Royal Ballet MacMillan triple bill: Danses Concertantes, Different Drummer, Requiem 20 March to 13 April 2024

[capybara]

Rather a nice fashion/dance show here:

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/C5VTJSds5Bx/?img_index=1

 

 

[Emeralds]

8 minutes ago, capybara said:

Rather a nice fashion/dance show here:

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/C5VTJSds5Bx/?img_index=1

 

 

Great pictures (and jumps)! Alvin Ailey choreographed Pas de Duke, Vadim choreographed Pas de Duck. 😄 Very cute!

[Sim]

Tonight’s cast:

 

https://static.roh.org.uk/digital/cast-sheets/MacMillan-Celebrated/MacMillan-Celebrated-Cast-Sheet-04-04-24.pdf

[alison]

James Hay not in Different Drummer  

[Linnzi5]

1 hour ago, capybara said:

Rather a nice fashion/dance show here:

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/C5VTJSds5Bx/?img_index=1

 

 

I rather like the costume but the jury is still out on the headpiece! Does anyone know if the headpiece has some significance at all?

[Emeralds]

Another delightful performance of Danses Concertantes so far- Marco Masciari and Liam Boswell virtually unrecognisable under the headpieces but excellent in their dancing and partnering, and it also took me a while to recognise Ashley Dean with her hair hidden under the black headpiece! The six ladies of the ensemble- Katsura, Lubach, Mullova-Barley, Nikelski, Roscoe, Tonkinson once again stellar in their unison and beautiful lines, while still dancing with musicality and wit. Taisuke Nakao revelling in the humour of his role, with some fine jumps.

 

The pas de trois with Zucchetti, Maeda and Dean danced with so much wit,  charm and virtuosity, but never overdoing it- bliss! Maeda has grown in confidence and polish since her last performance. Couldn't help feeling that maybe Zucchetti and Rovero might be a better fit if they swapped roles. Gasparini a delightful lead ballerina again. The music is gorgeous - beautifully played by the ROH Orchestra under the baton of Koen Kessels. Such a lovely ballet! Can we have it back in 2026?? (Back to the show...)

[Jane S]

3 hours ago, Linnzi5 said:

I rather like the costume but the jury is still out on the headpiece! Does anyone know if the headpiece has some significance at all?

I've never heard any suggestion that the headpieces are anything other than decorative  - I think they're great, and completely in tune with the rest of the decor!

Edited April 4 by Jane S

[Emeralds]

4 hours ago, alison said:

James Hay not in Different Drummer  

I'm really hoping that James will be in Danses Concertantes next time round - either the solo man in yellow or the pas de trois man: both roles are so suited to his strengths. Also, the Libera Me role in Requiem. I wonder if James will be back as the doctor on 9th or 13th?

 

4 hours ago, Linnzi5 said:

I rather like the costume but the jury is still out on the headpiece! Does anyone know if the headpiece has some significance at all?

Linnzi5, I haven't been able to find any books or interviews with Nicholas Georgiadis discussing the 1955 DC costumes (it doesn't mean there aren't any in existence- I just haven't found any) but watching it closely tonight, I think if the gold decoration is taken off, it makes the men's heads look like they  blend into the set quite often, because the set has dark/black parts... which would look strange. If they take the black headpiece off completely, because the costume is quite streamlined, it has the effect of making their hair look messy especially next to the women.

 

I'm guessing that the 3D arrow-like gold  decoration was to match the arrows on their leotards. Actually, as the ballet progresses they actually blend in and look much nicer. They just aren't photogenic in pictures or when the wearer is standing still though! I agree, jury is still out.

[Rob S]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Roberta]

1 hour ago, Jane S said:

I've never heard any suggestion that the headpieces are anything other than decorative  - I think they're great, and completely in tune with the rest of the decor!

 

I think the headpieces should perhaps be seen to be part of the wider whole costume & set design. Georgiadis was an artist / designer and at the Slade when he collaborated with MacMillan on this. Also at that time (1955) ballet costume would still normally have a wig and elaborate headpiece of some sort as a given, natural hair wasn't the trend it is today.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2001/apr/06/guardianobituaries1

 

Extracts from that:-

 

 

"Much of Georgiadis's work drew on the past in a grand, even glitzy, style. His first work with Macmillan, Danses Concertantes (1955), suggested a green and blue palace decorated with winged sphinxes. Later productions created fantasias of the courts of Louis XIV or imperial Vienna....

 

Born in Athens, Georgiadis studied painting and architecture in Greece, and at Columbia University, New York. In 1953, he came to London on a scholarship to study at the Slade, and won first prize for stage design, attracting the attention of the Royal Ballet's Ninette de Valois.

