bangorballetboy Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 This is not a good story. It is such a pity it has been printed. It's a salutary reminder that we should all think before pressing send! 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 I believe the journalist in question has previously been referred to as the Telegraph's "arts correspondent". Although she quotes much, possibly all, of "Tim Couchman's" posting, her paragraph 3 does not seem to me to be a very accurate reflection of its contents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angela Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 As a general rule London critics say what they really think about new dance works. I may be fussy, but do you have any reason to believe that critics out of London don't? That Dawson was somehow pampered by the Dutch or German critics? Believe me, they also write exactly what they think about a work. I have another question: Why did Dawson write about "London critics" in his tweet - the other reviews were not so negative as the one on Arts Desk. They were not great, but one could have lived with them. Was there another bad one I missed? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) I am given to understand that the hard copy headline in the Daily Telegraph reads: "How the 'bickering' Royal Ballet stars fell from grace" and that, while his original 'tweet' is quoted, David Dawson's conciliatory statement is omitted. The accompanying photo shows all 6 men in the sequence with Claire Calvert. Edited March 23, 2017 by capybara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 Angela, that was precisely the question I asked myself as well, but I assured myself that if there had been another review our hard-working Links team would have found it. And given the way the Telegraph has been going, I wouldn't be at all surprised at that headline, inaccurate as it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 On Mar 17, Luke Jennings posted a tweet in support of the article written by Hanna Weibye and quoted parts of his review in 2013 when The Human Seasons were premiered https://twitter.com/LukeJennings1/status/842783642820771841 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizbie1 Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) I think Luke Jennings' (very thought-provoking) review in the Observer was quite negative as well, though it was only published online the morning after the tweet. Dawson may have had early sight of it, though, or guessed from the tweet linked to by Duck that he wasn't going to like it. https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2017/mar/19/crystal-pite-flight-pattern-royal-ballet-review-triple-bill-dawson-wheeldon Edited March 23, 2017 by Lizbie1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fonty Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I would not blame any of the dancers for being a bit careful during rehearsals. Presumably they were doing this at the same time as they were performing Sleeping Beauty. For those appearing in both, it seems perfectly logical not too push their bodies to the extreme and risk injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billboyd Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 David Dawson would have had to be very, very thick skinned not to feel upset reading the reviews - especially, Hanna Weibye's review. In fact, I think he would have needed to be devoid of emotion. His knee jerk tweet is, therefore, perfectly understandable. But, he later deleted it. Tim Couchman's posting is another matter. It is out of order. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Was lucky enough to see the schools matinee with my 7 year old. No Human Seasons, which despite the furore , or maybe because of it, I would have liked to have seen again. Beatriz Stix-Brunell and Eric Underwood were the lead couple in After The Rain and were gorgeous together , not as moving as I remember Nunez and Soares , but that is understandable perhaps given the experience and experiences that the latter 2 bring to this pas de deux. I have a soft spot for Underwood and Stix-Brunell, even when they aren't in lead roles I often find myself following them on the stage, and I would like to see them paired together in other works. The other dancers were Mayara Magri, Tomas Mock, Anna Rose O'Sullivan and David Donnelly all performed admirably but I have to confess that After The Rain is not one of my favourite Wheeldon works, if you take away the duet it feels rather cold and detached to me. I thought it wasn't the best example to the school children in the audience of what ballet can do, or express. My son comes with me quite often to see ballet at the Royal Opera House and even he was asking 'How long left?' halfway through the piece and he's quite happily sat through Woolf Works, Frankenstein and other much longer works! This however cannot be said for Flight Pattern- this received a rapturous applause from the children. Some found it a bit scary and frightening at first, they didn't know what was going to happen or if the ending was happy or sad but nearly all I spoke to (and overheard) loved it and to quote one 9 year old 'I didn't know ballet could do things like that!" I loved it too, and I echo many of the posters here about Sambe and McNally, the latter in particular I am always overjoyed to be given praise and celebrated. Wouldn't it be wonderful if O'Hare dared to commission a work from McNally for the main stage? I know, possibly an optimistic hope too far- but if Flight Pattern taught me anything it's the power of hope over experience. Would very much like to see Flight Pattern again to be able to make more coherent comments about the piece. Particularly loved the falling snow/ashes that was like the antithesis of the gorgeous snowflake dance from The Nutcracker -the dance of the snowflakes often brings a tear to my ear with the sheer beauty of it and Flight Pattern sent similar yet different shivers down my spine. My favourite ballets are those that marry beauty with devastation and Flight Pattern certainly carries elements of both. I hope it will return soon. