Royal Ballet 2016/17 season

[VickyPage]

Okay, changing the subject! I've, tragically, never seen Fille live before and I kind of want to go to every night, because all the casting looks fantastic. However, my budget cannot take that. Any suggestions on ideal casts?

[Jan McNulty]

Well I am very biased but I would go for Marquez/Campbell.  They were absolutely terrific together when I saw them in Don Q a couple of years ago.

 

Alternatively Hayward/Sambe (Frankie Hayward comes on stage, breathes and is fabulous and she was so very, very sublime in Rhapsody).

 

or Choe/Zuchetti ... or any of them!

[SPD444]

I would choose three, in this order - Frankie, Nela and Natalia ( only third because I have the DVD). If it came to one then Frankie because she is gorgeous.

[Mary]

Oh you must see Muntagirov in Fille!

 

However, I too want to go to every night so share the dilemma really. All the casts look good.

[VickyPage]

Thanks for your advice! It looks like we're leaning the same way, which is nice. Unfortunately, all you're making me want to do is go to everything even more. It's an Ashton ballet so it shouldn't suffer from being seen from the Upper Slips, so... You are all very bad for my impulse control!

[Balletfanp]

Muntagirov and Morera were wonderful last time. But I suspect Muntagirov and Nunez will also be a cast to be reckoned with...oh, dilemmas!

[MAB]

My suggestion would be to see the older dancers such as Marquez, Morera and Nunez while you can.  The younger ones will feature in future runs of Fille and you can see them then.

[CHazell2]

Hi there.

 

Do anybody know what the prices are for this season. I want to save up for Fille and Anastasia.

[mshovelt]

For me, the order is: Hayward/Sambe , Nunez/Muntagirov , Osipova/McRae. But only because I saw Osipova/McRae on the last run; and it's a really close run thing with those first two pairings. I may just have to go to all three this time though (if my wife lets me!).

[Fonty]

If I could only see one, then my choice would be either be Marquez and Campbell, or Morera and Muntagirov.   Both ladies are wonderful in this, but what makes it special for me are the two men.  Muntagirov is just fantastic in everything, and cannot put a foot wrong as far as I am concerned.  And Campbell is rapidly becoming one of my personal favourites.

[Jamesrhblack]

Okay, changing the subject! I've, tragically, never seen Fille live before and I kind of want to go to every night, because all the casting looks fantastic. However, my budget cannot take that. Any suggestions on ideal casts?

Marquez and Campbell were an absolute delight last time. They dance really well together: she is a fantastic Lise and he's a natural Colas. Also, it'll probably be the last chance to see them dance together. Mind you, everyone has been eulogistic about Morera with Muntagirov too...

[Sim]

I would also back Marquez/Campbell.  For me, she is the best Lise in the past ten years, he is a natural, as James says, and this will be your last chance to see them in Fille together.  If you can't get those, then definitely Morera/Muntagirov.  They were also wonderful together. 

[VickyPage]

Thanks again! Okay, I think Mab raised a good point, since my options are limited, but I will definitely make sure I book for the Marquez/Campbell, whatever else I do, since it does seem unlikely that Marquez will do that role again at the ROH. 

[Nina G.]

Marquez is (was) THE Lise for me and I am certainly going to see her again, together with the wonderful Campbell! 

[capybara]

Muntagirov and Morera were wonderful last time. But I suspect Muntagirov and Nunez will also be a cast to be reckoned with...oh, dilemmas!

 

A remortgage might be necessary 

[Balletfanp]

I fear so...

[FLOSS]

I said in an earlier post that Nutcracker was inevitable in the forthcoming season because of Sir Peter Wright's ninetieth birthday. I think that Sleeping Beauty was also inevitable as the company is celebrating the seventieth anniversary of becoming the resident ballet company at Covent Garden and the re-opening of the house with the Messel production of Sleeping Beauty. As far as I can see the only thing that is surprising about the revival is that it is occurring in the 2016-2017 season rather than the 2015-2016 one and in 2017 rather than 2016. Perhaps that is an indication of the amount of preparation the company will need to produce an outstanding revival rather than a standard revival in which it sometimes seems that as long as the roles are filled it is deemed a success. I am sorry if this upsets some people but the fairy variations have not been up to the mark for a long time and we have had a run of less than satisfactory Lilac Fairies.It is a couple of years since it was last revived and there have been quite a few changes in the junior ranks since then. There should be quite a few new Auroras in 2017 which is something to look forward to.Perhaps the names of the debutants as the SPF are a strong indication of who some of the new Auroras will be.