 

 

His collaboration with Macmillan began with the choreographer's first ballet for Sadler's Wells in 1955. Macmillan, who had never previously worked with a designer, was taken by de Valois to the Slade, and chose to work with Georgiadis.

 

 

Stark, black accents always tempered Georgiadis's splashes of colour, as in the arrow-marked leotards of that early Danses Concertantes."

 

 

 

Edited April 4 by Roberta

[Linnzi5]

29 minutes ago, Emeralds said:

I'm really hoping that James will be in Danses Concertantes next time round - either the solo man in yellow or the pas de trois man: both roles are so suited to his strengths. Also, the Libera Me role in Requiem. I wonder if James will be back as the doctor on 9th or 13th?

 

Linnzi5, I haven't been able to find any books or interviews with Nicholas Georgiadis discussing the 1955 DC costumes (it doesn't mean there aren't any in existence- I just haven't found any) but watching it closely tonight, I think if the gold decoration is taken off, it makes the men's heads look like they  blend into the set quite often, because the set has dark/black parts... which would look strange. If they take the black headpiece off completely, because the costume is quite streamlined, it has the effect of making their hair look messy especially next to the women.

 

I'm guessing that the 3D arrow-like gold  decoration was to match the arrows on their leotards. Actually, as the ballet progresses they actually blend in and look much nicer. They just aren't photogenic in pictures or when the wearer is standing still though! I agree, jury is still out.

Thank you - what you suggest makes total sense. Having been there tonight, I did like the costumes and didn't find the headpieces strange at all. From the stalls, they looked quite nice! 

[Dawnstar]

36 minutes ago, Emeralds said:

If they take the black headpiece off completely, because the costume is quite streamlined, it has the effect of making their hair look messy especially next to the women.

 

They could try oceans of hair gel, a la Woolf Works Act II!

 

@Rob S I haven't even looked at my photos yet. Not really much point in doing so now!

[Linnzi5]

I really enjoyed tonight. 

 

Danses Concertantes was fun! Lighthearted and quirky. I liked the costumes, as from where I was sitting they really added to the performance and the head pieces looked good too. I liked the set and the orchestra did a great job. Lovely dancing from all. A special mention goes to Isabella Gasparini - she did brilliantly - really took on the role of the lead ballerina with confidence and panache  - and I just love her smile. The two supporting ladies - Sae Maeda and Ashely Dean (thanks @Dawnstar for identifying them for me!) were brilliant too. Everyone else was excellent.

 

Different Drummer. Well, I was surprised to find that I liked it - I don't think 'enjoyed' would be the right word here, as it was quite disturbing. However, it was danced beautifully by Sambè and Hayward, especially. I liked the choreography, some of the lifts and turns and dragging along the floor (how Hayward's shoulders weren't dislocated, I'll never know!) were very impressive. It wasn't a work that filled me with joy - more I was fascinated by it, but I did think the performances were first class. I thought the orchestra were wonderful again.  I would see it again in a mixed bill but it wouldn't be at the top of my list to see. I am glad I saw it though.

 

Requiem was just beautiful - that is the only way I can describe it. I felt so emotional throughout it but also a sense of calm, of peace.

 

Sarah Lamb was an angel suspended. She danced so gracefully and ethereally - she was perfect. Everyone else was brilliant too, of course. Special mentions go to Melissa Hamilton (she was stunning, as usual), the lovely William Bracewell (his dancing was so, so beautiful and I could have watched him forever) and Lukas Braendsrod (his strength when lifting Sarah Lamb was so impressive and he was so confident). Everyone else was wonderful as well. The orchestra, chorus and soloists were perfect. I love Faurè's Requiem and they didn't disappoint. What a wonderful ending to a fantastic evening.

 

It was lovely to meet forum members again and to have a companion on the train home! 

 

Well done to all who performed tonight.

[Rob S]

32 minutes ago, Dawnstar said:

 

They could try oceans of hair gel, a la Woolf Works Act II!

 

@Rob S I haven't even looked at my photos yet. Not really much point in doing so now!

they were rather good last time so you probably should look 

[Sim]

I agree with @Linnzi5 above. A very varied programme.  I hadn’t seen any of these ballets for a few years and it was interesting to re-visit them after so long. 
 

DC was joyful and fun and very well danced. DD was also very well done, but for me it didn’t have the impact that it did the first time I saw it, and it just felt a bit flat.  Requiem:  what can I say?  It’s almost unbearably beautiful and poignant, and tonight it took me to heaven with it.  Sarah Lamb was perfect as the angel figure, and wonderful performances from Melissa, Will and LukasBB (who must surely be in line for promotion).  I only wish that John Cranko could know that such a glorious piece was made in his memory.  Maybe he does…who knows?

