Jump to content

Royal Ballet: The Two Pigeons, Monotones I & II, November 2015 & Rhapsody January 2016


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 668
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Mr Monahan certainly makes his case about Francesca's dancing being superior to Natalia's in the Ashton style. Very interested to compare their Giselle's and Mayerling in the future but there is no doubt in my untrained mind that young Ms Hayward is going to be an absolute star, if she isn't already, and should be nurtured going onwards. Really looking forward to seeing the cinema presentation with Natalia dancing and then Francesca at the matinee on the 30th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The differences in the critical response to this run is illuminating.You can begin to identify those  critics who can't forgive Ashton for not being someone else. This group of critics tend to describe Ashton's  ballets as if he was a rather incompetent jobbing choreographer who had been taken on by the company until a real choreographer appeared. Interestingly they are divided over the  type of real choreographer he should have been. Depending on their tastes they favour either a choreographer in the Balanchine mould or one in the MacMillan mould.

 

There  now seem to be another group of critics who seem to be keen to treat ENB and the Royal as if they were competing football teams with ENB cast in the plucky non league team role. Perhaps the lack of unanimity in the critical response will persuade a few more people to buy tickets to see the programme.

 

Unlike some of the critics who have complained that Pigeons is back again I think that Mr O'Hare got this one right as the choreography now seems to belong to the dancers in a way it did not before Christmas. 

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Clement Crisp  - ***** Five stars!

 

Judith Mackrell, Vera Liber and Zoe Anderson (Today's Links) seem to be with Clement.

 

 

Dear Bill, reading those reviews, they state that Osipova is an absolute star and dances fantastically. Which makes for a great night too. I think the point from Monahan and other posters is about the specificities of dancing Ashton, and the more subtle and romantic skills that go with that.

 

I think you should all be very happy that ROH has Osipova back and healthy, and dancing very well aand looking forward to her stellar performances of Giselle etc., aaand enjoy knowing that there is an up and coming star at ROH that can dance Ashton (maybe) in the way it was envisaged.

 

It seems in this case there isn't really an argument of sides, and ROH are having their cake and eating it :)

Edited by SwissBalletFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Clement Crisp  - ***** Five stars!

 

Judith Mackrell, Vera Liber and Zoe Anderson (Today's Links) seem to be with Clement.

 

 

Sorry Bill, I guess your comment means that you would give 5 stars to both casts, including Hayward and Osipova?

 

If so, I apologise, as I read that you were 'with' the other reviews as they were of the Osipova cast rather than Hayward.

 

Either way...happy days for ROH. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your question is offensive.

 

Of course I have. Otherwise I would not be able to comment.

 

 

Bill, Fonty's post is not in the least bit offensive.  It comes over to me as a genuine query.

 

Over the years I have come across far too many people who are happy to state their opinion but who, when challenged, have not seen the piece or the dancer in question.  Or indeed people, who have never seen ballet, saying they don't like it but that is because of their preconceived notions.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irregardless of which performances I might prefer (shockingly I liked both for different reasons), the thing I don't particularly enjoy are X-factor type headlines for ballet reviews. I want professional reviewers to review the performance itself, not compare the performance of dancers to each other in a slightly lame attempt to create sensationalism.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill, Fonty's post is not in the least bit offensive.  It comes over to me as a genuine query.

 

Over the years I have come across far too many people who are happy to state their opinion but who, when challenged, have not seen the piece or the dancer in question.  Or indeed people, who have never seen ballet, saying they don't like it but that is because of their preconceived notions.

Thanks, Janet.

 

Fonty - I take back my remark about your question being offensive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The differences in the critical response to this run is illuminating.You can begin to identify those  critics who can't forgive Ashton for not being someone else. This group of critics tend to describe Ashton's  ballets as if he was a rather incompetent jobbing choreographer who had been taken on by the company until a real choreographer appeared. Interestingly they are divided over the  type of real choreographer he should have been. Depending on their tastes they favour either a choreographer in the Balanchine mould or one in the MacMillan mould.

 

Surely a critic should have an equal appreciation of all three,  I no longer read the critics but if you are suggesting bias due to lack of an understanding of contrasting choreographic styles then perhaps they have no business to be writing about classical ballet at all.  The rank and file ballet goer will shell out hard cash (something critics don't do) to go to see favourite works of all three choreographers without recourse to a spurious rating system.  Perhaps the reason why I find your comments and that of other ballet.co contributors more and more valid. 

 

There  now seem to be another group of critics who seem to be keen to treat ENB and the Royal as if they were competing football teams with ENB cast in the plucky non league team role. Perhaps the lack of unanimity in the critical response will persuade a few more people to buy tickets to see the programme.

 

Isn't that inevitable when two companies are performing in the same city simultaneously?

 

 

Edited by MAB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irregardless of which performances I might prefer (shockingly I liked both for different reasons), the thing I don't particularly enjoy are X-factor type headlines for ballet reviews. I want professional reviewers to review the performance itself, not compare the performance of dancers to each other in a slightly lame attempt to create sensationalism.

Me too, although I believe the headlines are often the work of subeditors? OTOH, if the critic *is* going to give a serious comparison of two (or more) casts' interpretations I suppose it can be valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irregardless of which performances I might prefer (shockingly I liked both for different reasons), the thing I don't particularly enjoy are X-factor type headlines for ballet reviews. I want professional reviewers to review the performance itself, not compare the performance of dancers to each other in a slightly lame attempt to create sensationalism.

