Ballets that have aged badly

[Blossom]

The play conveyed attitudes which today would be homophobic and overall was rather lacking in terms of diversity and inclusion. But I think to find it controversial, you would have to be exceptionally young for a start and I don’t think there was anyone born in the 90s or after in the audience.

[Sim]

18 hours ago, alison said:

Soares was dancing a secondary role in it, not the lead.

I am aware of that, as I saw it, but it was he who made me like the ballet.  

[Sim]

2 hours ago, Fonty said:

I am trying to think what attitudes, language and conventions were so controversial at the time that they need a warning sign outside.  Are theatres doing this for everything now?  I would imagine some of Shakespeare's works might be pretty alarming to the modern generation.  

We get the same warning now before many TV programmes from the 60s, 70s and 80s.   No comment.  

[DanJL]

I was born in 1975. I grew up in a time when homophobia, racism, sexism and more were commonplace and often went unchallenged. Presumably this was similar for preceding decades as well. Inevitably some of this fed through to characters in theatre and television, and due to the prevailing culture perhaps little was thought of it by the majority of viewers. I think it's easy to forget how far we've progressed into becoming a more tolerant society. An inevitable impact of which is that language and attitudes in productions from a few decades ago can indeed seem badly out of step with what we would expect and view as being acceptable today. 

[Sebastian]

On 06/12/2023 at 10:52, Geoff said:

As has been discussed on the Forum in the past Two Pigeons is known to be autobiographical, or at least inspired by important events in Ashton’s personal life. A little more attention to the history of the work and what it is really all about - and “twee” disappears.

 

On 06/12/2023 at 11:03, Fonty said:

 

@Geoff  If I knew that, I have forgotten.  I have done a quick search, but there are so many posts about the ballet, it might take me a long time to find the answer.  Could you tell me what the incidents were, please?  

For those who would like to know more, might I suggest Julie Kavanagh’s marvellous biography “Secret Muses”? She details what was going on in Ashton’s life at the time he conceived the ballet, and spells out what she calls “its additional, hidden dimension”, the temptations of Fire Island and so on. 

[DVDfan]

I think we have a problem if attitudes that someone, perhaps very reasonably, thinks unacceptable, cannot be portrayed in drama. How can the various issues be addressed if no one can say what they think - if the thought police stamp on them at every turn? You have to know why someone thinks whatever it is, and then gently and rationally explain why there is a difficulty with that, how it impacts on someone's life, for example.  Drama can explore these issues very effectively, if allowed to do so.

 

I don't think we are more tolerant, I think that the acceptable targets have changed. Look at the way many high-profile women have been viciously abused and no-platformed for expressing reservations about the trans-agenda. One philosophy lecturer at a university was driven from her job, I believe, for asking questions about it.

And you try saying that you are uncomfortable about same sex marriage in public, and see what response you get. It won't be a gentle enquiry about why you feel that way,  that's for sure. (And in order not to be targeted myself, can I say that I know this because I have a very religious friend, who has learned to keep her mouth shut.)

 

I do think it is reasonable to warn people about content, but 'attitudes of the time' is of little use. People born decades later won't know what that means. 

[DanJL]

I don't think there's a problem with portraying people with offensive attitudes in drama. The issue is when the production actively reinforces those prejudices. In reality, there are things that are clearly unacceptable and others that are more subjective. The latter is where it gets really difficult when deciding whether to programme something made in a previous era. But perhaps the compromise of showing it with a suitable warning is a good solution. 

[Ondine]

1 hour ago, Sebastian said:

For those who would like to know more, might I suggest Julie Kavanagh’s marvellous biography “Secret Muses”?

 

Recommended for many reasons.  It is indeed marvellous, a thoroughly fascinating read. (I dug mine out to re-read it recently and must put it away again before I drop it on my foot. It is quite a tome.)

 

Just to add, re-reading the main Two Pigeons pages:

 

'He (Ashton) had developed a hernia, which he blamed on lifting Karsavina as a young man.'

 

Glorious reading.

Edited December 7, 2023 by Ondine

[MAB]

Any form of censorship is anathema to me.  I'm old enough to remember when every theatrical production had to be approved by the Lord Chancellor's offce and there was even the DH Lawrence book that finished up in court for a judge to decide if the general public could read it.  It seems we've gone full circle and the bad old days are back with a vengeance.

 

I see a society where any kind of tolerance is thin on the ground, have the wrong view on subjects and you are 'cancelled' (what an odious expression) People now are selective of their prejudices with agism, misogyny, antisemitism and open contempt of the disabled being rife and the official figures sadly confirm this.   I look in vain for the kind gentle people I knew in my youth, but find coarseness, anger and ignorance in abundance.  I often wish the 'virtue signallers' would take a long hard look at thenselves and the society they are creating because there is little that is good about it.  