[Geoff]

15 hours ago, Tufty said:

Realised that Different Drummer is not recommended for under sixteens so planning to take my daughter for dinner during that hour and 45 mins. 

You don‘t say how old your daughter is Tufty, and you know her best of course, so I am sure you have made a wise decision. But in general your comment raises an important issue. 
 

ROH has put a 16+ age limit on this show, obviously because of the MacMillan. One can argue about whether this is one of his finest works or not, whether he was starting to try and shock for the sake of shocking or was sincerely responding to his source material, and so on. But objectively speaking, what are we presented with that is quite so problematic?
 

As has been discussed earlier in this thread, the story of Woyzeck is a classic. Perhaps no longer as familiar as say Faust or Romeo&Juliet or Carmen (all pretty shocking stories when taken seriously, eg devil worship, suicide, erotomania) Is it the content or the images on stage (adopts Molly Sugden voice “didn’t think it was very naice”) or somehow both, particularly when set to disturbingly gorgeous music?
 

Lots of people didn’t like this ballet, for a variety of reasons, ranging (if one reads through all the comments) from thoughtless philistinism to epicurean disappointment at MacMillan not hitting the spot. Good to warn audiences that this isn’t the sort of holiday tutu fare some people identify with “ballet”, but at what point does a refusal to engage with aspects of the troubles of the 20th century shade into over-protectiveness? 
 

I have no answers (thinking back I would have judged the best age for seeing this show differently for each of my children) but the conversation has been interesting. 

[Sim]

There is nothing in the MacMillan that would have shocked me when I was under 16.  A friend of mine was there with her 14 year-old daughter last night. She wasn’t the slightest bit disturbed by anything she saw. 
 

However, in an age where we have trigger warnings for fairytales and Jane Austen, the ROH is probably just trying to cover itself. 

[Linnzi5]

15 minutes ago, Sim said:

There is nothing in the MacMillan that would have shocked me when I was under 16.  A friend of mine was there with her 14 year-old daughter last night. She wasn’t the slightest bit disturbed by anything she saw. 
 

However, in an age where we have trigger warnings for fairytales and Jane Austen, the ROH is probably just trying to cover itself. 

I would agree - it certainly wouldn't have shocked me as a younger teenager. Though the content was dark (I mean, it's not a nice story, is it?) I was surprised that it wasn't shocking at all, as I expected it to be more explicitly violent and it wasn't. I also didn't find Doctor or Captain alarming - some of the photos I had seen previously, depicted them as being quite terrifying and I didn't feel that last night. In fact, I found the gaoler scene in Manon more disturbing and unsettling overall really. Then again, perhaps that's because I was emotionally invested in Manon and I wasn't during Different Drummer.

[DVDfan]

Picking up on Geoff's comments about age etc, two things come to my mind.

 

One is that it isn't only the age of the child but also their lived experience that feeds into a decision to take them to see a particular work. You probably wouldn't want to take a child whose family had been affected by suicide to Wolf Works, for example, or from the sound of it, one who had been bullied to Different Drummer. 

 

The other is that it is most undesirable if anyone is actually traumatised by a theatre performance. This happened to me when I was about 10 in a cinema, when a scene of a hanging (which was actually faked within the drama as well as on the real set), which caused me to faint with shock. My parents hadn't been irresponsible, the film was billed as a swash-buckling adventure. This obviously did not lead me onto a love of cinema and if we are trying to build audiences for ballet we need to be a bit wary of putting children off. Best not risk it, in my opinion.

 

[Mary]

ROH have not put an age limit on the show as such; what they say is 'some content suitable for 16+'

It is advisory.

That seems fair enough, and of course,  parents  -and the audience generally- have to use their own judgement, having been alerted to something possibly upsetting.

It seems particularly sensible to me to give the alert, because the ballet is not well known.

 

 

 

 

 

[Sim]

Just now, Mary said:

ROH have not put an age limit on the show as such; what they say is 'some content suitable for 16+'

It is advisory.

That seems fair enough, and of course,  parents  -and the audience generally- have to use their own judgement, having been alerted to something possibly upsetting.

It seems particularly sensible to me to give the alert, because the ballet is not well known.

 

 

 

 

 

Was the same guidance given for Manon?  I didn't notice either way!

[Mary]

Manon was suggested as 14+ I think -

and a 12 in the cinema (which I thought was a bit low as I fully agree with Linzzi5  that the last act is very distressing and more so than DD.)