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Surprised to find only one comment registered so far in support of the dancers: http://www.roh.org.uk/news/your-reaction-what-did-you-think-of-the-royal-ballets-mixed-programme Of course, one wouldn't want to rehearse the HS saga or hint at criticism but some of us might feel that expressions of support are appropriate in that context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissBalletFan Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 (edited) The conciliatory statement is now included in full in the telegraph article. Not really much in content or apologies, I would imagine most choreographers say these things after each project. (Unless I don't quite understand the real meaning of conciliatory) Edited March 23, 2017 by SwissBalletFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 The conciliatory statement is now included in full in the telegraph article. Not really much in content or apologies, I would imagine most choreographers say these things after each project. (Unless I don't quite understand the real meaning of conciliatory) But it is not included at all in the paper itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 Probably came through after the paper went to press - plus I suspect the staff were concentrating on other things last night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 David Dawson would have had to be very, very thick skinned not to feel upset reading the reviews - especially, Hanna Weibye's review. In fact, I think he would have needed to be devoid of emotion. His knee jerk tweet is, therefore, perfectly understandable. But, he later deleted it. All choreographers have to come to terms with criticism. I'm sure it must hurt if read (some don't!), but it goes with the job. Most choreographers don't respond - in the long term it goes nowhere at all. Just throwing a hissy fit does not inspire confidence. Later withdrawing what you said might be helpful, especially if accompanied by an apology/explanation (not the case here), but it doesn't mean it didn't happen and people/ADs won't remember it all and reflect. Dawson wasn't the first choreographer to garner a handful of not so great reviews and he wont be the last. His distinction is to draw attention to them. Not good for him or the company. None of this is understandable at all. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billboyd Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Bruce - Social Media - Twitter/Facebook/balletcoforum.....is new. David Dawson's instant tweet did not criticise the dancers. It was an understandable instant reaction to Hanna Weibye, Luke Jennings ... When did you read a review as 'bad' as Hanna Weibye's? His tweet was not offensive, rude or insulting.. He - on reflection - deleted it Can you imagine the sort of tweets had twitter existed in the days of Nureyev, Ashton and McMillan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billboyd Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Oh, I think it goes without saying - It would have been better had he not tweeted. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 When did you read a review as 'bad' as Hanna Weibye's? I've read a lot worse over the years, quite a few from respected critics. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 All choreographers have to come to terms with criticism. I'm sure it must hurt if read (some don't!), but it goes with the job. Most choreographers don't respond - in the long term it goes nowhere at all. Just throwing a hissy fit does not inspire confidence. Later withdrawing what you said might be helpful, especially if accompanied by an apology/explanation (not the case here), but it doesn't mean it didn't happen and people/ADs won't remember it all and reflect. Dawson wasn't the first choreographer to garner a handful of not so great reviews and he wont be the last. His distinction is to draw attention to them. Not good for him or the company. None of this is understandable at all. I agree with all this, Bruce, except that I suppose his tweet was understandable on a purely human level. It just wasn't wise or professional or sensible or ... etc. But that's the trouble with Twitter - so many people just use it all the time to express their every thought and action. Which is just daft. We might all think something, but that doesn't mean we should even say it let alone broadcast it to the world! 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aileen Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I think that choreographers have to roll with the (critics') punches. It's far better to maintain a dignified silence however unfair you feel the review(s) is/are. Getting a reputation for sulking is not going to be good for your choreographic career. And sometimes, what a critic writes may even be worth paying heed to. No choreographer should think that his/her work can't be improved upon. