Age 14 for classical ballet age 16 for musical theatre?

[Guest Autumn days]

That is a good point, pictures!

[Dance*is*life]

I am personally prouder of the student success stories amongst those of my pupils with a lesser ability, than of those whom I knew from the start had what it takes! It took real effort, knowledge and passion on my part to get the best out of the former students, whilst with the latter I only needed to teach them correctly to see results. In the same way, when the RBS will only take the absolute top ranking students - it's pretty obvious that they'll succeed.  I actually admire those so called "lesser" schools who give a chance to the less than perfect students to get wonderful training and enable them to have meaningful careers in the dance genre they love.

[Pups_mum]

I think the key thing here is to apply nly to those schools which you feel to be sufficiently selective. This is what my dd did, as she said there is no point traning at a lesser school if those at the highest level did not see sufficient potential! As expected, she did not obtain a place but thought t better to change direction at 16 than three year's further down the line!

I think that makes perfect sense - if, that is, your only desired outcome is a career in classical companies. But for many students seeking upper school and post 18 training that isn't the case. My DD is under absolutely no illusions regarding the probability of a classical career, and to be honest, I am not sure that now she would even want that if it was a feasible option. She certainly did when she was younger, but now she has developed more diverse interests. But she has to dance. Nothing else interests or motivates her in anywhere near the same way. She would like to perform, no doubt about it, but she knows it will never be Odette/Odile at the ROH, and she is also interested in choreography, and has something of a natural flair for teaching. I, on the other hand, want her to get a degree, as her plan B has always been primary school teaching. And there are many other careers that require a degree, the exact nature of which is not crucial. I think she is much more likely to achieve that degree doing the thing she loves than some other subject that I, or her teachers think is sensible, but that doesn't enthuse her in the slightest. So whilst she is applying for some very competitive courses, she will also be auditioning for some of the so called "lesser schools" and for dance degrees at regular universities. (A route which seems to attract scorn in some quarters but seems to work well for some people.) I just want her to have a chance to study the thing she loves and come out of it at the end with a recognised qualification that keeps doors open for her as she grows up. I certainly don't expect a classical career at the end of it, and nor does she. Im just hoping and praying that she gets in somewhere where she will be happy and thrive. (And is eligible for student finance!)

[Lucinda]

I think it is too simplistic to say that to have any chance of a career in classical ballet you must be in full time training at age 14. There are considerably more factors that come into play. 

The statement “you have to be in full time training by 14 or you are not going to make it as a classical ballet dancer” is a bit “old school”. We were told the same at a parent information session. The opposite school of thought is that students should keep their options open, study other subjects, not completely focus on a classical ballet path and aim to be a well balanced individual whose life does not completely revolve around dance. There are many paths that lead to Rome and numerous elements (including luck) come into play, although the primary consideration appears to be enough good quality training in the teenage years and this is possible even if a student is not at vocational school. 

Whether a student will realise their true potential, or not, also comes down to a multitude of factors and I think it is far too simplistic to say the primary factor is whether a student is in full time vocational training (from whatever age), or not. 

The only known definite considerations are: a dancers career is usually very short, the average length is seven years; the risk of injury is omnipresent, which is why it is so important that students keep up their academic education during their training (it doesn’t matter how brilliant a student is they can suffer a career ending injury at any time); and it is extremely difficult to gain a contract with a classical ballet company upon graduation.

So it is imperative that when to start full time training comes down to a personal informed decision and what is best for each individual child and family. 

I also feel there is too much of a rush to “finish” training and start auditioning. Does it matter that a dancer is 20 rather 18 when they start auditioning for companies? 

Edited October 26, 2015 by Lucinda

[Bluebird22]

Lucinda, were you given the same sort of information? Which associate programme ?