But it's a general alert rather than fixing an age, that seems sensible to me.

 

[Sim]

1 minute ago, Mary said:

Manon was suggested as 14+ I think -

and a 12 in the cinema (which I thought was a bit low as I fully agree with Linzzi5  that the last act is very distressing and more so than DD.)

But it's a general alert rather than fixing an age, that seems sensible to me.

 

Thanks.  Well that's a bit inconsistent to me:  14+ for Manon and 16+ for DD??  I also think that Manon is much more graphic and disturbing than DD.  Women get slapped around and raped, someone gets shot with blood spurting all over the place, old men get beaten up and robbed....much worse than DD, IMHO.

[alison]

53 minutes ago, Sim said:

old men get beaten up and robbed....

 

Something I barely noticed in the last run, I must say.  It tended to feel more on the level of the townspeople roughing up Dr. Coppelius.  I don't know whether that was an intentional change.

[Geoff]

1 hour ago, Sim said:

Well that's a bit inconsistent to me:  14+ for Manon and 16+ for DD??  I also think that Manon is much more graphic and disturbing than DD.  Women get slapped around and raped, someone gets shot with blood spurting all over the place, old men get beaten up and robbed....much worse than DD, IMHO.

Indeed. And if I may say so, the advisory message appears to have been drafted by the same illiterate ROH team as have been responsible for (for example) the muddled lines about under 5s:

 

>> 'some content suitable for 16+'
 

Although this phrase has been praised here, surely it is hardly helpful? It tries to say something about what is *unsuitable* but in fact says nothing about that, only that older people may find “some” of the show “suitable”. My old English teacher would have put a big red ring around that. 

[Roberta]

25 minutes ago, Geoff said:

Although this phrase has been praised here, surely it is hardly helpful? It tries to say something about what is *unsuitable* but in fact says nothing about that, only that older people may find “some” of the show “suitable”. My old English teacher would have put a big red ring around that. 

 

What on earth does the person who drafted this expect an accompanying adult to do? Attend a performance beforehand and make copious notes about which parts are 'unsuitable' for the child so the DC can be told to close their eyes? Bizarre isn't it? 

[Mary]

I was not praising the wording itself  Geoff which I agree is a bit odd,  just the idea of an alert.

 

It might be better to use a more general phrase and not mention age.

[CCL]

 I was there last night and thought it was an absolutely excellent triple bill. Danses Concertantes was quirky and sunny; I liked the vintage feel of it. I didn’t mind the costumes in the end, having originally thought ‘headache’, as they contributed to the overall feeling of effervescence. It was pure joy! Different Drummer was, for me, extremely compelling and moving. The beauty of the music added to the desperate poignancy of what was happening on stage. The story was told with the utmost clarity and commitment: huge kudos to Marcelino Sambe, Francesca Hayward and Francisco Serrano in particular but really everyone was on top form. I felt wrung out afterwards but also thankful that I had the opportunity to see this powerful piece of art. Finally, Requiem was as utterly divine as I expected it to be. Every single piece was beautiful and moving, but I would single out the second piece, the Offertoire, as the one that had the greatest impact on me. William Bracewell was absolutely stunning in this. Incidentally, the tickets for myself and my daughter, in Row C of the amphi- quite far round but not restricted view - were £22 each. I think that is absolutely outstanding value for money. I am still on a high this morning! 

Edited April 5 by alison
To reduce font size

[CCL]

Sorry, I tried to correct the font size above as it’s too big, but I can’t seem to - apologies, it looks a little silly. 

[Roberta]

1 minute ago, CCL said:

it’s too big,

 

It actually makes it more readable for me, I can't be alone in having the usual 'elderly person' eyesight problems! 

[capybara]

The comments on this thread which are focused on the performances of this stunning triple bill are what makes BCF special - thank you everyone.

[Emeralds]

30 minutes ago, Roberta said:

 

What on earth does the person who drafted this expect an accompanying adult to do? Attend a performance beforehand and make copious notes about which parts are 'unsuitable' for the child so the DC can be told to close their eyes? Bizarre isn't it? 

I think @Geoff meant that the advisory should say "some content is unsuitable for audiences under 16" or "some content only suitable for age 16+". The wording for this triple bill wasn't up to their usual standard. 

 

Edited April 5 by Emeralds
(Highlighted/Tagged so that if I didn't understand Geoff correctly either, hopefully Geoff has a few moments to correct us).

[Roberta]

I wasn't really too worried about the wording, it's the practicality of what is suggested that has me bemused. 'Curate's egg, good in parts so be prepared to shield your DC from the nasty bits' doesn't sound very feasible really.