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Just imagining Nureyev's tweet, if he had been dancing in the production ....... *'?! you '*@*** @***** and @&&£!*** your !***&@*** Personally I think it's time to draw a line. Bruce - Social Media - Twitter/Facebook/balletcoforum.....is new. David Dawson's instant tweet did not criticise the dancers. It was an understandable instant reaction to Hanna Weibye, Luke Jennings ... When did you read a review as 'bad' as Hanna Weibye's? His tweet was not offensive, rude or insulting.. He - on reflection - deleted it Can you imagine the sort of tweets had twitter existed in the days of Nureyev, Ashton and McMillan? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted March 23, 2017 Author Share Posted March 23, 2017 Personally I think it's time to draw a line. I agree. There are two performances of this bill left, and since I shan't be getting to either of them I'd like to hear people's thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabitha Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Interesting that nobody thinks that there is any truth in Tim Couchman's post? I wonder why he would have risked such a long, detailed articulate post? I suppose if the dancers didn't dance the piece the way it was intended then it wouldn't have looked its best on stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balletyas Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I may be fussy, but do you have any reason to believe that critics out of London don't? That Dawson was somehow pampered by the Dutch or German critics? Believe me, they also write exactly what they think about a work. I have another question: Why did Dawson write about "London critics" in his tweet - the other reviews were not so negative as the one on Arts Desk. They were not great, but one could have lived with them. Was there another bad one I missed? Luke Jennings in the Observer was pretty blunt about the carpet sweeping and spatchcocking.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Interesting that nobody thinks that there is any truth in Tim Couchman's post? I wonder why he would have risked such a long, detailed articulate post? I suppose if the dancers didn't dance the piece the way it was intended then it wouldn't have looked its best on stage. I thought it was well danced, even the most difficult bits, and looked as good as it could. It may well be that rehearsals didn't go smoothly. I just find it literally incredible that these daring, creative, brilliant and adaptable dancers would be the cause of the type of problems he describes. If there was disharmony, I suspect that, to use a football analogy, the 'manager lost the dressing room'. If top-class players lose trust and confidence in what is being asked of them, or in how it is being asked of them, the problem is at management level. Besides which, whatever problems there may (or may not) have been, to air them in public in this way is totally unacceptable. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabitha Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 It may well be that rehearsals didn't go smoothly. I just find it literally incredible that these daring, creative, brilliant and adaptable dancers would be the cause of the type of problems he describes. They are also human and have bad days and problems at work just like everyone else. Interesting that the assumption is always management is bad and dancers are beyond reproach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindsay Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I agree that we should not assume that Tabitha and it is not healthy to reify anyone. It is completely legitimate to criticise performances from the perspective of an audience member or professional critic based upon what one sees on the stage. It is tedious and predictable to always defend the RB or its dancers just because they are the 'home team'. However, in the backstage context, dancers are often the people with the least control over matters of programming, staging, casting and so on. So, whatever the truth of the matter, to 'break the seal' of the rehearsal room and criticise them publicly in this way is unfair as well as astonishingly unprofessional. I wonder how Dawson and his stager would feel if a named dancer had commented so negatively in public about the work or their working methods? Furthermore, as I understand it, the RB (like other companies) has social media policies that prohibit/limit dancers from doing so there is not really any right of reply. It is all a very ill-judged and unfortunate tangle. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Whatever happened or did not happen, however well or badly things went- and sure, we can all believe sometimes rehearsals go badly and sometimes whole productions go badly- this sort of comment by this sort of method, -the 'passive-aggressive' tweet-is inappropriate and unprofessional and the only wise response is a dignified silence. The tweeter has hurt nobody's reputation but his own, so the dancers scarcely need defending, as noone can take such an attack seriously. Unfortunately, journalism as in The Telegraph is also damaging in the image it presents of the ballet world, but luckily it is totally ephemeral. (The really bad thought is what nonsense they are probably writing about more important matters.) The best response for RB and all others concerned is to carry on regardless, which is what they are doing. We can continue to discuss the perfomances and I hope we do, but I think it would be wrong to speculate about what went on in rehearsals as we have no facts and the whole discussion is now tarnished beyond repair. