could not afford both violin and ballet lessons, but she also opposed ballet for another reason: she thought that ballet was a superficial leisure activity for girls who live in pink bedrooms, play with barbie dolls and like to look at themselves in the mirror - not serious art (as opposed to classical music).

I think this view is quite widespread in Germany. There seems to be - especially in the media - a general distrust of an art form that involves technical skill and dedicated hard work from an early age, because that depends to quite a large degree on decisions taken by parents when the child is very young and is therefore "unfair".

(With classical music it is similar but:opera houses and symphony orchestras are better rooted in Germany, and there are lots of them :-) and music in Germany = cerebral whereas dance = sensual?)

 

Of course in elite sports you also have to start early and work hard but that is more acceptable because it is more popular ... and therefore it is relevant. In discussions about the performing arts in Germany, I get the impression that what is not relevant is not acceptable, and in order to be relevant the art form or performance must have a political side to it. Sort of journalistic art, I sometimes think.

Also operas can take "updating" and the so called "Regietheater", because the music and libretto can still stay intact (and are well notated and documented in the first place). Ballet is not so good at that, so in Germany it is getting not as much attention, there are fewer knowledgeable critics, and so the perception remains that it is ... dusty, especially the heritage pieces (of course there are exceptions - Ballet on the Rhine - but they don´t do any 19th century works and only partially correct the dustiness-prejudice).

So I think the problem to some extent sociopolitical, a Zeitgeist thing and difficult to solve for a marketing department. Most of the education/audience building attempts that I know of are either about preaching to the converted/giving-to-those-that-already-have or they are one-off activities without a lasting effect (but they do decorate the house).

 

Sorry about the confused rambling ... also am a German native speaker ...  getting a little cynical about it all.

When I was a student not very long ago I used to have a little job helping out at the box office of one of the larger German houses. Between the category of people who bought tickets for performances aimed at children/teenagers/newcomers and those who attended mainstream repertory performances there was next to no overlap.

Edited August 13, 2015 by Katharina

[alison]

... also am a German native speaker ...  

 

I wouldn't have guessed it from your English  Thanks for your contribution, Katharina.

[Ellie]

Lots of very relevant points and food for thought. Katharina, I've always considered Germany to be one of the most pro arts (dance) countries in Europe so I was surprised at your post (and by the way I think that your written English is excellent )

 

Ian, I can also understand your point. There is a time and an opportunity for everyone to appreciate the arts, it can't be forced.

 

In reply to alison and other people who have posted as to how to encourage a younger and hopefully long-lasting audience for the ballet I can only post from my experience from what could be considered in modern times a rather financially and culturally challenged country in Europe.

 

Over the last 5 years or so the National Ballet Company has held school matinees. 5 euros per child to watch a company of very good dancers with a full orchestra in a beautiful opera house. (Dancing both classic and more contemporary pieces) They also offer educational programmes before the matinees. There are also family Sunday matinees with hugely discounted tickets.Always sold out Since this initiative the ticket sales for the 'usual' performances (non discounted) have soared. Be it for Giselle, Firebird, Anne Teresa de Keersmaeker or Nutcracker. 

 

Of course this is subsidised by the government and of course not every child who has been dragged along to the ballet by parents or teachers will develop a lifelong passion for the artform, but maybe they will develop an appreciation - and surely that's a good start. 

 

Edited to add that over the last year the National Ballet Company have also been carrying out a 'Ballet for All' type initiative where they specifically target and perform short excerpts from ballets for schools in underpriviliged areas

Edited August 13, 2015 by Ellie

[Katharina]

Thank you, Alison and Ellie :-)

Ellie, maybe I am moving in the wrong circles ...

It is generally true that Germany is pro arts so I probably shouldn´t complain, but I know lots of otherwise intelligent people who are prejudiced about ballet. For example a so called "cultured person" in Germany would read books, go to the museum, attend concerts and theatre/opera performances, but might never have seen a ballet. Do children learn about ballet in academic schools in Britain? At my school in Germany I learned history of music and music theory, but nothing about dance.

 

I think the "pro arts attitude" here and elsewhere is closely related to subsidies that theatres and concert halls etc receive from the city or federal state*, and these institutions funded by public money are obviously not as threatened by a production that sells badly as a private enterprise would be. Such theatres can take risks with interpretations of opera/theatre. But if you begin an "interpretation" of Swan Lake" it can happen that only the music and the basic outline of the plot remain ... or you go half way like the Berlin State Ballet did in the late nineties with their Swan Lake production by the POB´s Patrice Bart (Rotbart the evil minister conspiring with the Queen, Benno has feelings for Siegfried etc. but most of the iconic choreography is there).

The core repertoire is small anyway, and the best known ballets are the narrative ones that are based on well-known literary texts. Even recently, Stuttgart had a great success with "Krabat", a ballet based on a novel by Otfried Preußler (there is also a successful German film). So people recognised the title, and maybe that is the way to do it (if there is a good dramaturg) ...

 

____

 

 

* Also important is the fact that in past centuries Germany consisted of lots of kingdoms, duchies, principalities ... and each of them had their court theatre, musicians, etc. Plus there were the merchant cities with their theatres built by the bourgeoisie. Many of those theatres have remained and people sort of take them for granted.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Katharina