 

And the front page has Frankie leaping above THE DAILY TELEGRAPH with the caption Francesca Hayward: Meet the Royal Ballet's queen in waiting.

 

I've never seen that done in relation to a review before.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent review from The Times for Natalia Osipiova and Steven McRae in Rhapsody, I'll have to wait for the Cinema to see them but should see Yuhui Choe and Valentino Zuchetti tomorrow, another treat I think, plus a wonderful cast of debuts in Pigeons!

 

It was nice to see Debra Craine give Yuhui Choe and Alexander Campbell great reviews for Two Pigeons too!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mab. I don't think that it is inevitable. In the dim and distant past  when ballet was treated as a serious art form the critics managed to produce accounts of performances by both companies which were generally recognisable if you had attended them. Of course that was long before the cult of the show biz personality had  become so important in the world of journalism. What they did not do was write accounts that would have been more appropriate in .one of those celebrity magazines where the journalists dream up grudges and feuds between people who you have never heard of. I think the first person who I became aware of writing about ENB and the RB in show biz terms was a certain Mr Christianson who wrote about Rojo's and Cojocaru's departure from the  RB and Muntagirov moving to the RB under a headline that said something like "Transfer Wars".    

Edited by FLOSS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the front page has Frankie leaping above THE DAILY TELEGRAPH with the caption Francesca Hayward: Meet the Royal Ballet's queen in waiting.

 

Thank you for that, capybara.  I'd just popped into Sainsbury's and spotted that.  Came back here, went straight to the Links page and could only see a *review* from the Telegraph for today.  From the banner headline, I might have expected an interview/article, at the very least.  Just think, I might have bought the paper purely on that assumption.  Glad I checked here first.

 

FLOSS: again, that may have been the subeditor.  But I'm afraid it's a reflection of the times that articles of any sort - even if completely shoddy - are valued more highly than reviews/reports, especially if a shock! horror! aspect is present - the hardcopy equivalent of clickbait, I suppose.  I understand they pay better, too :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sim. If you go onto Google and enter "Press Reviews of Rhapsody and Two Pigeons" into the search engine you should find yourself on a web page with all sorts of links to reviews of the performance. If you then click on the ft link for the paper's review you should find that by answering one or more simple question on a google pop up that you get access to the entire review which you can then read at your leisure. That is what I have done.

 

 

Mr Crisp thinks that both parts of the programme are very good, if not brilliant and excellent, and trounces all those who think that Pigeons is sentimental and naif or that Ashton is a bad story teller. I think he would probably kill anyone with a single cutting phrase who suggested that the story is slight or that either act is weak in any way. If you need any more information I will supply it but I think that you should be able to access the article if you follow the instructions.  

Edited by FLOSS
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been able to read the FT reviews for several months now too, not using the link here but via Google, today's questions were about Tesco!

 

 

 

I got questions about Waitrose!!!

 

The headline is "Beguiling and Radiant".  Mr Crisp really liked McRae and Osipova.

 

Quote re Two Pigeons:

 

"The Young Girl is a tease, but how beguiling in Yuhui Choe’s offering of step and feeling and pretty feet. The Gypsy Girl is alluring in Itziar Mendizabal’s bright-cut interpretation, with Tomas Mock darkly fine as her lover. Alexander Campbell, who enhances his every role and whose sure technique illuminates choreography, is ardent, errant, vastly sympathetic as the Young Man. The company performance is strong, properly Ashtonian."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few quotes from Clement Crisp...........

 

Re Two Pigeons: "The Young Girl is....... beguiling in Yuhui Choe's offering of step and feeling and pretty feet".  "Alexander Campbell, who enhances every role and whose sure technique illuminates choreography, is ardent, errant, vastly sympathetic as the Young Man".

 

Re Rhapsody: "Steven McRae dances, blazing through the steps, turning with an incandescent bravura, cutting tremendous shapes in the air........" "......Natalia Osipova, holding Ashton up to the light of her artistry that we may admire the facets and bright cutting of her dances........and moving with a delight in a role that marks her great gift".

 

It is not a long piece. The remainder relates, in the main, to Ashton and the supporting company.

 

[Edited to say that I had not seen Janet's precis before offering mine!]

Edited by capybara
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the front page has Frankie leaping above THE DAILY TELEGRAPH with the caption Francesca Hayward: Meet the Royal Ballet's queen in waiting.

 

I've never seen that done in relation to a review before.

 

"Hello" meets "Daily Telegraph" ") 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That'll teach me being blasé about missing a performance, assuming you can catch it later....now I wish I'd decided to cough and sneeze all over the audience in last year's run when Morera was on. Glad they have a lovely replacement in the shape of Fumi at the ready though, that definitely sweetens the twinge of disappointment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a shame about Morea.

 

I attended the performance on 20 Jan. Enjoyed both pieces - it was first time of viewing for me. I was on the Amphi and could really appreciate the lovely patterns of the corps - reminded me of Balanchine. As for Osipova - I could only think of that quotation "She walks in beauty...". She and McRea went for broke I thought. His part was definitely bravura but hers not so much (I think). Wonderful music too.

 

I don't like the Telegraph review and the placing and comment on the photos seems critical to me in an unpleasant way. It seems poor taste when the cinema screening is on 26 Jan.

 

Choe and Campbell were charming in Two Pigeons. A lovely evening and I am looking forward to the cinema showing. Great shame about Morea though.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...