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Just out of seeing tonight's performance. I have to say that the second cast Dawson really went for it - bravo. But I still think when the Wheeldon starts you immediately feel you are in the hands of somebody with more experience and mature views. But the Pite takes you to a whole other place. Whereas the boys concentrate on a few dancers, Pite sees how to make a mass of dancers into a greater and more interesting body. I just love it that while others want to work with 'top brass' of the company, Pite wants to work with soldiers and low officer ranks and in the doing shows us a magnificent vision of what dance can be in 2017. But it's not for everybody - about 5 minutes in I saw a couple leaving - its not ballet as many understand it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I agree that we should not assume that Tabitha and it is not healthy to reify anyone. It is completely legitimate to criticise performances from the perspective of an audience member or professional critic based upon what one sees on the stage. It is tedious and predictable to always defend the RB or its dancers just because they are the 'home team'. However, in the backstage context, dancers are often the people with the least control over matters of programming, staging, casting and so on. So, whatever the truth of the matter, to 'break the seal' of the rehearsal room and criticise them publicly in this way is unfair as well as astonishingly unprofessional. I wonder how Dawson and his stager would feel if a named dancer had commented so negatively in public about the work or their working methods? Furthermore, as I understand it, the RB (like other companies) has social media policies that prohibit/limit dancers from doing so there is not really any right of reply. It is all a very ill-judged and unfortunate tangle. Why should you assume that any defence of the RB or its dancers is 'just because they are the 'home team''? I personally defend them in this case because of what I currently regularly see on stage in a wide variety of works - performances which could not be produced by the kind of unprofessional, timid, lazy, unco-operative people described in the stager's post. (I am also and have always been prepared to criticise the RB if/when I think it's appropriate.) And I think posters on this forum have many 'teams' which they follow, criticise, care about, assess, enjoy (which is as it should be). However I very much agree with your second paragraph. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capybara Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I thought that The Human Seasons went very well tonight. The pairing of Yasmine Nagdhi and Matthew Ball in the last pas de deux was beautiful and, as Bruce has said above, everyone seemed to be 'going for it'. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Just out of seeing tonight's performance. I have to say that the second cast Dawson really went for it - bravo. But I still think when the Wheeldon starts you immediately feel you are in the hands of somebody with more experience and mature views. But the Pite takes you to a whole other place. Whereas the boys concentrate on a few dancers, Pite sees how to make a mass of dancers into a greater and more interesting body. I just love it that while others want to work with 'top brass' of the company, Pite wants to work with soldiers and low officer ranks and in the doing shows us a magnificent vision of what dance can be in 2017. But it's not for everybody - about 5 minutes in I saw a couple leaving - its not ballet as many understand it. Well that was their loss! No, it's not ballet; but it's brilliant. I do think that the RB's focus should (unsurprisingly perhaps) be on ballet; but there is a place for the occasional foray into a different form of dance that makes use of the dancers' great physical facility and expressive qualities. And the bulk of the audience appeared to love it, judging by the reception. (And by the way, I'm not sure that Dawson and Wheeldon would appreciate being referred to as 'the boys'!! Or that their gender is relevant here anyway. Pite's choreography actually brought Akram Khan to my mind, so it didn't strike me as a particularly 'female' approach.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 From all the hubbub, I was expecting Human Seasons to be a car crash but in the event I found it OK - nothing spectacular, but it had its moments and kept me watching. Yasmine and Frankie were, as ever, highlights for me. I wasn't keen on the floor sweeping and pass the parcel routine, which I thought rather demeaning, but didn't have a programme so couldn't tell whether it was making some kind of deliberate point or was just incidental. In After the Rain, I loved Marianela and Thiago's PDD, which took the piece up several notches. I was personally less enthused by Flight Path than pretty much everyone else clearly has been, but think I'd need to see it more than once to really get it, and ideally from another viewpoint. I found myself interested but not really emotionally engaged. I was however seated rather high and distant, which focuses you on watching group shape and pattern at the expense of being able to see individuals' portrayals. Think also I was still on a high from the previous night's Pina Bausch Sacre rehearsal, which is familiar territory and far easier to be swept up in. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now