[Lucinda]

No it wasn't an associate programme. It was at an parent information session after a master class for students. The person was an Australian Ballet ex principal dancer. I discussed this with my DD's teacher at the time and she felt it was "old school" thinking. My DD (then 14 yrs) had been offered full time ballet places but she turned them down and completed a program that allowed her to finish her high school academics and dance (20 hours per week). She started full time ballet (40 hours) training at 17 years.

[hfbrew]

The statement “you have to be in full time training by 14 or you are not going to make it as a classical ballet dancer” is a bit “old school”.

Yes definitely. And I feel that I must say that many of those who have been in full time training since 11 are quite often very surprised at just quickly those students who join them at sixth form level catch up, if they are not already at the same level which some are due to excellent local training.

 

There are those who wish they had waited until 16!

 

It's very hard for anyone to get a pure classical contract these days, whatever their background. One only has to look at the auditions pages of Dance Europe to see this as more and more companies demand versatility.

 

Even RBS graduates are not guaranteed a job, the end of year statistics only account for those who survive to the end!

 

So the sensible advice would be not to do Ballet! But for us bunheads that's like being asked not to breathe.

 

If you, like me didn't start full-time training until 16 or older then please ignore all those that try to tell you it's too late and take heart from the fact that an audition panel/s has decided that yes you do merit full time training and yes there is a chance, however slim, that you will get that contract!

Edited October 26, 2015 by hfbrew

[primrose]

I know of a couple of students who did not go to vocational school and accepted into RBS upper school. They were British girls trained at local dance schools, so it does happen.

[sarahw]

With Lucinda saying 20 hours of training at home we are talking about a heterogeneous group of non vocational students. I would imagine those getting 20 have a much better chance than most? I don't know what average is? My dd gets around 8 and that's been hard enough to arrange.....

 

And of course this heterogeneity muddies the waters even more.....

Edited October 27, 2015 by sarahw

[Kat09]

sarahw -  heterogeneity is my word of the day - always learning something new on Balletco

[sarahw]

Hee hee

[Picturesinthefirelight]

I know that if dd had stayed at home the maximum hours of ballet per week she could have done was 2.5 hours with an extra 2 hour workshop once a month (though you can add an extra 1.5 hours of tap & modern.

 

Compare that to the 10 plus hours of ballet Per week plus 6 plus hours of other dance forms she does & it's a big difference.

[Guest]

Following a dream is never pointless and all that self discipline and self sacrifice and sheer hard work will stand you in good stead for whatever life throws at you. If its what you truly want to do, for its own sake and not in the expectation of fame and fortune then go for it. Just accept that only one person at a time can be Francesca Heywood. Or Lewis Hamilton. Doesn't mean that their contemporaries all wasted their time though. All life involves taking risks and if we only chose the safe guaranteed path, most of us would never do anything. And this doesn't only apply to exciting cool choices such as dance or sports. To the delight of my parents, my first degree was in an applied science of unparalleled geekiness. In fact the reward for 4 years of extremely hard slog was to discover that there were 6 yes that's six job vacancies advertised in New Scientist for new graduates in that subject area in the UK for that year. Most of the people I trained with ended up doing something else entirely and one of my friends applied for 120+ jobs before they had an offer. So the odds for a dance career should be viewed in context.

[Flora]

Am I missing the point or isn't the irony of this thread that sometimes very stiff competition for the best US places at 16 comes from privately trained, academically home schooled dancers from other countries i.e. apparently non-vocational school students.

 

Given the international competition for jobs it doesn't seem that surprising to me that you ideally need to be doing a vocational number of hours and quality of training by 14 but the voc schools like any other school must surely have their ups and downs and may not at any particular time have the UK's very best teachers.

[primrose]

Spot on Flora, it is the quality and quantity of training that allows the dancer to reach true potential. Vocational schools are not the be all and end all for younger students. A good teacher is the dancers tool to be the best they can be.

[invisiblecircus]

I used term 'lesser schools' as I wasnt unsure how else to describe them but accept that it doesnt sound good. There is definitely a hierarchy of schools and I meant to suggest that at one end they are exceptionally selective and at the other barely selective at all. As you suggest, like my daughter, most people applying at 16 are aware of this. My argument is that in an already saturated market it is perhaps wise to consider training options wisely!