[DanJL]

I'm very sorry you've experienced those things MAB. Whilst there are sadly always some intolerant individuals, I really think the prevailing culture (in terms of theatre, television etc) is strongly against the forms of prejudice you've listed and generally in favour of celebrating diversity. Certainly agree there could be a more thoughtful way of society engaging with different sets of values however. 

[Scheherezade]

11 hours ago, Fonty said:

 

I am trying to think what attitudes, language and conventions were so controversial at the time that they need a warning sign outside. 

 

And, indeed, what attitudes, language and conventions a play based in 1979 is supposed to adopt if not those that reflect and represent what was accepted at that time. 

 

11 hours ago, Fonty said:

I would imagine some of Shakespeare's works might be pretty alarming to the modern generation.  

Some universities have already removed Shakespeare from their literature syllabus on the basis that the fragile sensibilities of the students would be too traumatised to cope. 

[Scheherezade]

2 hours ago, DanJL said:

Whilst there are sadly always some intolerant individuals, I really think the prevailing culture (in terms of theatre, television etc) is strongly against the forms of prejudice you've listed and generally in favour of celebrating diversity

Sadly, I think this is a very optimistic appraisal, DanJL. I only wish it were otherwise. 
 

I find it particularly interesting that those individuals who talk longest and loudest about tolerance and diversity are invariably the selfsame individuals who believe that those concepts should unequivocally be denied to anyone whose views and opinions diverge in any way from their own.

 

This is not progress, it is the worst sort of smug, pompous and ultimately dangerous regression, as the hard won freedoms that until recently we took for granted - freedom of thought and of speech, the freedom to read what we choose and to expand our minds by examining views and opinions that are sometimes markedly different from our own - are being eroded and destroyed by a self-serving, autocratic minority who see no incongruity in the brutal eradication of anyone who questions their mantra; and this under the banner of so-called ‘tolerance’. 

Edited December 8, 2023 by Scheherezade

[Ondine]

46 minutes ago, Scheherezade said:

Some universities have already removed Shakespeare from their literature syllabus on the basis that the fragile sensibilities of the students would be too traumatised to cope. 

 

Some universities have removed certain authors or aspects of their work from some curriculum modules, but I think it's not got a great deal to do with student sensibilities or being traumatised and is rather more to do with other ideas about what is relevant to be taught.

 

After all, replacing Jane Austen with Toni Morrison in a module, as I understand one university tried, can't have a great deal to do with not wishing to shock, though it was shocking that an unmarried woman of meagre means in Jane Austen's time so frequently had a difficult life.  Not the forum for the essay I could write on  A Woman's Place, however.

 

I suppose this sort of thing keeps the T***graph in column inches, when it isn't writing guff about the National Trust 'going woke' and the rest.  However, that's nothing to do with ballet so I won't go on.

 

4 hours ago, MAB said:

look in vain for the kind gentle people I knew in my youth, but find coarseness, anger and ignorance in abundance.

 

 I recall horrific racism, National Front on the march etc in my younger days and:

Sexual Offences Act 1967

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/overview/sexuality20thcentury/

 

In 1967 the Sexual Offences Act was passed which decriminalised private homosexual acts between men aged over 21, while at the same time imposing heavier penalties on street offences.

 

The law was not changed for Scotland until 1980, or for Northern Ireland until 1982.

 

Yes this has relevance to ballet and the course of ballet in the UK.

 

John Cranko left the UK for Stuttgart as he was prosecuted for homosexual activity in the UK (1959?) Not always so kind and gentle, the UK, sadly.

 

http://www.elisarolle.com/queerplaces/fghij/John Cranko.html

 

 

[Scheherezade]

5 minutes ago, Ondine said:

 

Some universities have removed certain authors or aspects of their work from some curriculum modules, but I think it's not got a great deal to do with student sensibilities or being traumatised and is rather more to do with other ideas about what is relevant to be taught

I would agree with you but for the fact that the insights into the human condition provided by the works of Shakespeare surely have a universal relevance, and I recall reading a written justification from one university citing student sensibilities and trauma as the reason his works had been removed. 

[Ondine]

6 minutes ago, Scheherezade said:

I would agree with you but for the fact that the insights into the human condition provided by the works of Shakespeare surely have a universal relevance, and I recall reading a written justification from one university citing student sensibilities and trauma as the reason his works had been removed. 

 

It would be useful then to specifically cite these universities which are removing all Shakespeare and ditching his works onto a bonfire in case students have a fainting fit and run back home to mum. I clearly read the 'wrong' newspapers.

 

They could always use Bowdler. 

 

There is not a great deal of Shakespeare (plays, sonnets) I haven't read / seen and I can't think that Banquo's ghost is going to keep the average 18 year old awake at night these days.

 

[Scheherezade]

Sorry Ondine, I don’t keep a log. And while the idea of students being traumatised by ghoulies and ghosties might raise an amused eyebrow, the objections were, of course, much more predictably based on that now familiar trope of ‘unacceptable attitudes’ that some of them might find too upsetting to cope with. On which note, this has surely run its course, and I, for one, am signing off. 

