Nogoat Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 15 hours ago, capybara said: Beliaev arrives in check trousers and changes into striped ones. Dame Monica Mason was asked why at an Insight many years ago and her answer was something to do with travelling - but I couldn't work that one out! It’s curious that Rakitin’s jacket seem to be made from the same loud check fabric used for Beliaev’s (first) trousers. The most prosaic explanation is that the costume department got a job lot from the local market, but the conspiracy theorist in me wants it to be deliberate and meaningful. Is Ashton hinting that Natalia’s ideal man is part-Beliaev and part-Rakitin? You could combine the trousers and jacket to make a two-piece suit; could you similarly combine the two men to make a two-piece suitor? 🙄 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 16 minutes ago, Nogoat said: It’s curious that Rakitin’s jacket seem to be made from the same loud check fabric used for Beliaev’s (first) trousers. The most prosaic explanation is that the costume department got a job lot from the local market, but the conspiracy theorist in me wants it to be deliberate and meaningful. Is Ashton hinting that Natalia’s ideal man is part-Beliaev and part-Rakitin? You could combine the trousers and jacket to make a two-piece suit; could you similarly combine the two men to make a two-piece suitor? 🙄 I do love this forum. 😍 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawnstar Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 6 hours ago, jules_skichick said: Thank someone for something they cannot change???? Why??? If they had been taller it still would not be their fault if your view was not perfect. Can't help your height. Now hats and mad hairstyles now that's another story.... I'm very sorry, I didn't intend to annoy anyone with my remark. It was just meant to be a facetious aside. I'm afraid I can't remove it myself now but if I've contravened any forum rules on mentioning personal appearance perhaps a moderator could remove it? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balletfanp Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 7 minutes ago, Dawnstar said: I'm very sorry, I didn't intend to annoy anyone with my remark. It was just meant to be a facetious aside. I'm afraid I can't remove it myself now but if I've contravened any forum rules on mentioning personal appearance perhaps a moderator could remove it? I can’t see why your jokey remark should have offended anyone. Please don’t feel bad about it. 🙂 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sim Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 55 minutes ago, Dawnstar said: I'm very sorry, I didn't intend to annoy anyone with my remark. It was just meant to be a facetious aside. I'm afraid I can't remove it myself now but if I've contravened any forum rules on mentioning personal appearance perhaps a moderator could remove it? You haven’t contravened any rules Dawnstar, nor is there anything offensive in your post. I think most people could see it was a joke. Joking is a risky business these days.... Please don’t worry about it. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan McNulty Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Dawnstar said: I'm very sorry, I didn't intend to annoy anyone with my remark. It was just meant to be a facetious aside. I'm afraid I can't remove it myself now but if I've contravened any forum rules on mentioning personal appearance perhaps a moderator could remove it? I must admit to having a giggle when I read your post. If someone I know is sitting in front of me I usually ask them to keep their heads down (in a jokey way of course!)! A young man who worked with me for a few months was 6'10" tall and he said he would always get a seat at the back so as not to impede other people. The thing was he didn't look that tall sitting down - he was all legs! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxDaveM Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 5 hours ago, Lizbie1 said: I think the 2nd circle of Sadler’s Wells is also quite bad for this - from memory, the rows aren’t offset, so you are directly behind the head of the person in front and due to the high-ish viewpoint the rake isn’t enough to mitigate the impact of a tall person. This isn’t the tall person’s fault of course, just a poor bit of planning by SW. I've always found the rake in Sadlers Wells more than adequate to avoid any heads in view problems - the person in front usually has their head below my knee level, so as long as they don't lean forward... (though as I'm trying to recall, I'm sure there is a little bit of a stagger, to assist the view) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridiem Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 13 minutes ago, zxDaveM said: I've always found the rake in Sadlers Wells more than adequate to avoid any heads in view problems - the person in front usually has their head below my knee level, so as long as they don't lean forward... (though as I'm trying to recall, I'm sure there is a little bit of a stagger, to assist the view) I find the 2nd circle at SW very bad for sightlines, and I'm tall. I regularly have a head in my way, because the seats aren't staggered. It was one of the (many) things that really annoyed me when the new SW opened. Why would you design a new theatre like that?? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawnstar Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Sim said: You haven’t contravened any rules Dawnstar, nor is there anything offensive in your post. I think most people could see it was a joke. Joking is a risky business these days.... Please don’t worry about it. Thanks for the official moderator confirmation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 (edited) Possibly it was already mentioned here, so apologies if I am repeating information, but I just wanted to let readers know that there was an interesting article in June's Dancing Times about The Firebird and also in the same issue, an article about its designer, Natalia Goncharova. Edited June 23, 2019 by Darlex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maryrosesatonapin Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 On 23/06/2019 at 12:06, Darlex said: Possibly it was already mentioned here, so apologies if I am repeating information, but I just wanted to let readers know that there was an interesting article in June's Dancing Times about The Firebird and also in the same issue, an article about its designer, Natalia Goncharova. ... Also a lovely report of this triple bill in Dance Europe, where Robert Penman's description of 'Symphony in C' as an 'applause machine' made me smile. It's a glowing review though, especially of Vadmin Muntagirov (whom I didn't see on this occasion). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alison Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 You have my sympathies: he was delicious (and I was very sad I only got to see him the one time) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Wall Posted January 20, 2020 Share Posted January 20, 2020 (edited) This isn't the RB's Firebird - but I didn't want to create a different strand for a single item. Just thought the visual presentation in this trailer for NYCB's Firebird was fascinating in it's 3D dimension attempt ... (Costumes for the Balanchine/Robbins Production are by Marc Chagall) Edited January 20, 2020 by Bruce Wall 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