 

Edited to say

 

Anna, we were posting at the same time!

I don't think anyone can promise a 100% success rate but some schools do have more success than others and I believe their degree of selectivity has a place to play in that as well as their added value.

 

I think calling some school "lesser" is walking on shaky ground and in my opinion some very good schools have been unfairly dissed on here but as I have written before, my advice is always to look at the graduate destinations of any school/ course you're considering and see how they line up with your professional aspirations. Even a school with 100% graduate employment might not be the best place for you if graduates are not getting the kind of jobs you want!

 

I am personally prouder of the student success stories amongst those of my pupils with a lesser ability, than of those whom I knew from the start had what it takes! It took real effort, knowledge and passion on my part to get the best out of the former students, whilst with the latter I only needed to teach them correctly to see results. In the same way, when the RBS will only take the absolute top ranking students - it's pretty obvious that they'll succeed.  I actually admire those so called "lesser" schools who give a chance to the less than perfect students to get wonderful training and enable them to have meaningful careers in the dance genre they love.

 

I couldn't agree with this more!

 

I think that makes perfect sense - if, that is, your only desired outcome is a career in classical companies. But for many students seeking upper school and post 18 training that isn't the case. My DD is under absolutely no illusions regarding the probability of a classical career, and to be honest, I am not sure that now she would even want that if it was a feasible option.

 

I think it makes sense whatever field of dance you are interested in. In fact, it makes sense even if you're interested in a field that has nothing to do with dance! Some musical theatre courses have better graduate success rates than others. Degree courses at different universities have different focusses and thus, different graduate destinations. I did a university dance course and some of the students had made the decision to go after being unsuccessful at vocational upper schools and conservatoire institutions.  A couple were hoping to get into commercial dance, even though that style wasn't even offered on the course! More than a few thought they would be ale to get jobs as full time performers in companies.

[ParentTaxi]

I think it's also worth thinking about a person 'reaching their potential' as a lifetime thing, and perhaps a more rounded thing, than simply where they get to in a performing career in dance in their early 20s.

 

DD's dance school principal did work as a dancer in her early 20s. But it is as a teacher / examiner / dance school owner / teacher trainer that she excels, and at which she has 'reached her potential' to a greater degree and at a higher level, if that makes sense?

 

Equally when I look at DD, talented at dance but also extremely academically and artistically able, I can see that her life may take a variety of directions before she finds the context in which she 'fulfils her potential' even in one of these, let alone more than one. I think it is simpler for parents and supporters when a young dancer has that single, outstanding talent / drive, which makes an early entry into vocational training 'obvious'. It is harder when there is more than one area of ability, where as a parent one tries to juggle e.g. high quality academic schooling with non-vocational local dance training, simply in order to keep more options open for longer. For each person saying 'she should fulfil her potential in x' there are another 2 saying 'but she can't do that because it will limit her ability to develop y and z'....

[ParentTaxi]

I suppose what I am saying is that, for families like ours, the discussions are not always about 'the optimal time for entry' into a single-destination path. Our discussions are about 'the point at which that path is definitively closed'. Some children at DD's dance school - those whose only aim is a classical career - have gone to White Lodge and elsewhere at 11 or a little older. Others leave at 16, usually to study Musical Theatre. The largest group going on to dance leave at 18, often with exceptionally good academic A-levels from local secondary schools, and study dance from 18 at the major dance colleges - and then progress to a variety of dancing and dance-related careers. Those later ages may be 'suboptimal' in terms of 'straight path to final destination', but they may well be optimal in terms of a young person's lifetime career development including all aspects of their lives.