 

As far as next season's programming is concerned the dominance of Petipa and Ashton's Petipa based choreography from September until March is understandable and to be welcomed. It was too much to expect Cinderella at Christmas this year but it is good to know that management is taking the company's technical standards seriously in the run up to Sleeping Beauty. I think that the programming shows real recognition of the need to prepare the company for Beauty's revival. The company could dance File every season and Sleeping Beauty and Swan Lake every other year and I should be perfectly happy. Nutcracker does not really  give the entire company enough serious choreography to tackle but at least it contains the right sort of exposed choreography which can not be fudged. The problem with Alice is that it is an entertainment rather than a ballet and the choreography does not give al lot of real dance opportunities to all those on stage.

 

The RB is a classical ballet company and in the coming season the repertory selected suggests that the management is taking its classical heritage seriously, and that can't be bad. It would seem that the Ashton mixed bill at the end of the season is also anniversary based. Symphonic Variations was the first ballet that Ashton created for the company's new stage in 1947.It was both a ballet which showed the possibilities that the stage offered to the company and its choreographers and an implied criticism of the sort of dance dramas that Helpmann had been creating. It would be nice to think that it is being programmed as a statement about the primacy of classical dance for the company and its future rather than just because of the anniversary. At a time when so many continental companies are passing into the hands of ADs with strong affinities to contemporary dance perhaps it is a timely statement of intent. Whether or not the season turns out to be exciting or incredibly dull will depend very much on the casting and preparation of Beauty not just at principal dancer level but at every level of the company including the most junior ranks.

Edited May 13, 2016 by FLOSS

[alison]

Yes, I take it you've read the concerns of the dancers at La Scala about their ability to keep up Classical standards during their next season, with the Classically-demanding ballets being clustered at the end.

[MAB]

I want to see the fairies danced by principals again.  If they are as pathetic as last time around, I'll start following the example of others I know and simply turn up for act 1.  If there's no decent Lilac Fairy in the ranks (?!) import one.  Perhaps it's time to ditch the recent convention of the Lilac Fairy being tall.  In my DVD collection the best LF is Lucette Adous, a tiny woman.

[FLOSS]

Yes, I have read it Alison, and I wonder how, with so little dancing of any kind through out the year, least of all classical choreography. the la Scala company will be in any fit state to dance Swan Lake.

 

I don't want to bore everyone with my views about the fairy variations.Last night's RB evening in the Clore was worth the price of the ticket because we were given a short demonstration involving coaching one of the artists, Gina Storm-Jensen, in the Lilac Fairy's variation. Dame Beryl Grey was among the panel who were there to discuss the early years of the company and Kevin invited her to sit with him to watch the coaching session. Before long she was giving her own corrections which were mainly to do with Gina's arms and head. It was very interesting to see the difference that a slight adjustment of the arms from "school room correct" to expressive, with arms suggesting "giving from the heart," made.

 

 it would be lovely to think that some of the company greats like Dames Beryl and Antoinette; Alfreda and Leslie could be put in the rehearsal room with the dancers who are going to perform these variations. Samantha Raine is very good at her job but it seems to me that the elements that are missing in the RB's Beauty are grandeur, elements of characterisation which relate to the gifts being conferred by each fairy, and old fashioned theatricality. The variations were not intended to be dry as dust expositions of classroom steps, each one reflected the character of the original dancer of the role and her type as a dancer. The names of the dancers originally allocated to each variation in 1946 should be a clear indication of the type of dancer required to give each variation its full effect.

 

Dame Beryl was very quick to say that Gina had to remember that she embodied goodness and that it was her power that made everything in the ballet happen as was clear from the fact that she appears in all three acts. Gina was impressive after one day's rehearsal. Dame Beryl was very quick to praise Gina for the beauty of some of her movements but equally concerned to ensure that she understood her pivotal place in the structure of the ballet as a whole and insisted on the need to draw the audience in to the action on the stage. If Alfreda and David managed to make ENB dance their production of Sleeping Beauty as if they were the RB of old why should it not be possible to achieve the same transformation of the RB's dancers?

Edited May 13, 2016 by FLOSS

[SwissBalletFan]

 In my DVD collection the best LF is Lucette Adous, a tiny woman.