[Ondine]

I'm sure it has run its course, though assertion is no substitute for hard evidence and citation, is it?

 

[Jan McNulty]

4 hours ago, Ondine said:

I'm sure it has run its course, though assertion is no substitute for hard evidence and citation, is it?

 

It’s easy enough to research yourself:

 

Google Search

 

[DVDfan]

According to a philosopher I know, the problem with the secular liberals who are so down on everyone and anyone with a different set of values is that they define their own philosophy as tolerant. They are tolerant, this is a core part of their identity and therefore they cannot even conceive that they might be saying or doing something intolerant. Intolerance is the cardinal sin. It is committed by anyone who has doubts about their other values, and therefore those people deserve to be 'cancelled'.  

[Jamesrhblack]

There is no Liberal less liberal than a Liberal with whom you disagree…

[Ondine]

3 hours ago, Jan McNulty said:

It’s easy enough to research yourself:

 

Google Search

 

Yes this is a regular column filler for certain sections of the media who like to have their readership choking over the marmalade about how we are going to hell in a handcart, though a great deal of it doesn't survive detailed scrutiny.

This week it is how Shakespeare is consigned to the bonfire, next week another concocted piece of fluff about the National Trust banning Christmas or Easter or whatever.

 

I thought this an interesting view.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/24/schools-shakespeare-decolonising-curriculum-pupils

 

Not that this has a great deal to do with ballet.

[Guest oncnp]

8 minutes ago, Ondine said:

 

Yes this is a regular column filler for certain sections of the media who like to have their readership choking over the marmalade about how we are going to hell in a handcart, though a great deal of it doesn't survive detailed scrutiny.

This week it is how Shakespeare is consigned to the bonfire, next week another concocted piece of fluff about the National Trust banning Christmas or Easter or whatever.

 

I thought this an interesting view.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/may/24/schools-shakespeare-decolonising-curriculum-pupils

 

Not that this has a great deal to do with ballet.

 

As if the article mentioned isn't from a source as equally biased (as a regular reader of both) 

[Ondine]

5 minutes ago, oncnp said:

As if the article mentioned isn't from a source as equally biased (as a regular reader of both) 

 

I said I thought it an interesting view, I hope I'm a sophisticated enough reader to be able to sort out the wheat etc.

 

Anyhow, we now know that apparently Fille isn't 'banned' and will be returning to the ROH. 

 

So we can all sleep easily over that one.

 

[MAB]

8 hours ago, Ondine said:

John Cranko left the UK for Stuttgart as he was prosecuted for homosexual activity in the UK (1959?) Not always so kind and gentle, the UK, sadly.

 

 

Worth remembering that the act of 1967 came about because of the strength of public opinion.  The law as it stood was simply a charter for blackmailers and it disgusted people.  It was the compassion (something else lacking in current society) of the general public that was the driver for the decriminalization.

[Ondine]

4 minutes ago, MAB said:

It was the compassion (something else lacking in current society) of the general public that was the driver for the decriminalization.

 

Is there evidence that we are any less compassionate than we were then? As with all things, there are campaigners for change and those who oppose it vehemently.

 

https://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/sexual-offences-act/

 

A National Opinion Poll extracted from the Daily Mail in October 1965 stated that 63% of people polled disagreed that homosexual acts in private should be criminal, although 93% believed that ‘homosexuals’ were in need of medical or psychiatric treatment (HO 291/127). This represented a huge change in the way society viewed homosexuality in this era, which had largely moved from moral opposition to a medicalised view.

 

 

 

 

 

[capybara]

28 minutes ago, Ondine said:

Anyhow, we now know that apparently Fille isn't 'banned' and will be returning to the ROH. 

Source?

[Ondine]

6 minutes ago, capybara said:

Source?

 

While I can't say how accurate it is, though there was never hard evidence as far as I could discern that it was 'cancelled', this forum?

 

In fact is it this thread? @Blossom I think.  I'll search when I have more time.

 

We will have to wait and see I suppose.

[Ondine]

On 28/11/2023 at 15:33, Blossom said:

I have it on good authority that Fille hasn't been cancelled. Next season perhaps?

I think it's a wonderful sunshine ballet and a great first ballet for kids. Would love to see this danced by the new cohort of principals promoted since the last run.

 

So, let's hope the 'good authority' is correct!

 

47 minutes ago, capybara said:

Source?

 

 

[Lizbie1]

1 hour ago, Ondine said:

 

I said I thought it an interesting view, I hope I'm a sophisticated enough reader to be able to sort out the wheat etc.

 

 

But others here aren't?

[Ondine]

6 minutes ago, Lizbie1 said:

But others here aren't?

 If that's your reading of what I said, that's your reading.

Multiple meaning of text and all that.

 

 

[Sim]

Hello everyone.  Once again, we have a thread that is starting to become overly political and sniping.  Whilst everyone is entitled to their opinions, this ballet forum is not the place.  I am therefore locking it for now.