 

(Having had 3 very different careers myself, plus a stint of full-time stay at home parenthood, I sort of expect that everyone will have a similar kind of 'portfolio' lifetime, for which a strong grounding in SOMETHING, whatever it is, to instil an understanding of work ethic, of dedication, of grafting towards a goal, is a really useful starting point)

[ParentTaxi]

(Like mnemo, my particular 'strong grounding' is a PhD in an obscure area of science, which I have never used directly in a job ... though the skills and attitudes i learned from it have stood me in good stead ever since)

[invisiblecircus]

Equally when I look at DD, talented at dance but also extremely academically and artistically able, I can see that her life may take a variety of directions before she finds the context in which she 'fulfils her potential' even in one of these, let alone more than one. I think it is simpler for parents and supporters when a young dancer has that single, outstanding talent / drive, which makes an early entry into vocational training 'obvious'. It is harder when there is more than one area of ability, where as a parent one tries to juggle e.g. high quality academic schooling with non-vocational local dance training, simply in order to keep more options open for longer. For each person saying 'she should fulfil her potential in x' there are another 2 saying 'but she can't do that because it will limit her ability to develop y and z'....

 

I agree, and it's difficult for the young person herself to make decisions in that situation too when they don't have the life experience to think about every aspect of each potential career path. I can't say that I regret my dance career because I had so many amazing experiences that I never thought would be possible, but I also didn't really understand how lonely it would be or what life on tour would be like. I knew that I wanted to have a family, but hadn't considered how that was going to fit in with my dance career. When you're living in the intensity of vocational school, it's often hard to look at the bigger picture. You're so focussed on your next class, assessment, performance, assignment, the pressures of funding, auditions... that you don't think about how you're going to pay for things after you graduate. Even if you get a contract in a classical company, salaries are generally very low and the cost of living is high in the cities where those companies are based. When you're non dancing friends are starting to get mortgages and buy houses and you're still renting a room in a shared flat, it's hard not to wonder where you'd be if you'd taken a more traditional path, but you don't think about that when you're making those choices.

[invisiblecircus]

I'm sorry, I meant "your," not "you're!"

 

*cringe*

 

[taxi4ballet]

it's hard not to wonder where you'd be if you'd taken a more traditional path, but you don't think about that when you're making those choices.

Well, I guess that with the benefit of hindsight, many of us would have mapped things out differently, but nobody can turn the clock back and even if we could, we would never know whether a different decision earlier in life would have worked out in the way we think it might have done

[Picturesinthefirelight]

When dd decided to turn down a place at a highly regarded academically selective senior school at age 11 to go to vocational school one ofvthe reasons was that she could always change her mind if it didn't work out but she didn't want to spend her life thinking what if, if she didn't take the chance.

[Dance*is*life]

The point is that we never know where life decisions will take us - I spent my childhood dreaming of being a ballet dancer, left my grammar school for a performing arts school, went to the Royal Ballet School instead of Uni and eventually ended up in a company in Germany, where I was home sick like mad, but where I made a lifelong friend and gained invaluable experience.  Coming back to England I went into the other route of summer season and pantomime, which I had never envisioned I would do, but I met my darling husband because of that (he was a student in Glasgow, when I did panto there) and here I am blessed with 5 adorable grandchildren, a very fulfilling teaching career and a twenty year career as a character artiste with our local company, which was amazing.  I also got a degree through the RAD eventually.   You can plan and scheme, but life is full of surprises.  We can only go with our dreams and make the most of what turns out of them.

[invisiblecircus]

Obviously there are no guarantees whichever route you take, but I think it's fair to say that purely from the point of view of financial stability, some routes are riskier than others and young people who have never had to support themselves often don't think about that aspect of their career choice.

 

If you have a career as a dancer, you are going to be working unsociable hours and you are extremely likely to be on a low salary. That's not to say that this wouldn't happen if you chose to do something else, of course it might, but if you have other talents and passions, it is worth factoring this into your decision. Basically, thinking about what else you want out of life and seeing how compatible that is with your career choice.

Edited November 1, 2015 by invisiblecircus