 

 

Surely this depends on the size of your television?

[capybara]

That's interesting, FLOSS. Gina Storm-Jensen is, of course, one of the tallest (if not the tallest) member of the corps.

Edited May 13, 2016 by capybara

[Sim]

So a corps member is being trained to dance LF?  Interesting...I wonder if she will get any performances.

[Fonty]

I remember seeing Lucette Aldous in the film they showed on tv, and thinking how wonderful it was to have an LF in a tutu and doing proper dancing, rather than wafting about the stage in the sort of elegant dress that makes her look like mother of the bride.  Why has it become the fashion to turn this in to a non dancing role?  Do they think it balances out the antics of Carabosse?  And if it has become customary to give this role to a taller dancer, why is that?  Someone with superb technique and stage presence can command the stage, no matter how short they are. 

 

We've all commented on the remarkably average dancing for some of the fairy variations in the past.  Presumably Grey, Sibley, Collier and so on are all available and able to contribute?  What astounds me is that they are not routinely called in to give a little extra advice and coaching, not just for new youngsters but for some of the more experienced dancers who may need a bit of a reminder. 

[capybara]

So a corps member is being trained to dance LF?  Interesting...I wonder if she will get any performances.

 

Well, Tierney Heap danced LF last time around and she was an Artist then.

[Naomi M]

Did Tierney Heap did Lise in La Fille mal gardee? I don't think so.

[now voyager]

Did Tierney Heap did Lise in La Fille mal gardee? I don't think so.

I think this discussion is about Lilac Fairy casting, rather than Fille.

[Naomi M]

I think this discussion is about Lilac Fairy casting, rather than Fille.

 

Oh thanks! 

[Jacqueline]

Surely this depends on the size of your television?

Or how close to the tv you sit.

[alison]

Last night's RB evening in the Clore was worth the price of the ticket because we were given a short demonstration involving coaching one of the artists, Gina Storm-Jensen, in the Lilac Fairy's variation.

 

I'm so sorry to have missed that   I still get the impression that the RB doesn't really make the most of the assets still available to it in terms of dancers from past times.  With the far-too-premature loss of Davids Wall and Drew, it's surely even more important to make use of the experience which remains.

[FLOSS]

Personally I don't think that you need a tall dancer for the Lilac Fairy. What you need is someone with stage presence and authority to command the stage and to represent physically the defeat of Carabosse's malign power, with the technique to meet the role's technical challenges. Now that can be someone like Lydia Lopokova who was London's first Lilac Fairy, who I think was not that tall,someone tall like Dame Beryl or someone who is a very strong elegant dancer like Bergsma and Mason. The whole reason, I suspect, that in the past the role was given to dancers like Mason, Bergsma and Grey is that they were not really suited to the role of Aurora. It provides a wonderful role for a dancer who like Grey is seen as too tall  for the role of Aurora or like Bergsma and Mason too mature and powerful for the role because it uses the very elements that may make them unsuitable for Aurora. All three had technical command, stage presence and grandeur which made their beneficent presence felt throughout the ballet. Beriosova did dance Aurora very beautifully but if she had not discovered MacLeary as a partner tall enough for her she too might have had problems in being cast in the role.

 

It seems to me that staging a successful revival of Beauty calls for the stager to use his dancers' strengths and weaknesses to their advantage and to the advantage of the entire enterprise. It is not merely a question of allocating names to each role but selecting the right person for the role from the point of view of  technique and personality. Getting  casting right is an art in itself . It is not simply a question of finding dancers with phenomenal technique it is the ability to see the potential in a dancer. Sometimes a dancer who has enough technique for the role will be the ideal casting choice. Sibley said that Ashton did not always select dancers with the strongest technique when he cast roles, but that his decisions were always right because he saw in the dancer concerned something which no one else did.

Edited May 13, 2016 by FLOSS

[Jamesrhblack]

Monica Mason did dance a couple of performances as Aurora in the 1974/1975 season....

[capybara]

I'm so sorry to have missed that   I still get the impression that the RB doesn't really make the most of the assets still available to it in terms of dancers from past times.  With the far-too-premature loss of Davids Wall and Drew, it's surely even more important to make use of the experience which remains.

 

One detects a resistance to using certain former stars to coach classical ballets (apart from Monica Mason who remains very involved with the RB). However, the importing of Benjamin and Durante next season is a good sign where MacMillan works are concerned.